← PBD Podcast
PBD Podcast
"I Trust Putin More Than Zelenskyy" - Exiled Zelenskyy Top Insider Oleksii Arestovych TELLS ALL | PBD Podcast | Ep. 524
01:49:58
Loading summary
Transcript218 lines
- [00:01]
Oleksiy Arestovich
This episode is brought to you by Google Gemini. With the Gemini app, you can talk live and have a real time conversation with an AI assistant. It's great for all kinds of things, like if you want to practice for an upcoming interview, ask for advice on things to do in a new city, or brainstorm creative ideas. And by the way, this script was actually read by Gemini. Download the Gemini app for iOS and Android today. Must be 18 to use Gemini Live. This episode is brought to you by Allstate.
- [00:28]
Patrick Bet-David
Some people just know they could save.
- [00:30]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Hundreds on car insurance by checking Allstate first. Like, you know, to check the date.
- [00:34]
Patrick Bet-David
Of the big game first before you.
- [00:37]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Accidentally buy tickets on your 20th wedding anniversary and have to spend the next 20 years of your marriage making up for it. Yeah, checking first is smart. So check Allstate first for a quote that could save you hundreds.
- [00:49]
Patrick Bet-David
You're in good hands with Allstate Savings. Vary terms apply.
- [00:52]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Allstate Fire and Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates, Northbrook, Illinois. Even now, I have to be watching my words very carefully and select my words just so not to damage the country.
- [01:03]
Patrick Bet-David
This is a very important question for you to answer. Do you directly or indirectly know that he's gotten paid from all the money that other countries are given to?
- [01:11]
Oleksiy Arestovich
The level of corruption is off the charts. Catastrophical Zelensky is an extremely authoritarian and strict person. Everybody played him like the owner of this puppet, but it's all the opposite.
- [01:24]
Patrick Bet-David
You know what they're gonna do in your country if you go out there and you talk like this? You think they're gonna let somebody like you win?
- [01:30]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think I will win.
- [01:31]
Patrick Bet-David
Really?
- [01:32]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes.
- [01:32]
Patrick Bet-David
Who do you trust more, Zelensky or Putin? Putin. You trust Putin? Why is that?
- [01:42]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Because the enemy is a better teacher.
- [01:48]
Patrick Bet-David
So imagine all the conflicts going on right now between Ukraine and Russia, and you, let's just say your name is Oleksiy Arestovich and you are Zelensky's top advisor. Your background is military intelligence, right? And you're in there and you're making all of these predictions, and you keep getting right on when Putin's gonna invade Ukraine. Over and over. Everybody's like, why does this guy get these things right? You're on the inside, then all of a sudden, there's a big falling out between the two of you, Zelensky and Arestovich. And then suddenly you are in exile because you have three criminal prosecutions. That's going on with you, investigations. That's going on with you. You leave Ukraine September of 2023. Now, this is Somebody that you are considered as a number two candidate for being a president that you can potentially take over Zelensky's job while that's going on. He came in here, we did a two hour podcast together. The things we discussed was mind boggling. And I asked him a question. I said, so how much time have you spent with Zelensky? He says, weeks, hundreds of hours. I said, great. How different is he from the one we see on stage versus the one he is behind closed doors? His answer will shock you. I asked him about the visit that Boris Johnson had. Three visits. Boris Johnson from UK comes to Kiev and they're talking about, hey, we'd like to prevent the war and stop the war. And Boris is saying no. And then we went through the sequencing of Boris Johnson coming here. He's in the meetings while these negotiations are taking place. And Boris is making that recommendation. And then he leaves his timeline of stepping out in September. Then Liz Truss coming in as a prime minister for one month. September, October, Nord Stream pipeline happens. Then I asked him the question of who he thought it was behind it. You have to hear the answer here. His breakdown and analysis on Putin was very unique. You're going to be enamored by the way he broke down Putin strategies and what Putin is doing. But all in all, this is not somebody that Zelensky likes. This is not somebody that Zelensky trusts. I even asked the question of how many people that are in Zelensky's camp right now that trust him, that are in communication with him, specifically when I asked the question about corruption and the amount of money, how much of that money flow to Zelensky. This is a tell all conversation here with probably the most qualified person to speak on the topic of Zelensky. With that being said, enjoy this