5 years later and the USA is starting to see decline in its "useful" population too, since "women" stopped having 3-4 kids in the 1980s. The "best-qualified" people in the USA who are NOT ALREADY very close to retirement are (near-majority) immigrants (from India and similar) - and Russia can open its territory to these "best-qualified" immigrants same as USA did - and eventually, within 50 years, they will BOTH cease to exist as "European" civilizations. Read Patrick Buchanan's Death of The West circa 2001 - its happening to ALL "European" nations, so BFD, give yourselves a biscuit.
When you put together the math- geography, culture/history, demography, econ- it's an easy prediction. His brilliant innovation was seeing the WHOLE picture of forces instead of just one. And he doesn't inject any "ideology" into his research. Just the facts ma'am. The author of "Guns, Germs and Steel" did something similar but I don't think he brought all the history forward and combined it with the latest economic developments. We need his holistic approach to be taught in schools and most importantly taught and used at the highest levels of pulbic admin, both elected and appointed.
@@SoonerStoneAIand basic population models. Statistics and it’s finest. I mean. He was off about Russian agression in Eastern Europe by what? A few months? That’s amazingly accurate as far as predicting human behavior goes.
@@Loki1191 First of all, the "draftable population" has not dropped by half since 2017, and secondly the russians are not "dieing out". They will just go through the same population readjustment that every other country in the world is going thorugh. There are still over a 100 Million russians around, way more then enough to "survive".
@@Loki1191 PZ made the same major mistake most of us made, Russia included. He was certain Russia would roll over Ukraine in a matter of weeks with few losses. He was very very wrong and it took him over a year to admit it. He still insisted this was Russia's war to lose, meaning they're strongly favored to win unless they do something wrong. He was wrong about that too. He's just now coming on board to see that Russia is screwed. There's really no path to victory for them. We already know Russia intends to get all of Ukraine and then invade Poland and Romania. Those are both NATO countries. This triggers Article 5 and NATO attacks Russia back for real. This is WW3. NATO eviscerates the Russian troops and now Putin has little to lose by launching nukes. Game over. All the NATO leaders are very well aware of who PZ is and these things he said. They take him very seriously, at least about the potential ramifications of WW3. Suppose Russia pulls a bold move tomorrow and they conquer half of Ukraine. NATO would freak out. We're that much closer to WW3. NATO would double or quadruple its support to Ukraine to prevent WW3. Now imagine Russia gets within 100 km of Poland and Romania. NATO would double or quadruple the support yet again. The closer Russia got to the NATO borders the more support NATO would send Ukraine. Therefore the closer Russia comes to winning, the further they become from winning. Meanwhile Russia keeps losing men at a horrific pace, like we've never seen before in modern times. They're destroying themselves trying to win a war they can't win. If they ever do reach the NATO border they will be so depleted they wouldn't last a few days against our real attack using actual NATO troops. PZ was certain that once Russia entered Ukraine, they would be halfway through Poland in a matter of days and would need the Germans to help defend Poland. This is where he was wrong. He was 100% right about Russia's plans but this war didn't play out even close to how he envisioned.
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future. But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years. In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030. Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography. Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
@@rammur he doesn’t? He bases everything in geography and demographics, and while important, refuses to see that culture, technology and politics are important. He thinks Japan can Survive a terminal population, but Germany cannot? That is bullshit. He thinks the US will suddenly loose the will to fight for the world we know? Nah. Geopolitics based in geography can give us answers, but they are never fully right.
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future. But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years. In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030. Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography. Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
Impressive predictions. What is truly amazing is he spent years saying these things while everyone was probably chuckling and telling him he is nuts. Just take a look at the comments of people below from 2019, 2020 etc. It takes real courage to build your life and career around ideas that sound crazy in the time you came up with them. The fact that he kept going and didn't just get a job driving a taxi or milking cows is inspiring to me.
Now, I'm not saying his predictions are wrong, but you are missing a major point here. This guy has been 'selling' a product the American people have been starving for for decades; someone telling them that the US are not a crumbling empire destined to go the way of every empire that was before them but a nation that will not just endure but even strengthen their position as the only super power in the world while all other nations collapse around them. He's been making a good life from that and will continue to do so. In any case, it's undeniable that he has a far better understanding of the Russian motives than most other 'experts' I've heard on this over the last decade. I still remember the chorus of 'experts' laughing at anyone who suggested the Russians could actually attack, when they had already amassed their whole army at the border.
@ulbulb8218 oof. Harsh mirror held up to this viewer! Huge fan of Zeihan, but you just made me realize it's because I've been told the US is crumbling for the last 20 years. Thank you for a well-spoken contrarian opinion sir
But I don’t think he made a lot of money when he was saying these things and everyone was laughing at him. Plus if he is just playing to his audience, why state that Turkey and Argentina are going to prosper in the future he sees coming? Do you think the people in those countries even know he exists? The more likely explanation is he really believes what he is saying.
@@ulbulb8218 could you elaborate on how he made/makes money? I'm not really sure many people think the US is a crumbling superpower, let alone that you could make money off telling people otherwise. The US has problems, no one will deny that. But the US also survived Trump and probably will survive Sleepy Joe.
His predictions on China were even more against the grain. Both excellent predictions as China stalls after reopening, next up free fall demographics and its inevitable decline.
I'm listening to Peter's new book right now. Not being one to just listen and believe, I've been researching each topic trying to understand where he might be wrong, and have come up with nothing. Plenty of articles from 4 years ago from people explaining how Zeihan would be wrong, yet today everything is playing out just as he stated. Pretty crazy.
Same, I wouldn’t mind if he was wrong more often since I don’t like the idea of globalization ending but I haven’t found a meaningful counter argument yet
@Morgan Allen ''Because geography.'' Well in this case, he's talking about things like the the available pool of draftable men, and mortality rates and such. We have a larger population compared to the countries you listed with the except to China, which means we have more doctors, lawyers, soldiers, experts etc. to deal with such infrastructural issues. We also have more friends than Russia, so naturally our support system is bigger and more sturdy. So technically yes, because geography and also geopolitics.
@@jossland1628 His big picture stuff has pretty much all panned out. Shift it forward or back by a few years and things are still on schedule for Zeihan-world.
@@Longlius no, he gets most stuff wrong. he said Russia would have to attack Ukraine before 2020 if it wanted to have a big enough army, and here we are. In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030. Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography. Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well-known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
@@Adrian-rb4qp Well he hasn't been wrong on most of that either, and it's wrong to think just because you can't always get the exact year that it won't happen at all. Russia may not be capable of doing what it needs to do now because they waited too long. By every standard metric China should be collapsing as we speak, but they have been successful in artificially propping themselves up and buying time. Just because the timeline changes doesn't mean it won't happen.
@@Scaredwetpants From a completly honest POV, what makes you think China is cracking up? Don't you think China has their own experts, that could tell the government what to do in case of a "crack"? the Chinese are not dumb, in fact, China is a meritocracy. if there were "cracks" in the system, the Chinese would know. And with your statement, I must disagree. Peter gets most stuff wrong and is confusing at times. Saying that Japan has a terminal population, but can survive with automatization, but Germany and the UK cannot is ludicrous. He has also been wrong on the energy for Europe and has constantly underplayed the role renewables has in Europe, named the energiwende. shortly, most of the EU won't need Russian gas thanks to ACER. of course, Zeihan would not know this as he has never left the anglosphere. This, combined with the fact that he never cites sources make him an unreliable guy. No credible expert or university would trust him as a source, and this speaks volumes. Peter is merely known because he is a good speaker if you want proper predictions about the future read the actual experts - if you want, you can try JSTOR to search for a lot.
You figure? He starts off by saying in 5 years, there will be half the draftable population, so they won't be a threat to their neighbors. In 2017. 5 years later they invade a neighbor. Sounds like he was pretty much exactly wrong.
Jesus. I can’t believe this is 5 years old. Given what’s going on in Ukraine, it might have been nice that someone had been paying attention to this kind of stuff.?
russian philosophers like Dugin literally openly talk about their intentions for the last 20 years. Same with people russia sent to govern donbass like Strelkov (didn't last long for him though). He's been telling russia's intentions for 8 years. Sadly, only ukrainians listen to russian news, politicians and other prominent figures.
GOD I remember when he mentioned CHINA and how Southern China is region HISTORICALLY KNOWN to engender diseases and epidemics, and he predicted their may be an event where disease/epidemics runs rampant Historically in Southern China back in 2017. HE WAS RIGHT but he was also TOO RIGHT, that disease/epidemic (Covid) is not only a problem for Southern China but also now the world.
He is great but he didn't really predict. That's what Russia always did. Empire, USSR or Federation. Every time they come up with some crap to subvert and infiltrate, being it Orthodox Religion against the Ottomans, Pan-slavism for the balkans, Communism for stupid westerners and third worlders, now conspiracy theory and troll farms. There is no sincerity in these - they are tool used to conquer useful idiots.
He predicted nothing and mostly explained why the Russians invaded Crimea after it had already happened like many other analysts. Nothing in this video is some great revelation; he retold what Russian grand strategy has been for 100s of years, essentially dumbed down the 120 year old Heartland Theory by John Mackinder, and, as everyone knows, explained how Russia is in a post-Soviet decline. The only difference is that Zeihan writes and speaks for a general audience who are ignorant of basic geopolitics.
.War' "Older men declare war. But it is youth that must fight and die. And it is youth who must inherit the tribulation, the sorrow, and the triumphs that are the aftermath of war." - Herbert Hoover ...
Started listening to Peter about a year ago and keeping an eye on his analysis and predictions. He's been spot on most of time. (Recently saw UTube ad with a vehicle to invest in fertilizer. Not a surprise. )
If some guy by sheer luck calls a stock market correction he’s on CNBC for 15 years as the guy who called that market correction even though invariably he’s never right about anything again. Old Peter nailed Russia invading Ukraine but he’s still our little secret it seems like.
yes but like every single observer he overestimated the Russian army, he said they would have no meaninfull resistance to plugging the 5 gaps when in reality then cant even take Mykoliav
@@jhrusa8125 Not really, American shale oil is no good for making diesel and diesel is what we need in 2022. Most American produced shale oil is exported because US refiners don't want it.
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future. But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years. In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030. Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography. Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
As a Canadian, I find it funny that EVEN Canada is capable of invading Russia 😂 I get it that we are kind and apologetic an all but we are a resourceful bunch!
If you haven't already, you should check out a speech he gave about what's to come for Canada. I'm sorry to say, at least from the information I gathered from said speech, things do not look good. Hopefully goes better than he predicts!
While this is definitely valid geopolitical analysis, Russia is nuclear power. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, we bombed every Iraqi military asset from Kuwait city to Bagdad. When Putin did it, we put Russia under sanction and sent the ZSU rocket launchers. Whether or not Russia controls geographic choke points will have no bearing on whether a future enemy can attack them.
The threat to russia through those chokepoints isnt just a military one. As Peter said, it is also a cultural and an economic one. If the chinese and their companies/mafia spread deeper into the siberian russia than they already have there's an irreversible demographic shift in that part of russia that not even nukes can "fix". Eventually, there can be referendums about joining the rest of china.
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future. But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years. In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030. Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography. Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
He predicted nothing and mostly explained why the Russians invaded Crimea after it had already happened like many other analysts. Nothing in this video is some great revelation; he retold what Russian grand strategy has been for 100s of years, essentially dumbed down the 120 year old Heartland Theory by John Mackinder, and, as everyone knows, explained how Russia is in a post-Soviet decline. The only difference is that Zeihan writes and speaks for a general audience who are ignorant of basic geopolitics.
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future. But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years. In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030. Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography. Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
@@Adrian-rb4qp To give credit, Japan was pressured into signing the Plaza Accord, which has caused their economy to stagnate through the 90s and 2000s, and has seen South Korea become a tough competitor to Japan.
@@pellergin they also realized that they have to integrate economically to the US, ie build cars here instead of exporting from japan. they understand now that they need us more than we need them and have recalculated how they conduct themselves economically. the EU on the other hand is doomed
Wow lots of angry Russians in the comments. I get why, Peter is very blunt. Unfortunately, this is just a segment and not his whole speech. I think the Russians have proven they can turn things around in hardship, he's just saying what needs to be turned around... and soon, this generation.
The thing is, America and China also have aging populations and infrastructure as well. Europe depends on Russia for energy as well which would explain why Russia would start hostilities in the middle of winter.
You should watch Peter's other talks. America is the youngest developed nation on the planet. China is the oldest. America is aging slowly. China is aging at a rapid pace. Apple meet orange
@@Adrian-rb4qp well yes, it is moving to be slightly inverted and childbirths and stuff definently have dropped off in these years, so 20 years from now well see that considerably, but 20 years from today still leaves a decent amount of the US population vs russia where its done today nor 5 years from now, in china, well no matter what theyll always have a huge army, just not a stable population
@Adrian That’s just not true. Current US fertility rates are sitting at 1.78 births per woman. .32 lower than replacement level 2.1. While this is the lowest birth rate the US has seen in a while it’s manageable with immigration. The US demography is in a fairly healthy spot today and is no where near the point of no return. What we’re now waiting on is to see if the millennials start having kids within the decade or not. That will determine if the US starts heading the direction of Europe or China.
"Financial sanctions won't cut it." It looks like events 5 years after this video was made have proven that statement to be totally wrong. Perhaps Peter never considered that western countries would be willing to suffer themselves to impose sanctions on Russia.
Considering that the provisional government could not decide whether to continue their participation in the first world war, and that they had monarchists amongst them along with anarchists and socialists, I highly doubt that the provisional government could have sustained itself. What would have been really interesting would be if the Soviet Union had continued to exist as a loose confederation, as Gorbachev proposed in a union-wide referendum, the union of sovereign states.
@@archlinuxrussian They could and did decide to continue their participation in the war, which led to their demise. The war is the catalyst for the Soviets, without it - or having the Russians leave/win it sooner - it’s hard to imagine them ever getting an upper hand over the Republican government.
@@Cotswolds1913 That's what I was trying to get across to @Egie Asemota , that the "communists" (read: Bolshevik Party) likely wouldn't have really "lost", since they won even with outside intervention against them (US, UK, Japan, etc who took active roles in the Russian Civil War supporting the various White Army factions).
If he's right, and that is the view of Putin and the Russian government, then you would have to seriously consider that the use of nuclear weapons is on the table for them.
@@johnnytass2111 Peter mentions on the Joe Rogan Podcast that Vlad's position is fairly well known, and that a strategic use of nukes would mean the end of him, personally. He knows the US knows. Finally, nukes are complicated and need maintenance. Considering everything else that has gone down, what are the chances that there's a failure there? Is that uncertainty worth it? Nukes are a non zero risk, but they are a low probability one.
Given the current state of the Russian military, I would be surprised if even half of their nuclear arsenal is even operable and do note that the west has lots of advance anti-missile systems in place and russia certainly sin't developing capabilities to bypass those systems in any meaningful ways. If all it took to deter foreign aggression and ensure your nation's safety is just by having nuclear weapons, then the UK, France, India, and many other countries could have significantly downgraded their militaries and only spend the absolute minimum just to maintain their nuclear arsenal years ago. Simply put, nuclear is destructive but just because it exists doesn't mean that conventional wars and conflicts as we know it will just cease to exist as countries just fling missile at each other
im now a fan of this channel since the war of aggression by the rvssian orcs towards Ukraine. Found it very informative, factual all the videos from you sir Zeihan. Youre channel is great to share to all my social media accounts and full support to your campaign. God bless you.
This seems very prescient - and as far as Ukraine goes, it was - but I do not see Russia setting foot in NATO land. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania? Half of *Poland*, Romania? Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia are far more likely in comparison. But NATO land? Nah. No geography is worth World War III.
If the war had gone as they hoped, and they rolled over Ukraine within a month, they'd have considered it. After this unfathomable shit show though? No, they won't be going into NATO territory. This speech is also older. The Russians now have troops deployments in Georgia/armenia/azerbaijan
He's just pointing out the topography, ecology, and why those matter. Why the Russian Empire, the Pre WWII Soviet Union, and Post WWII Soviet Union held the borders they did, and why Russia is fundamentally unstable today.