two hour sit down with Alexi Arestovich. Did you ever think you would make it I feel I'm supposed I could take sweet victory I know this life meant for me why would you bet on Goliath when we got bet David? Valuetainment giving values contagious this world of entrepreneurs we can't no value to hate it I run homie look what I become I'm the I'm the one okay, so we got an interesting interview here right now and it's very timed. Well, because just three to four hours ago, Putin made an announcement in an interview that will play for you here in a minute that he's agreed to be willing to compromise with Trump on the Ukraine war. And for us, we've been going Back and forth about wanting to do an interview with my guest today, and that is Oleksi Arestovich. Let me kind of properly introduce him to you. So you know who he is. He has been in exile from Ukraine. I think the last time he was there was September of 2023. I'll be very technical. He'll correct me if I'm off on any of this stuff. I think there's three criminal prosecutions that he's going through. He has not gone back since then. He was the former top adviser to Zelensky, and then there was a falling out. And even at one point, a lot of the people who are following the Ukraine, Russia, NATO relationship, he was accurately predicting the fact that In February or 2022, Putin will be invading Russia, Ukraine. And a lot of people were like, why would you say something like this in 2019? And he got it accurate. He got it right. So a lot of people are watching his prediction and the things that he was saying. And so finally, with his background, military intelligence, strategy, everything that he's doing, we agreed to do this interview together here. As we're doing this, the audience that's watching this, he will be speaking in Russian. There will be a translator. You will hear the translator in English. I will be going back and forth with the question. The interview is also being uploaded in Russian on our valuetainment Russian channel. So if somebody wants to watch this right now and they just want to watch it in Russia, we're going to put the link below on the YouTube channel that will take us to our value Team and Russian channel. If you just want to listen to this whole thing in Russian. Having said that, Oleks, it's great to have you here on the podcast. Nice to meet you. Likewise. So few things when we're talking about this one, your background for the audience doesn't know specific to Ukraine, Zelensky and Russia. If you don't mind sharing that with the audience.
- [06:49]
Oleksiy Arestovich
In 1998, I finished the same military school as General Zaluzhny. We know each other since that time. We're friends since the military school. Then I was serving in the Ukrainian Military Intelligence, specializing on the military and political analysis within that framework. When I retired in 2005, I predicted, while analyzing the situation and predicted that Russia will invade Crimea. I described it and there's a video of that in the Internet from 2008 where I describe how they will invade Crimea. And that's actually how they did it. The literally same stages and same steps as I had described. Then there was a video in 2015, 18, 19, where I was predicted the war will break out. Since 2014, I was participating in the 2nd Maidan and Military operations in the east. And I became famous as a military commentator, military reviewer. When Zelensky came to power, I criticized him very sharply because of his approach towards war and towards stopping the war and so forth. So harsh that one time they invited me over to talk. I was especially critical of the information informational coverage of the Minsk Process. And I received a call from their office and they invited me to a meeting in the Minsk process. And when it finished, they said, what's your opinion? What do you think that the informational policy should be? I described it what I would do when they offered me to become an advisor and speaker of the Ukrainian group. In the Minsk Process parallel, there was the Normand process happening. And about three weeks after that I met with Yermak and he offered for me to become the advisor to the office. And I was an advisor on strategical communication in the area of national defense. In that capacity, I went through the Minsk process, the Norman process, to Zelenskyy's office. When the war began, I became the main speaker, one of the three main speakers. The first was Zelenskyy and Podolak was second. And I was the speaker on the military issues. Then it happened that there was an explosive growth in popular and influence. I bec second most popular person in Ukraine and I took part in the Stamboul process, where I was also the head of the military subgroup. In the talks with Russia, there were four subgroups, the economic, political, cultural, and I was the head of the military subgroup.
- [09:06]
Patrick Bet-David
At this time, when this is happening, is your relationship with Zelensky good? Are you guys spending time together? There's a good relationship. He trusts you, you trust him? Or is there instability? Is there friction between you, the two of you guys?