He’s talking about the Russian civil war where basically everyone with a military invaded Russia. The US, Japan, Germany, The UK, France, Canada, Greece, Finland, Persia, Australia, China, etc. It was the WW1 after party basically
popular protests and riots in khazakstan and russia already has troops in... crazy it is. Khazakstan, Belarus, Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea, now Ukraine, tomorrow moldova, I dont think they'd touch uzbekistan since they are the only power in central asia that seems to have any influence on its neighbors so, possible alliance if not a non-agression treaty but its not like uzbeckistan is in anyway ever going to be a world power, lets just hope they dont poke the bear too hard
I like Zeihan and much of what he says, but I still think that the thrust of Mearsheimer's assertions are accurate. Putin is, like most of the historic leaders of Russia/Soviet Union, a creature of history and historical Russian perspective towards the West. He tries to play the Intellectual in public, acknowledging things that the West has done to be successful while portraying himself as offering friendly, constructive criticisms where he claims to see us making mistakes that Russia had to learn so many hard lessons from, but all of that image of him as the bespoke statesman is a mask for the Paranoid Schoolyard Bully he truly is. His view of the West is a centuries-old mistrust. This is not to suggest that he is stupid. No, he understands the internal dangers his country faces, and there may be other reasons (his allegedly deteriorating health, for one) that has him ditching chess and suddenly appearing to struggle at simple checkers, but he is not an expansionist on the scale that Zeihan suggests (Note that his previous history of military adventurism has always been limited in scale) so much as a man facing the end phase of his physical and political life and carrying the fear that history will ultimately describe him not as the leader who expanded a Russian "empire" and restored its glory, but rather as the one who failed to prevent the country from disintegration and demise. The irony is that his foray into Ukraine may be the catalyst that causes the latter to become reality.
Are you getting any information you trust, out of Ukraine? After hearing that Zelenskyy and his TV production crew are "winning the information war", I don't really trust official word form either side of that conflict.
@@jimluebke3869 Given that Deception is a Stratagem in Warfare, I do not trust any information by either side, their allies, or their surrogates. What I am looking at is a combination of historic viewpoints, Putin's prior military incursions in the Caucasus region, and the demographics that Zeihan cites. Where I diverge with Zeihan and side with Mearsheimer is that I do not foresee Putin's short-term goal to be conquering all of Ukraine (He would risk a wider war that would tempt NATO into the fray, a fight Russia is clearly not prepared to engage in let alone win), but instead to cleave-off the Russian speaking portions of Eastern Ukraine, and leave the remainder of Ukraine a broken mess militarily and politically. Putin is more likely than not to succeed if his goal remains limited as described above, but in the long run, Zeihan is correct that the demographics and political devastation inflicted by the sanctions will damage Russia well beyond Putin's lifetime. His legacy will most likely be one of ashes. Even resuming oil exports to the likes of India (at a discounted rate equivalent to $30 per barrel) is a failing policy as the cost to maintain Russia's social programs was reported to have been greater than $45 per barrel a number of years ago when the price of oil was plummeting. Unless he thinks that the value of the ruble is going to go parabolic (and it's not).
I don’t think Zeihan and Mearsheimer contradict. Zeihan is coming from a data driven perspective, while Mearsheimer comes from an IR offensive realism theoretical perspective. Mearsheimer constantly asserts that Ukraine is an existential threat but not sufficient colour as to why. Zeihan, on the other hand, points out the geographical and strategic necessity of Ukraine being in Russian control from the need for geographical barriers and the fact that Eastern Ukraine is the opening to the Volga River, which is essential to Russian prosperity.
@@Sththy I can’t remember where I saw it but there is an interview out there where zeihan speaks on mearsheimer’s theories( I think a Taiwan based yt channel) and he was pretty strongly against his ideas
@@funkle2645 sanctions drove up the price of oil , so they sold less oil and made more money! They are also making more money selling the heat and all the resources they sell and earn most of their GDP from. You need to take economics and stop watching the news which is a propaganda machine
I've been on a "this guy kick" for a couple of days, and Ive found a gap. The one thing that the gap theory misses, is nuclear weapons. You just use nukes to defend the avenues of approach.. But but you say? If he's willing to say (and he has) that if Russia wins it goes nuclear, and if they lose they go nuclear? Why send a generation they don't have into a meat grinder conventional war? The gap theory makes a lot of sense from a Russian viewpoint. But not expanding outward to plug the gaps when you can vaporize invaders, when the WHOLE point here is demographics and the lack of young Russians.
Name one army that is going to risk getting vaporized in a ground assault on Russia, actually invade, GET VAPORIZED, then retaliate with nukes then continue to press on to Moscow through nuclear fallout. Peter's logic is flawed, because it's based on a pre-nuclear world where you need large conventional armies occupying ground as a buffer. Russia absolutely cannot match NATO in terms of numbers. Russia is not a military threat to NATO. Conventional wisdom is that an attack on a prepared defense needs 3:1 odds in terms of manpower to have any chance of being successful. Hypothetically, if Russia could put half a million combat troops together, They could win in Poland initially, until they're attacked from 3 sides by Germany, Turkey, Poland, Lithuania, UK, The US, France, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Belgium... I say again...who exactly is going to threaten to invade Russia in a land war? The Chinese? They have enough troops. India? They have enough troops. The USA? We have enough troops if you factor in technological advantage. The Chinese won't. The Indians won't. They might be shooting at each other soon. Peter's wheelhouse is demography, and he's 100% correct that Russia won't have enough people to fill it's ranks in the Army soon. Why on earth would the Russians spread it out to plug up invasion routes from imagined threats? By the time they could realistically plug all the holes, 100% of Russia's Army would need to be forward deployed in countries that they invaded, making them sitting ducks. What if one of those threats wasn't imagined, and it was Ukraine, who isn't a NATO member, but was hosting NATO military advisors, and getting NATO aid, right next door, in the biggest "gap" that would allow NATO tanks to roll right up to Moscow.
It's not just about protecting against invasion of the homeland, it's about expanding to acquire other country's resources to make up for the shortfall in their demographics, and then being able to defend it cost effectively without resorting to nuclear conflict.
Taking out the Kerch Bridge dramatically alters what Russia can do. Russia has to deal with 3 Million Crimean and Kerchian Maggots running around like chickens with no heads. They have to find alternate ways to supply them and their troops. It creates a huge logistics probloem for their military and their Maggots. The maggots have to swim across the channel to get away.
So why isn't this guy the president of the United States of America? Seriously though I know he makes an insane amount of money already but can we draft Peter Zeihan or something? Never have I ever heard someone speak who really understands the world even a fraction of a percentage as well as he does. I can confidently say I have listened to all of his talks on UA-cam and while repetitive no one can deny his accuracy over time. All of the minds in the Congress Senate supreme court presidential cabinet Pentagon and the entire Bureaucratic DC aperatus combined are nothing at all compared to Peter Zeihan. If he were to enter politics in the USA he would make everyone else appear to be the mentally deranged children they are by comparison. Peter Zeihan 2024.
That is a very thin prediction. It obviously contains reasonable variables but just saying, yeah they will soon die out and therefore they are acting now... Why not directly after the Krim for example. What I want to say is that we miss much information and therefore the error term of this regression seems rather high.
Here's an interesting analogy, I had a neighbour once, who told me they had a total of seven neighbours to their house and land. Guess what, they were in dispute with five of them! Russia is like that neighbour, they have more than seven neighbours so no wonder they feel the need plug gaps.
They do and they have people who predicted similar things. The problem with democratic governments is that leaders change and many of them chose to concentrate on next election than some long term plans. Things were ignored when Russia invaded Georgia, and frankly also when Crimea was taken. They thought, "eh, they will only stop there". West also ignored the hybrid warfare that was happening and is responsible for the recent populism in Western countries. Obama dropped a ball with it and didn't take Crimea seriously he realized it towards the end of his presidency and did some steps. Unfortunately his successor not only did do nothing in that direction, he actually undid everything.
Hmm, it’s 5 years later and they still have a huge army. I think Peter got the overarching logic correct but didn’t foresee how the Russians would respond to the demographic drop - leveraging mercenary forces - which led to a drop in quality as they tried to preserve their quantities.
He literally said Russia has been invaded 50 times. All of which the winter was what defeated their enemies. It’s not prophecy, it’s history repeating itself. Geography hasn’t changed.
@@markgarcia8253 Theres actually so much wrong with that statement.. The geography of whats considered "russia" has changed many times in my lifetime alone, kid, and it will for you too. Not to mention the fact that earth itself is constantly moving and shifting. Much much more of russia is usable today than it was during ww2. You completely ignore multiple countries history when you just blanket say "it was all russia being invaded" Like cmon my guy.. and the idea that winter has "saved them everytime" is so laughably wrong that you clearly get your history from the history channel and only that. Winter has hurt russia in war = as much as it has helped. Pick up a book my guy. Edit: My original comment is whats known as a "figure of speech", the more you know.
New to Peter and he has a lot of knowledge and interesting ideas, but I'm not so sure about his predictive analysis of his knowledge and perhaps the wholeness of his knowledge. He says Russia needs to take several more areas in other nations which include the NATO members of "half" of Poland and Romania, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. He also says that Russia "...have all the tools here and until the Germans are willing to dedicate troops to protect the Polish frontier...". Seems to me that Russia does not have all the tools to seize Ukraine, much the less 5 NATO nations and Germany hadn't even delivered Leopard tanks, much the less German troops and Russia is light years farther away from being able to invade Poland now then they were one year ago. Use experts to enhance your knowledge and analysis. Not to replace it.
"half" of Poland. Look at a map of Poland. What's there? The Vistula River. Geographic boundaries. Canada doesn't have the manpower or economic might to do anything significant to the US, and the Mexico / US border is somewhat hardened, with massive deserts between the two countries. He includes those countries to highlight the limits of projecting power across a geographic border, and how those countries are the ones who occupy those landforms a Russian defensive position craves.
Russia has cut its on throat at this time. The Russ military has now shown an inability to take Ukraine, and by extension any other country that resists. When they finally concede in Ukraine they will not have the military to take any country that doesn’t resist. There’s an unanticipated effect of the was, and that’s that Russians are leaving Russia in big numbers. Even with the freeze on draft age men, over 200K Russians have left for other homes. These and trained and educated people who have skills that will transplant. The war will Ukraine has ended Russia. They can’t and won’t win, and they have accelerated their loss of talent and skilled workers.
its part of a bigger picture, russia has demographic gaps between generations, consequences of the comunist revoluiton, the civil war, the 2º world war and stalin regime. They lost too many people and know they are seeing the long term consequences of that.
@@BOIZADAS I understand Russia has been through problems but Peter states things that are false as though they are facts. it's not clear that it's supposed to be rhetoric.
Withnail1969 He’s not saying they have literally no engineers, but they have no where near enough to replace those that are about to start dying off in any significant capacity.
@@meratrix9967 and what hard evidence is there to support this theory? for a start, a lot of infrastructure in Russia today such as 4g and 5g mobile phone networks is not Soviet in origin, so having Soviet trained engineers in that field is irrelevant. obviously most things today will be similar. life has moved on.
plugging gaps? which country don't have gaps to plug? such an attitude is how you get unending cycles of wars. such antiquated preoccupation with land. it's arguable that a nation today with a greater economy has an asset far more valuable than how much real estate it own. just like a developed land is far more valuable than undeveloped. Putin should stop thinking last century and focus on developing the land he has. he wastes limited resources, including lives, with such pointless wars and only siphon away from things that really matter. clearly, China and India also possess this false mindset, using extreme nationalism for political ends and maintaining legitimacy.
I don’t agree that Russia needs to take over Poland the Baltics and Romania. What they need to do is join the European Union because Europe actually extends all the way to the Ural Mountains. They could be a major player in the EU.
Noo or at least not yet.... with enough nuclear weapons to vaporize any other country, it doesn't matter how many border disputes has with every neighbor.... If Russia collapse, will be something internal.... After all in the last century the country collapsed two times.
5 years later and Russia has thrown its last dice. Amazing Peter.
5 years later and the USA is starting to see decline in its "useful" population too, since "women" stopped having 3-4 kids in the 1980s. The "best-qualified" people in the USA who are NOT ALREADY very close to retirement are (near-majority) immigrants (from India and similar) - and Russia can open its territory to these "best-qualified" immigrants same as USA did - and eventually, within 50 years, they will BOTH cease to exist as "European" civilizations. Read Patrick Buchanan's Death of The West circa 2001 - its happening to ALL "European" nations, so BFD, give yourselves a biscuit.
He uses very simple historical/demographical/geographical inputs to reach his conclusions, which is the beauty of it.
When you put together the math- geography, culture/history, demography, econ- it's an easy prediction. His brilliant innovation was seeing the WHOLE picture of forces instead of just one. And he doesn't inject any "ideology" into his research. Just the facts ma'am. The author of "Guns, Germs and Steel" did something similar but I don't think he brought all the history forward and combined it with the latest economic developments. We need his holistic approach to be taught in schools and most importantly taught and used at the highest levels of pulbic admin, both elected and appointed.
This is wild.
@@SoonerStoneAIand basic population models. Statistics and it’s finest. I mean. He was off about Russian agression in Eastern Europe by what? A few months? That’s amazingly accurate as far as predicting human behavior goes.
This aged very well indeed. I hope I’m not back here in a year😑
God, I hate it when Peter is right.
hope there wont be any russia in a year
Facts dude
This guy is definitely a realist.
He was
We should probably just make this guy permanent Secretary of State.
Nope he’s a apologist for vulture capitalism.
@Shuthakaii He is not talking about US led wars on innocent civilians.
@@rajeshkumarm6441 If you’re too fragile for geopolitics there are plenty of other videos to watch.
@@rajeshkumarm6441 that explains why India is such a quasi-socialist shithole
He wouldn't take the job 🤣
"the Germans have never met a square foot of Poland they didn't like marching across" 😂
Sounds so bizarre when this first aired, sounds 100% accurate now.
but it is not
@@timokohler6631 care to explain what's not accurate about it?
@@Loki1191 First of all, the "draftable population" has not dropped by half since 2017, and secondly the russians are not "dieing out". They will just go through the same population readjustment that every other country in the world is going thorugh. There are still over a 100 Million russians around, way more then enough to "survive".
@@Loki1191 he can’t lmao
@@Loki1191 PZ made the same major mistake most of us made, Russia included.
He was certain Russia would roll over Ukraine in a matter of weeks with few losses. He was very very wrong and it took him over a year to admit it. He still insisted this was Russia's war to lose, meaning they're strongly favored to win unless they do something wrong. He was wrong about that too.
He's just now coming on board to see that Russia is screwed. There's really no path to victory for them.
We already know Russia intends to get all of Ukraine and then invade Poland and Romania. Those are both NATO countries. This triggers Article 5 and NATO attacks Russia back for real. This is WW3. NATO eviscerates the Russian troops and now Putin has little to lose by launching nukes. Game over.
All the NATO leaders are very well aware of who PZ is and these things he said. They take him very seriously, at least about the potential ramifications of WW3.
Suppose Russia pulls a bold move tomorrow and they conquer half of Ukraine. NATO would freak out. We're that much closer to WW3.
NATO would double or quadruple its support to Ukraine to prevent WW3.
Now imagine Russia gets within 100 km of Poland and Romania. NATO would double or quadruple the support yet again.
The closer Russia got to the NATO borders the more support NATO would send Ukraine.
Therefore the closer Russia comes to winning, the further they become from winning.
Meanwhile Russia keeps losing men at a horrific pace, like we've never seen before in modern times. They're destroying themselves trying to win a war they can't win.
If they ever do reach the NATO border they will be so depleted they wouldn't last a few days against our real attack using actual NATO troops.
PZ was certain that once Russia entered Ukraine, they would be halfway through Poland in a matter of days and would need the Germans to help defend Poland.
This is where he was wrong.
He was 100% right about Russia's plans but this war didn't play out even close to how he envisioned.
Sharing this among friends currently. He gave this talk in 2017. Thank you, Peter!
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future.
But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years.
In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030.
Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography.
Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
This talk was actually in 2014. He said that Russia took Crimea “this year”, which was in 2014.
@@Adrian-rb4qp not predictions its geopolitics and he just knows his shit nothin more nothing less
@@rammur he doesn’t? He bases everything in geography and demographics, and while important, refuses to see that culture, technology and politics are important. He thinks Japan can Survive a terminal population, but Germany cannot? That is bullshit. He thinks the US will suddenly loose the will to fight for the world we know? Nah.