- [09:19]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I never really was. I was always a black sheep. I've never was a member of of his team. More likely it was just their method to draw near the people who are criticizing them in order to disarm them. Then, in the middle of March 2022, half a month after beginning of the war, it became evident that I was ranking second most popular person in the country. Him or his people around him began undertaking systematic action against my popularity. They started a campaign that continues until today to portray that Aristovich is the concentration of all things evil in Ukraine. Moreover, considering that I'm expressing direct ambitions, this campaign is growing more fierce every day.
- [09:59]
Patrick Bet-David
So could that be that you were a threat because the fear was your ambitions were you were building your own identity because you eventually wanted to be the president. And that could be threatening to a guy like Zelensky where they want to get rid of you. Is that a fair assessment or no?
- [10:15]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes. It's like when two narcissists found themselves in the same den and it has become too tight for both of them.
- [10:21]
Patrick Bet-David
And you would say you're one of the narcissists.
- [10:23]
Oleksiy Arestovich
You're comfortable saying they call me that way. I don't consider myself to be one. I've been studying psychology for many years as an amateur. But nonetheless. And so I know what narcissist is, the definition, and it was just sort of a joke.
- [10:37]
Patrick Bet-David
So. So. And I appreciate that you know what you're saying. But for me, I think that you need a little bit of it to be a president, because to think you can lead a country, you have to think very highly of yourself. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. But going back to it. So what caused the relationship to get to a point that you had to leave the country and be in exile? What led to that events.
- [11:00]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Look, in 2000, the steps were as follows. It began in March 2022. Then later in July of 2022, I was given an interview to a very famous Ukrainian journalist, Dmitry Gordon. I openly stated there. He asked me if I was going to run for president. I said yes. And since then, it was clear that the set of problems standing before Ukraine resonates. And I understood that this is my life goal to help Ukraine to resolve these issues. I have my own views on those things. And after that, there was a totally crazy campaign that was set in motion against me, inspired particularly by people surrounding Zelensky, not only by them, but also other political opponents. The systems began working against me. Then a Russian missile hits a residential building in Dnipro, which is the second city in Ukraine by size, actually third after Kharkiv. This happened in January 2023. And in an interview, I had a daily show with the Russian oppositioner Mark Vigin. 500,000 people would watch it every time, every day, 100,000 people. It was very popular. And on that show live, I was very tired and I misspoke when they asked me about whether it was possible to intercept the missile. And I said that in my opinion, I think it was a Russian missile, but only after it was intercepted by our defense system, only after that it in turn hit the residential building. So when I misspoke, it was used In a huge campaign against me. And they actually suggested that I what year is this?
- [12:20]
Patrick Bet-David
What year?
- [12:21]
Oleksiy Arestovich
This was January 14, 2023.
- [12:24]
Patrick Bet-David
Oh, so this is. You're in war.
- [12:26]
Oleksiy Arestovich
One year after the beginning of the war, they used this against me. Yermak and Zelensky suggested to resign, leave the office. At that point, it was already clear that we differ on a whole range of issues. In particular, one of them is the fate of the Russian church in Ukraine or the Ukrainian church of the Russian Patriarchy. While being an advisor, I publicly spoke out in his defense, also on some other issues. And so, to be honest, I was happy to leave because the totality of contradictions between me and their position was critical in size by then. But since I was a phenomenally popular in Ukraine and beyond its borders, I had a lot of invitations to all kinds of international conferences on security, and they were not able not to send me there. I would regularly travel, go there, represent Ukraine and my particular opinion. And then in September 2023, while I was in the U.S. our visits coincided, my visit and President Zelensky's. And in one of the programs, I was asked to comment on his visit. And I assessed it as extremely unsuccessful. I changed my rhetoric and predicted all of the troubles that we now have, because during NATO summit in Vilnius in June 2023 and during that visit, in those statements, I saw all the problems that we have now. And I was warned and American professional will not name the person not to return to Ukraine. I left. I already had my return ticket to Ukraine. So I laughed, I said, this cannot be how. I'm the second most popular person in the country. Who and how would do that? And so forth. Moreover, I myself come from intelligence services background that I know when it's a real threat and when it's not. And I did not take it seriously at all. He repeated it three times, do not return. And he said that he will not repeat again. I did not fly back, thinking that the dust will settle in a couple weeks or months. And I was planning to go back by winter. I wanted to get the return tickets again. I was making plans. My family stayed back in Ukraine and so forth. But every time it was delayed farther and farther, and every time it was growing worse and worse. And I'm still a political immigrant. After a year and a half, already I cannot return. Returned back to Ukraine. They opened three criminal cases against me. Not directly, but still, to be exact, two criminal cases. And until now they're still trying to open a third one. To be completely exact, I have a School of Philosophy and Psychology, where I teach with more than 60,000 students from 60 countries. And right after that interview, they began pressuring the administration of the school. They hacked everyone's phone, installed wiretaps in their homes and cars. There was a demonstrative surveillance set up after the lady who used to be the school's administrator. And she was on the eight months of pregnancy. So that was the story. The security service came to my house undercover right after the interview. But overall then, even then I did. It didn't stop me. I wanted to go back calmly, but I was seriously warned from here, from the American side, that I should not go for now. And this for now continues until today and is being delayed farther and farther.