Geopolitics based in geography can give us answers, but they are never fully right.
@Adam of Good more right than most? How familiar are you with the works of other experts?
This guy is a genius! Look what's happening in 2022!
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future.
But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years.
In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030.
Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography.
Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
I agree that he’s a smart guy but you’re acting like Russia wasn’t already trying to invade Ukraine when he gave this talk
Impressive predictions. What is truly amazing is he spent years saying these things while everyone was probably chuckling and telling him he is nuts. Just take a look at the comments of people below from 2019, 2020 etc. It takes real courage to build your life and career around ideas that sound crazy in the time you came up with them. The fact that he kept going and didn't just get a job driving a taxi or milking cows is inspiring to me.
Now, I'm not saying his predictions are wrong, but you are missing a major point here. This guy has been 'selling' a product the American people have been starving for for decades; someone telling them that the US are not a crumbling empire destined to go the way of every empire that was before them but a nation that will not just endure but even strengthen their position as the only super power in the world while all other nations collapse around them. He's been making a good life from that and will continue to do so.
In any case, it's undeniable that he has a far better understanding of the Russian motives than most other 'experts' I've heard on this over the last decade. I still remember the chorus of 'experts' laughing at anyone who suggested the Russians could actually attack, when they had already amassed their whole army at the border.
@ulbulb8218 oof. Harsh mirror held up to this viewer! Huge fan of Zeihan, but you just made me realize it's because I've been told the US is crumbling for the last 20 years. Thank you for a well-spoken contrarian opinion sir
But I don’t think he made a lot of money when he was saying these things and everyone was laughing at him. Plus if he is just playing to his audience, why state that Turkey and Argentina are going to prosper in the future he sees coming? Do you think the people in those countries even know he exists? The more likely explanation is he really believes what he is saying.
@@ulbulb8218 could you elaborate on how he made/makes money? I'm not really sure many people think the US is a crumbling superpower, let alone that you could make money off telling people otherwise. The US has problems, no one will deny that. But the US also survived Trump and probably will survive Sleepy Joe.
His predictions on China were even more against the grain. Both excellent predictions as China stalls after reopening, next up free fall demographics and its inevitable decline.
I have all his books, this guy is brilliant
I'm listening to Peter's new book right now. Not being one to just listen and believe, I've been researching each topic trying to understand where he might be wrong, and have come up with nothing. Plenty of articles from 4 years ago from people explaining how Zeihan would be wrong, yet today everything is playing out just as he stated. Pretty crazy.
Same, I wouldn’t mind if he was wrong more often since I don’t like the idea of globalization ending but I haven’t found a meaningful counter argument yet
@discipleofkrolm yeah, he must ignore the issue of US demographic in oder not to be canceled
@Morgan Allen ''Because geography.'' Well in this case, he's talking about things like the the available pool of draftable men, and mortality rates and such. We have a larger population compared to the countries you listed with the except to China, which means we have more doctors, lawyers, soldiers, experts etc. to deal with such infrastructural issues. We also have more friends than Russia, so naturally our support system is bigger and more sturdy. So technically yes, because geography and also geopolitics.
He absolutely nailed it.
Wow the accuracy of this is lit
Unfortunately, this aged really well. Props to Zeihan
Boy remember when we thought he was wrong?
He's been wrong on a lot of stuff, but it doesn't look like this is one of them.
@@jossland1628 His big picture stuff has pretty much all panned out. Shift it forward or back by a few years and things are still on schedule for Zeihan-world.
@@Longlius no, he gets most stuff wrong. he said Russia would have to attack Ukraine before 2020 if it wanted to have a big enough army, and here we are.
In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030.
Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography.
Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well-known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
@@Adrian-rb4qp Well he hasn't been wrong on most of that either, and it's wrong to think just because you can't always get the exact year that it won't happen at all. Russia may not be capable of doing what it needs to do now because they waited too long. By every standard metric China should be collapsing as we speak, but they have been successful in artificially propping themselves up and buying time. Just because the timeline changes doesn't mean it won't happen.
@@Scaredwetpants From a completly honest POV, what makes you think China is cracking up?
Don't you think China has their own experts, that could tell the government what to do in case of a "crack"? the Chinese are not dumb, in fact, China is a meritocracy. if there were "cracks" in the system, the Chinese would know.
And with your statement, I must disagree. Peter gets most stuff wrong and is confusing at times. Saying that Japan has a terminal population, but can survive with automatization, but Germany and the UK cannot is ludicrous. He has also been wrong on the energy for Europe and has constantly underplayed the role renewables has in Europe, named the energiwende. shortly, most of the EU won't need Russian gas thanks to ACER. of course, Zeihan would not know this as he has never left the anglosphere. This, combined with the fact that he never cites sources make him an unreliable guy. No credible expert or university would trust him as a source, and this speaks volumes. Peter is merely known because he is a good speaker if you want proper predictions about the future read the actual experts - if you want, you can try JSTOR to search for a lot.
this is amazing for 2017.......he predicted almost everything
It says 2015 at the top when he is talking about demographics projections by age.
You figure? He starts off by saying in 5 years, there will be half the draftable population, so they won't be a threat to their neighbors. In 2017. 5 years later they invade a neighbor. Sounds like he was pretty much exactly wrong.
The ambition of Russia to have access to warm water ports, in order not to be landlocked, is centuries old.
He was absolutely on the number on this. Honestly insane how right he was on this, and we can see how this continues to impact the Ukraine War.
Jesus. I can’t believe this is 5 years old. Given what’s going on in Ukraine, it might have been nice that someone had been paying attention to this kind of stuff.?
russian philosophers like Dugin literally openly talk about their intentions for the last 20 years. Same with people russia sent to govern donbass like Strelkov (didn't last long for him though). He's been telling russia's intentions for 8 years. Sadly, only ukrainians listen to russian news, politicians and other prominent figures.
Central and easter Europe has been paying attention and warning the west.Vide Lech Kaczyński's speech in Tibilisi.
Wow. He predicted 2022.
he’s predicted a lot
GOD I remember when he mentioned CHINA and how Southern China is region HISTORICALLY KNOWN to engender diseases and epidemics, and he predicted their may be an event where disease/epidemics runs rampant Historically in Southern China back in 2017. HE WAS RIGHT but he was also TOO RIGHT, that disease/epidemic (Covid) is not only a problem for Southern China but also now the world.
He is great but he didn't really predict. That's what Russia always did. Empire, USSR or Federation. Every time they come up with some crap to subvert and infiltrate, being it Orthodox Religion against the Ottomans, Pan-slavism for the balkans, Communism for stupid westerners and third worlders, now conspiracy theory and troll farms. There is no sincerity in these - they are tool used to conquer useful idiots.
@@___Truth___ Bill Gates and lots of others predicted a pandemic.
He predicted nothing and mostly explained why the Russians invaded Crimea after it had already happened like many other analysts. Nothing in this video is some great revelation; he retold what Russian grand strategy has been for 100s of years, essentially dumbed down the 120 year old Heartland Theory by John Mackinder, and, as everyone knows, explained how Russia is in a post-Soviet decline. The only difference is that Zeihan writes and speaks for a general audience who are ignorant of basic geopolitics.
.War'
"Older men declare war. But it is youth that must fight and die. And it is youth who must inherit the tribulation, the sorrow, and the triumphs that are the aftermath of war." - Herbert Hoover
...
Thanks!
Started listening to Peter about a year ago and keeping an eye on his analysis and predictions. He's been spot on most of time. (Recently saw UTube ad with a vehicle to invest in fertilizer. Not a surprise. )
Epic lesson.
If some guy by sheer luck calls a stock market correction he’s on CNBC for 15 years as the guy who called that market correction even though invariably he’s never right about anything again. Old Peter nailed Russia invading Ukraine but he’s still our little secret it seems like.
Damn he nailed it!
I know that this was 5 years ago but one of the last things he said at 00:03:15 about "Last Generation" is now a censored word in China. 2022.
I’ve seen his more recent predictions on this subject and it has not changed. He’s amazingly accurate. It’s mind boggling how accurate he has been.
And he was absolutely fucking right.
This guy is on it! Wow, what great predictions.
yes but like every single observer he overestimated the Russian army, he said they would have no meaninfull resistance to plugging the 5 gaps when in reality then cant even take Mykoliav
its almost uncanny how right he was.
..prescient & fascinating !
Dang , dude nailed it
Three years later . They got what they got and it’s all down hill from here.
They got the most oil and gas in the world. That's what matters most.
This didn't age well.
@@Withnail1969 And if we choose we don't need any of it ,that's what matters to me.
@@jossland1628 What are you talking about, it's a Bullseye.
@@jhrusa8125 Not really, American shale oil is no good for making diesel and diesel is what we need in 2022. Most American produced shale oil is exported because US refiners don't want it.
That's amazing
He got it right back then.
The ultimate "I told you so".
Still worth sharing in 2022
Aged well!
jaw dropping
feels weird being here now
If anyone doubts his other predictions they should pay close attention to this one
This insight aged well
Why didn't we listen to this guy then? Or are we listening to him now? Let's hope some of our leaders have this intel and are reacting appropriately.
He didn't say what we should have done. And even with hindsight I don't know what we should have done.
He saw it coming
Add alcohol problem. It’s addiction to alcohol is bad and has existed since The Czars
Yup
Watching this in 2022. Now I'm getting VERY worried :(
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future.
But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years.
In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030.
Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography.
Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
Crimea, Georgia. Then on to Ukraine.
Scary accurate.
The morons in this comment section always make me laugh. I come back here for a good smile and chuckle every so often.
This aged well.
As a Canadian, I find it funny that EVEN Canada is capable of invading Russia 😂 I get it that we are kind and apologetic an all but we are a resourceful bunch!
If you haven't already, you should check out a speech he gave about what's to come for Canada. I'm sorry to say, at least from the information I gathered from said speech, things do not look good. Hopefully goes better than he predicts!
Congratulations. You've invaded both Russia and the US. Not many countries can make that claim.
Wow just seen this. 😳
As if it was recorded yesterday!
LOVE 💕 AND BEST WISHES FOR SUCH A WONDERFUL PRESENTATION ❤️/EVENT.REGARDS FROM RAVINDER TALWAR INDIA
While this is definitely valid geopolitical analysis, Russia is nuclear power. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, we bombed every Iraqi military asset from Kuwait city to Bagdad. When Putin did it, we put Russia under sanction and sent the ZSU rocket launchers.
Whether or not Russia controls geographic choke points will have no bearing on whether a future enemy can attack them.
The threat to russia through those chokepoints isnt just a military one. As Peter said, it is also a cultural and an economic one. If the chinese and their companies/mafia spread deeper into the siberian russia than they already have there's an irreversible demographic shift in that part of russia that not even nukes can "fix". Eventually, there can be referendums about joining the rest of china.
I wish I could see the map properly.
The sea you see is the Arctic Ocean. Behind it is the North Pole
@Peter: Whats about an update on this topic?
Modern day prophet
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future.
But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years.
In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030.
Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography.
Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
He predicted nothing and mostly explained why the Russians invaded Crimea after it had already happened like many other analysts. Nothing in this video is some great revelation; he retold what Russian grand strategy has been for 100s of years, essentially dumbed down the 120 year old Heartland Theory by John Mackinder, and, as everyone knows, explained how Russia is in a post-Soviet decline. The only difference is that Zeihan writes and speaks for a general audience who are ignorant of basic geopolitics.
"financial sanctions won't cut it."
Holy shit. He was saying this in 2017?!
i bet he hates being right
We should be wary of people like Peter. They're popular within the first 10-20 years of their predictions because it's not that hard to predict the near future.
But when their bolder claims never come to pass, they're discredited and we move onto the next person predicting the end of the world in 10-20 years.
In the 80s, George Friedman, Zeihan's former boss, predicted a US-Japan conflict and failed to predict the fall of the Soviet Union. 20 years later he predicted the fracturing of Russia by 2020 and the complete collapse and dissolution of China by 2030.
Zeihan, on the other hand, in his books and blog posts, none of his wild claims cite works from any studies or findings from other experts in the field. In academia, the bolder the claim the higher the burden of proof. That logic would imply that his books would have a truly massive bibliography. The Accidental Superpower doesn't have a bibliography.
Zeihan gets away with this because he claims that he's an expert in 6 fields. His website says "Peter combines expert understanding of demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to help clients best prepare for an uncertain future." That's A LOT of areas to be an expert in, quite frankly. He doesn't cite anything but, don't worry, Zeihan knows what he's talking about so we should trust him. This is, of course, a logical fallacy called "argument from authority". It's a well known fallacy and it's often associated with bold or even miraculous claims.
@@Adrian-rb4qp To give credit, Japan was pressured into signing the Plaza Accord, which has caused their economy to stagnate through the 90s and 2000s, and has seen South Korea become a tough competitor to Japan.
@@pellergin they also realized that they have to integrate economically to the US, ie build cars here instead of exporting from japan.
they understand now that they need us more than we need them and have recalculated how they conduct themselves economically.
the EU on the other hand is doomed
he saw it comin
In 5 years the amount of draftees will drop by half...This was five years ago and its happening now. We are seeing it live.
Wow lots of angry Russians in the comments. I get why, Peter is very blunt. Unfortunately, this is just a segment and not his whole speech. I think the Russians have proven they can turn things around in hardship, he's just saying what needs to be turned around... and soon, this generation.
This has not aged well
Or they can just invade.... #hindsight
The scarier stat to me is that 59 years average male mortality that is alarmingly low
Its why they are moving extremely fast and with urgency to grab what they can.
Wow is this valid now
Give me a fuckin beer!!!
A wise man once postulated that this is the millennium of aftermath, and there ain't gonna be nuthin' after that...
The thing is, America and China also have aging populations and infrastructure as well. Europe depends on Russia for energy as well which would explain why Russia would start hostilities in the middle of winter.
You should watch Peter's other talks. America is the youngest developed nation on the planet. China is the oldest. America is aging slowly. China is aging at a rapid pace. Apple meet orange
@@sillybirdy1994Peter is overestimating the us demography, he recently said it’s reaching the same level as Europe and Canada
@@Adrian-rb4qp well yes, it is moving to be slightly inverted and childbirths and stuff definently have dropped off in these years, so 20 years from now well see that considerably, but 20 years from today still leaves a decent amount of the US population vs russia where its done today nor 5 years from now, in china, well no matter what theyll always have a huge army, just not a stable population
@Adrian That’s just not true. Current US fertility rates are sitting at 1.78 births per woman. .32 lower than replacement level 2.1. While this is the lowest birth rate the US has seen in a while it’s manageable with immigration. The US demography is in a fairly healthy spot today and is no where near the point of no return. What we’re now waiting on is to see if the millennials start having kids within the decade or not. That will determine if the US starts heading the direction of Europe or China.
@@IpSyCo Peter already said that the us is heading there in an ama, they’ll just be later than everyone else
Someone should translate it to Russian so it will be easier for #Anonymous to show it on Russian TV
"Financial sanctions won't cut it." It looks like events 5 years after this video was made have proven that statement to be totally wrong. Perhaps Peter never considered that western countries would be willing to suffer themselves to impose sanctions on Russia.
I think he meant cut it to stop them from invading in the first place
What would Russia be like had the communists lost the revolution?
Economic paradise. Minimum wage 3500 Polish Złoty per month 🙃
They’d be richer ofc, and there would be a lot more of them. Population would probably closer to 200 million.
Considering that the provisional government could not decide whether to continue their participation in the first world war, and that they had monarchists amongst them along with anarchists and socialists, I highly doubt that the provisional government could have sustained itself. What would have been really interesting would be if the Soviet Union had continued to exist as a loose confederation, as Gorbachev proposed in a union-wide referendum, the union of sovereign states.
@@archlinuxrussian They could and did decide to continue their participation in the war, which led to their demise. The war is the catalyst for the Soviets, without it - or having the Russians leave/win it sooner - it’s hard to imagine them ever getting an upper hand over the Republican government.
@@Cotswolds1913 That's what I was trying to get across to @Egie Asemota , that the "communists" (read: Bolshevik Party) likely wouldn't have really "lost", since they won even with outside intervention against them (US, UK, Japan, etc who took active roles in the Russian Civil War supporting the various White Army factions).
If he's right, and that is the view of Putin and the Russian government, then you would have to seriously consider that the use of nuclear weapons is on the table for them.
No it isn't.