- [15:26]
Patrick Bet-David
Got it. So the story you're talking about in January 2017, this is when the Dnipro remarks, right where yes, you were asked to resign, that, you know, I think you made a resign after stating that the Russian KH22 missile that killed 44 people in the Dnipro may have been shot down by Ukrainian air defenses. This fundamental error, as Aristovich called it, sparked widespread angle in Ukraine, anger in Ukraine, where parliamentary signed a petition for his dismissal. Resist the story that you're talking about.
- [15:58]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, yes, yes.
- [15:59]
Patrick Bet-David
So, and I think later on you came and you publicly wrote and you gave your sincere apologies to the victims and the relatives and residents of Dnipro and everyone who was deeply hurt by the comments that you made. So that that was a follow up with you and Zelenskyy.
- [16:13]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I publicly apologized, even though until now, honestly, it was just a gesture of politeness and condolences for the deceased, because there were no formal basis to apologize if you watched the video attentively. I said that this version still needs to be verified and verified over again. I misspoke and I will explain what this happened every time when I do my show. I was also trying to train the people that watch me to process information correctly. So I would usually present several versions saying, look, there's a Ukrainian version, there's a Russian version. Yes, yes, it's a live, live show. Yes.
- [16:48]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, so anybody can see it.
- [16:50]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, absolutely, you can watch it. And I was so tired that day. I had traveled back from the field and I was exhausted and my tongue simply wouldn't turn to speak through each version. Moreover, my co host interrupted me and said, yes, I think it was our intercepting rocket that hit the Russian missile, which in turn hit the residential building. But I said that this needs to be verified and verified over again. That's All I had strength to do. Then I went to sleep. In the morning, I woke up and there is this huge scandal, and it was blown up by the participation of the Russian media and the media from our fifth president, Poroshenko, and then who is now in opposition, and as well, the networks of our president's office, as strange as it may be, their social channels and all the rest. So it was a big and fiery story.
- [17:35]
Patrick Bet-David
So. So for you, because one of the things you pride yourself in, in your intro was the amount of times you got predictions Right. Okay, 2014, 2008, 2019, how you said, this is what's going to be happening. When. When this happened, and you made a comment like this, and this. This error that was made, did that hurt your credibility at all? Did people say, yeah, you know what? I thought, I can trust him. But no, I think he's just trying to do this because he wants to undermine Zelensky and he wants to one day be off. His ambitions are getting in the way. Did it kind of. Was it viewed that way by certain people?
- [18:09]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Many smart people understand this. But you need to realize the atmosphere in Ukraine. The people, most of them, carry emotional trauma from the war. It's very severe, and it does not let them think freely. Moreover, they're under an onslaught of huge amounts of propaganda from different directions, from the Russia side, from the Ukrainian side. So they're not free in their judgment. Other than that, there's another aspect. My way of speaking is very provoking, narcissistic, as they say. It triggers and provokes a lot of people. I predicted this in March 2022, at the height of my popularity, when I was crazy popular with. People would not go to bed without hearing me. They would not wake up without me. Military people would listen to me, from generals to housewives. Everybody would listen to me. Everybody would listen to me before going to bed and so forth. So they asked me, how is this all going to end? And I said that they will call me a traitor. This is on video. And how did I know? Because it always happens in therapy. And I was providing some sort of.