@@dharmadefender3932 why not?
@@johnnytass2111 Peter mentions on the Joe Rogan Podcast that Vlad's position is fairly well known, and that a strategic use of nukes would mean the end of him, personally. He knows the US knows. Finally, nukes are complicated and need maintenance. Considering everything else that has gone down, what are the chances that there's a failure there? Is that uncertainty worth it? Nukes are a non zero risk, but they are a low probability one.
Given the current state of the Russian military, I would be surprised if even half of their nuclear arsenal is even operable and do note that the west has lots of advance anti-missile systems in place and russia certainly sin't developing capabilities to bypass those systems in any meaningful ways. If all it took to deter foreign aggression and ensure your nation's safety is just by having nuclear weapons, then the UK, France, India, and many other countries could have significantly downgraded their militaries and only spend the absolute minimum just to maintain their nuclear arsenal years ago. Simply put, nuclear is destructive but just because it exists doesn't mean that conventional wars and conflicts as we know it will just cease to exist as countries just fling missile at each other
@@johnnytass2111 He also explained how the thread isn't just a military issue but also a cultural and economic one
im now a fan of this channel since the war of aggression by the rvssian orcs towards Ukraine. Found it very informative, factual all the videos from you sir Zeihan. Youre channel is great to share to all my social media accounts and full support to your campaign. God bless you.
This seems very prescient - and as far as Ukraine goes, it was - but I do not see Russia setting foot in NATO land. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania? Half of *Poland*, Romania?
Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia are far more likely in comparison. But NATO land? Nah. No geography is worth World War III.
Maybe the whole Ukraine war and supplying weapons from the West is to make the 'prediction' go from 'unlikely' to impossible.
If the war had gone as they hoped, and they rolled over Ukraine within a month, they'd have considered it.
After this unfathomable shit show though? No, they won't be going into NATO territory.
This speech is also older. The Russians now have troops deployments in Georgia/armenia/azerbaijan
He's just pointing out the topography, ecology, and why those matter. Why the Russian Empire, the Pre WWII Soviet Union, and Post WWII Soviet Union held the borders they did, and why Russia is fundamentally unstable today.
At 1:55 he says Canada invaded Russia but I can’t find any info about this. Does anyone know what he’s talking about?
I believe he’s referring to The Canadian Siberian Expeditionary Force.
Maybe he was joking?
He’s talking about the Russian civil war where basically everyone with a military invaded Russia.
The US, Japan, Germany, The UK, France, Canada, Greece, Finland, Persia, Australia, China, etc.
It was the WW1 after party basically
yfw it's happening
I hope he's also right about China. They've been acting like a bag of ducks lately. lol
popular protests and riots in khazakstan and russia already has troops in... crazy it is. Khazakstan, Belarus, Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea, now Ukraine, tomorrow moldova, I dont think they'd touch uzbekistan since they are the only power in central asia that seems to have any influence on its neighbors so, possible alliance if not a non-agression treaty but its not like uzbeckistan is in anyway ever going to be a world power, lets just hope they dont poke the bear too hard
I think the bear is slowly commiting seppuku
Why do you think so?
love this Canada .. invaded Russia
👍👌🇨🇦
I like Zeihan and much of what he says, but I still think that the thrust of Mearsheimer's assertions are accurate.
Putin is, like most of the historic leaders of Russia/Soviet Union, a creature of history and historical Russian perspective towards the West. He tries to play the Intellectual in public, acknowledging things that the West has done to be successful while portraying himself as offering friendly, constructive criticisms where he claims to see us making mistakes that Russia had to learn so many hard lessons from, but all of that image of him as the bespoke statesman is a mask for the Paranoid Schoolyard Bully he truly is. His view of the West is a centuries-old mistrust. This is not to suggest that he is stupid. No, he understands the internal dangers his country faces, and there may be other reasons (his allegedly deteriorating health, for one) that has him ditching chess and suddenly appearing to struggle at simple checkers, but he is not an expansionist on the scale that Zeihan suggests (Note that his previous history of military adventurism has always been limited in scale) so much as a man facing the end phase of his physical and political life and carrying the fear that history will ultimately describe him not as the leader who expanded a Russian "empire" and restored its glory, but rather as the one who failed to prevent the country from disintegration and demise.
The irony is that his foray into Ukraine may be the catalyst that causes the latter to become reality.
Are you getting any information you trust, out of Ukraine? After hearing that Zelenskyy and his TV production crew are "winning the information war", I don't really trust official word form either side of that conflict.
@@jimluebke3869 Given that Deception is a Stratagem in Warfare, I do not trust any information by either side, their allies, or their surrogates.
What I am looking at is a combination of historic viewpoints, Putin's prior military incursions in the Caucasus region, and the demographics that Zeihan cites. Where I diverge with Zeihan and side with Mearsheimer is that I do not foresee Putin's short-term goal to be conquering all of Ukraine (He would risk a wider war that would tempt NATO into the fray, a fight Russia is clearly not prepared to engage in let alone win), but instead to cleave-off the Russian speaking portions of Eastern Ukraine, and leave the remainder of Ukraine a broken mess militarily and politically.
Putin is more likely than not to succeed if his goal remains limited as described above, but in the long run, Zeihan is correct that the demographics and political devastation inflicted by the sanctions will damage Russia well beyond Putin's lifetime. His legacy will most likely be one of ashes.
Even resuming oil exports to the likes of India (at a discounted rate equivalent to $30 per barrel) is a failing policy as the cost to maintain Russia's social programs was reported to have been greater than $45 per barrel a number of years ago when the price of oil was plummeting. Unless he thinks that the value of the ruble is going to go parabolic (and it's not).
I don’t think Zeihan and Mearsheimer contradict. Zeihan is coming from a data driven perspective, while Mearsheimer comes from an IR offensive realism theoretical perspective. Mearsheimer constantly asserts that Ukraine is an existential threat but not sufficient colour as to why. Zeihan, on the other hand, points out the geographical and strategic necessity of Ukraine being in Russian control from the need for geographical barriers and the fact that Eastern Ukraine is the opening to the Volga River, which is essential to Russian prosperity.
@@Sththy You lost me at, "IR offensive realism theoretical perspective". (I'm sure there's SOMEONE out there who can begin to unpack that ... ;))
@@Sththy I can’t remember where I saw it but there is an interview out there where zeihan speaks on mearsheimer’s theories( I think a Taiwan based yt channel) and he was pretty strongly against his ideas
This man stole my research.
You need more than that to prove a point.
He was right, financial sanctions didn’t cut it
What? Their economy is in the absolute shitter from it what do you mean
@@funkle2645 sanctions drove up the price of oil , so they sold less oil and made more money! They are also making more money selling the heat and all the resources they sell and earn most of their GDP from.
You need to take economics and stop watching the news which is a propaganda machine
@@funkle2645 I think Trying meant from the sanctions when the Russians invaded Crimea, not this year's sanctions. And he's right.
I've been on a "this guy kick" for a couple of days, and Ive found a gap.
The one thing that the gap theory misses, is nuclear weapons. You just use nukes to defend the avenues of approach.. But but you say? If he's willing to say (and he has) that if Russia wins it goes nuclear, and if they lose they go nuclear? Why send a generation they don't have into a meat grinder conventional war?
The gap theory makes a lot of sense from a Russian viewpoint. But not expanding outward to plug the gaps when you can vaporize invaders, when the WHOLE point here is demographics and the lack of young Russians.
Because nuclear will go both ways. They are not the only ones with nuclear.
Name one army that is going to risk getting vaporized in a ground assault on Russia, actually invade, GET VAPORIZED, then retaliate with nukes then continue to press on to Moscow through nuclear fallout. Peter's logic is flawed, because it's based on a pre-nuclear world where you need large conventional armies occupying ground as a buffer.
Russia absolutely cannot match NATO in terms of numbers. Russia is not a military threat to NATO. Conventional wisdom is that an attack on a prepared defense needs 3:1 odds in terms of manpower to have any chance of being successful. Hypothetically, if Russia could put half a million combat troops together, They could win in Poland initially, until they're attacked from 3 sides by Germany, Turkey, Poland, Lithuania, UK, The US, France, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Belgium...
I say again...who exactly is going to threaten to invade Russia in a land war? The Chinese? They have enough troops. India? They have enough troops. The USA? We have enough troops if you factor in technological advantage. The Chinese won't. The Indians won't. They might be shooting at each other soon.
Peter's wheelhouse is demography, and he's 100% correct that Russia won't have enough people to fill it's ranks in the Army soon. Why on earth would the Russians spread it out to plug up invasion routes from imagined threats? By the time they could realistically plug all the holes, 100% of Russia's Army would need to be forward deployed in countries that they invaded, making them sitting ducks.
What if one of those threats wasn't imagined, and it was Ukraine, who isn't a NATO member, but was hosting NATO military advisors, and getting NATO aid, right next door, in the biggest "gap" that would allow NATO tanks to roll right up to Moscow.
It's not just about protecting against invasion of the homeland, it's about expanding to acquire other country's resources to make up for the shortfall in their demographics, and then being able to defend it cost effectively without resorting to nuclear conflict.
Taking out the Kerch Bridge dramatically alters what Russia can do. Russia has to deal with 3 Million Crimean and Kerchian Maggots running around like chickens with no heads. They have to find alternate ways to supply them and their troops. It creates a huge logistics probloem for their military and their Maggots. The maggots have to swim across the channel to get away.
Within the last 72 hours Vladimir Putin just told the world "Russia Is Invincible".
So why isn't this guy the president of the United States of America?
Seriously though I know he makes an insane amount of money already but can we draft Peter Zeihan or something?
Never have I ever heard someone speak who really understands the world even a fraction of a percentage as well as he does.
I can confidently say I have listened to all of his talks on UA-cam and while repetitive no one can deny his accuracy over time.
All of the minds in the Congress Senate supreme court presidential cabinet Pentagon and the entire Bureaucratic DC aperatus combined are nothing at all compared to Peter Zeihan.
If he were to enter politics in the USA he would make everyone else appear to be the mentally deranged children they are by comparison.
Peter Zeihan 2024.
That is a very thin prediction. It obviously contains reasonable variables but just saying, yeah they will soon die out and therefore they are acting now...
Why not directly after the Krim for example.
What I want to say is that we miss much information and therefore the error term of this regression seems rather high.
Is anyone threatening russia tho? Why is recapturing those gaps a priority if they're not under threat?
History. Its about surviving the centuries to come.
Here's an interesting analogy, I had a neighbour once, who told me they had a total of seven neighbours to their house and land. Guess what, they were in dispute with five of them! Russia is like that neighbour, they have more than seven neighbours so no wonder they feel the need plug gaps.
holy sh*t peter has been saying this for over 5 years! why didn't American outets pick this up and tell our gov???
They do and they have people who predicted similar things. The problem with democratic governments is that leaders change and many of them chose to concentrate on next election than some long term plans. Things were ignored when Russia invaded Georgia, and frankly also when Crimea was taken. They thought, "eh, they will only stop there". West also ignored the hybrid warfare that was happening and is responsible for the recent populism in Western countries. Obama dropped a ball with it and didn't take Crimea seriously he realized it towards the end of his presidency and did some steps. Unfortunately his successor not only did do nothing in that direction, he actually undid everything.
Hmm, it’s 5 years later and they still have a huge army. I think Peter got the overarching logic correct but didn’t foresee how the Russians would respond to the demographic drop - leveraging mercenary forces - which led to a drop in quality as they tried to preserve their quantities.
Also, huge relative to what, Ukraine? The manpower to combat power ratio seems pretty ... underwhelming.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Cant say hes not prophetic..
He literally said Russia has been invaded 50 times. All of which the winter was what defeated their enemies.
It’s not prophecy, it’s history repeating itself. Geography hasn’t changed.
@@markgarcia8253 Theres actually so much wrong with that statement..
The geography of whats considered "russia" has changed many times in my lifetime alone, kid, and it will for you too.
Not to mention the fact that earth itself is constantly moving and shifting. Much much more of russia is usable today than it was during ww2.
You completely ignore multiple countries history when you just blanket say "it was all russia being invaded" Like cmon my guy..
and the idea that winter has "saved them everytime" is so laughably wrong that you clearly get your history from the history channel and only that.
Winter has hurt russia in war = as much as it has helped. Pick up a book my guy.
Edit: My original comment is whats known as a "figure of speech", the more you know.
New to Peter and he has a lot of knowledge and interesting ideas, but I'm not so sure about his predictive analysis of his knowledge and perhaps the wholeness of his knowledge. He says Russia needs to take several more areas in other nations which include the NATO members of "half" of Poland and Romania, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. He also says that Russia "...have all the tools here and until the Germans are willing to dedicate troops to protect the Polish frontier...". Seems to me that Russia does not have all the tools to seize Ukraine, much the less 5 NATO nations and Germany hadn't even delivered Leopard tanks, much the less German troops and Russia is light years farther away from being able to invade Poland now then they were one year ago. Use experts to enhance your knowledge and analysis. Not to replace it.
This is 5 years old. Hindsight is 20/20, turns out the Russian Bear isn't as fearsome as we thought.
"half" of Poland. Look at a map of Poland. What's there? The Vistula River. Geographic boundaries. Canada doesn't have the manpower or economic might to do anything significant to the US, and the Mexico / US border is somewhat hardened, with massive deserts between the two countries. He includes those countries to highlight the limits of projecting power across a geographic border, and how those countries are the ones who occupy those landforms a Russian defensive position craves.
Russia has cut its on throat at this time. The Russ military has now shown an inability to take Ukraine, and by extension any other country that resists. When they finally concede in Ukraine they will not have the military to take any country that doesn’t resist. There’s an unanticipated effect of the was, and that’s that Russians are leaving Russia in big numbers. Even with the freeze on draft age men, over 200K Russians have left for other homes. These and trained and educated people who have skills that will transplant.
The war will Ukraine has ended Russia. They can’t and won’t win, and they have accelerated their loss of talent and skilled workers.
i dont exactly understand his point, is he saying no Russian engineers have been educated since the late 1980s? that obviously isnt true is it.
its part of a bigger picture, russia has demographic gaps between generations, consequences of the comunist revoluiton, the civil war, the 2º world war and stalin regime. They lost too many people and know they are seeing the long term consequences of that.
@@BOIZADAS I understand Russia has been through problems but Peter states things that are false as though they are facts. it's not clear that it's supposed to be rhetoric.
Withnail1969 He’s not saying they have literally no engineers, but they have no where near enough to replace those that are about to start dying off in any significant capacity.
@@meratrix9967 and what hard evidence is there to support this theory? for a start, a lot of infrastructure in Russia today such as 4g and 5g mobile phone networks is not Soviet in origin, so having Soviet trained engineers in that field is irrelevant. obviously most things today will be similar. life has moved on.
Not enough in the right fields have been trained because not enough even exist so yeah they’re screwed
For the love of God, please display maps NORTH UP, the conventional way, so your points can be more easily understood.
plugging gaps? which country don't have gaps to plug? such an attitude is how you get unending cycles of wars. such antiquated preoccupation with land. it's arguable that a nation today with a greater economy has an asset far more valuable than how much real estate it own. just like a developed land is far more valuable than undeveloped. Putin should stop thinking last century and focus on developing the land he has. he wastes limited resources, including lives, with such pointless wars and only siphon away from things that really matter.
clearly, China and India also possess this false mindset, using extreme nationalism for political ends and maintaining legitimacy.
I don’t agree that Russia needs to take over Poland the Baltics and Romania. What they need to do is join the European Union because Europe actually extends all the way to the Ural Mountains. They could be a major player in the EU.
@@ireneuszpyc6684 and you are so uncivilized you don't have a republic
@@Vranabg Peter Zeihan attracts "the bottom of the barrel" - you & your comment prove it
@@ireneuszpyc6684 that's true, his main audience for this nonsense is Americans.
And give up their authoritarian cleptocracy? .... never
Who doesn't like being ruled from Brussels?
Russia is free for the pickings.
That’s your delusion what this guy feeds you... He knows nothing about the Russians! And I mean literally nothing.
Noo or at least not yet.... with enough nuclear weapons to vaporize any other country, it doesn't matter how many border disputes has with every neighbor.... If Russia collapse, will be something internal.... After all in the last century the country collapsed two times.
@@fabolvaskarika7940 WAH WAH
@@verynice5574 little puppy, are you hungry?