- [19:03]
Patrick Bet-David
Therapy for the nation while you were in Ukraine.
- [19:05]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, yes, yes. I said this at the height of my popularity. It was the third day, third week, rather after the beginning of the war. And I said that they will, in the end, call me a traitor, because that always happens when people put their hopes on someone and then the life happens and their hopes don't come to pass, and the person they place their hope upon becomes the worst person in the World. It's a known phenomenon in therapy and I was able to foresee it today. People, their attitudes towards me are very harsh and emotional. Figuratively. Many people defy me, carry me on their arms and consider me messiah and savior. And there are people who hate me and consider that I'm the concentration of evil and everything of the worst things that could happen with Ukraine. Yes.
- [19:46]
Patrick Bet-David
If you were to put total amount of hours you've spent around Zelenskyy, where you're around him, not phone calls, physically around him, how many total hours have you spent with Zelenskyy?
- [19:58]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Well, in the past, you see, the politicians, they trade an audience always. That's the main currency that a politician handles. So any audience is carefully protected. I would see Zelensky several times during the period from 2020 through 2022, including the times when I would stay in the office along with him and Yermak, resolving a list of specific military issues. For example, appointing the Luzhny as a commander in chief. I did that. It was my project to appoint the Luzhne as the commander in chief. And since this was a complex process, a closed door process, we were discussing this topic in detail several times when the war began. The immediate proximity, I'm just trying to be precise. I was in the immediate proximity with Zelenskyy.
- [20:42]
Patrick Bet-David
How many hours would you say? Like weeks?
- [20:45]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, hundreds of hours.
- [20:47]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, so you've spent enough time around him to see how he is. How different is he behind closed doors as a leader than he is the way we see him on stage when he's begging for money or raising for money, or, you know, pleading for everybody around the world to want to support him. Is he the same person behind closed doors as he is on the big screen?
- [21:11]
Oleksiy Arestovich
It's two different people, really. Yes, of course. On the screen he plays the role of this unbreakable leader, like made of iron in life, he carries himself in a much smaller, softer way. And personal conversations. He attentively listens to everyone's opinion. But nonetheless, he takes decisions himself later on behind closed doors when everyone leaves.
- [21:31]
Patrick Bet-David
So, you know, for. For us, you know, Americans or people around the world who are not directly in there, who don't know his story. We see the videos of him dancing. We see the videos of him being an actor. We see the videos of him going from being a teacher in a show to being a. Accidentally becomes a president. Right, for you being from there that's lived there to the average person. How did Zelenskyy get his popularity and how did he eventually get to a point of becoming a president in Ukraine.
- [22:01]
Oleksiy Arestovich
It was a huge protest against the old political system that was in action since 1991 through 2012. And during the time he was elected, it was the third Maidan, but it was an electoral Maidan voters. Maidan people were not so much voting for him, even though a good amount of people voted for him as much as they were voting against Poroshenko. In the old system, they wanted to elect a wild card joker person who is not from the system. And they got one.
- [22:26]
Patrick Bet-David
1991, he's 13 years old. Right. This is when the negotiations taking place. I'm thinking you're talking about the Budapest memorandum, the whole conversation that's happened. And hey, if you give us the 1700 nuclear warheads, we will give you protection. That's what we'll do. And then from that moment on, I'm more interested in Zelensky. So were the puppet masters looking to see somebody that they can use? And Zelenskyy was perfect for the puppet masters. Is that who he was perfect for? Because he was an image, he was famous?
- [23:02]
Oleksiy Arestovich
No, there are two main legends around Zelenskyy's name. The first is that he's someone's puppet, that Kolomoiskyi, for example, one of Ukrainian oligarchs. And the second one is that really Yermak around everything. And Zelenskyy is his puppet. But it's not so. Zelenskyy is an extraordinarily harsh and authoritarian person. He controls everything. And Yermak, when he says that he's just Zelenskyy's manager, it's true. He's not exaggerating their places and issues where they do not let Yermak in, where he decides single handedly. And the list of all those topics is not so short. And Kolomoisky is currently in jail. Everybody was portraying him as the owner of the puppet, but you see, they were pushing this legend. But you see how it all turned out to be.
- [23:43]
Patrick Bet-David
Well, that's complimentary for you to say that because you know, if one would think you would say, no, he doesn't know what he's doing. He got lucky. He's done the job because other people are using him and all this other stuff you're saying. No, he actually knows exactly what he's doing and how he got into that position. Absolutely. Oh, really? Wow. Okay, so who is Zelensky to you? You know, when, when, you know, seeing, you know, raising capital, reason, raising money, hey, give me more money here. And all this other Stuff is Zelensky in America. We were divided. A lot of people were all about, hey, Putin's a bad guy, Russia's horrible, he's a. He's an evil empire, he's a modern day Hitler, he's whatever. You know, we just got to make sure this guy, we got to take him down and we got to protect Ukraine. And everybody was wearing the Ukraine flag, you know, pin here, everybody on their Twitter profile, their pictures, Instagram shirts, jackets. It doesn't matter who you were. Everybody had the Ukraine pin. A lot of people. And a lot of people fell for it, right? And what a noble man Zelenskyy is, you know, person of the year. He's amazing. He's doing all these great things, but that's the image a lot of people had. And gradually his popularity around the world has declined. It's not what it was a year and a half ago, it's not what it was two years ago. But from your perspective, who's Zelensky to you?
- [25:03]
Oleksiy Arestovich
For me, Zelensky is a person that when life threw challenges at him, they were beyond his competency. Meaning if perhaps he was a president during peaceful time, perhaps he could manage. But when his life confronted him with war, huge challenges, first Covid, then the war, he could not handle it. He simply was not able to understand and resolve the problems posed before him. Moreover, from my point of view, this is a person who de facto deceived his voters. He promised them one thing and practically did not fulfill not a single. Not a single election promise, especially those key issues. Ukraine has about 25% of desperate nationalists who, in their extreme nationalism, roll down to chauvinism, especially with the war trauma. 73% of voters voted for Zelensky. Practically the entire remainder. We're talking 25 and 73. And to them, he promised a wider multicultural project where people who speak in Russian, for example, and Russian culture is an organic part of Ukrainian culture. This is why they voted for him, because he said that he will not allow to split Ukrainians based on the language they speak and what church they go to. But he did not do any of that. He did everything to the opposite. Poroshenko, at his time, announced his famous concept stating army language, Ukrainian language and faith. And he consolidated around 25% of voters around himself, and the rest voted against that. In the result, Zelensky's administration, it turned up that he supported that very same project. And today Ukraine is facing a serious violation of constitution. And he himself is supposed to be the guarantor of constitution, institution, Human rights violations, brutal violations, persecution of the church, etc. And I began criticizing that when I was still his advisor to his office, because for me, my personal motivation is very close toward a religious one. For me, the issue of conscience, honor, precision are key issues. The issue of truth. And I'm not able to stay silent. And even now I'm not silent because he, with all of this negative attitudes with what he does, he's the head. He's the president and the head of our country that's at war, that is at war with a superior opponent. So in my rhetoric and my critic, and I'm being officially in political opposition to him, I must at all times carefully choose my words to make a distinction between the office of the President of Ukraine and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. As a person, I'm trying not to damage the President of Ukraine, rather to hit particularly Zelensky himself. And this may have a negative appearance, as if I'm waging a personal war within him. That's not true. It's not the case. I'm criticizing him as a political leader that is making mistakes, in my opinion, including strategical mistakes on the inside and the outside, refraining from waging war as a matter of principle. But oftentimes such reputation may get created. And at all times, even now, I have to carefully cite my words as a matter of principle so as not to damage the country. And it's not easy.
- [28:11]
Patrick Bet-David
I can only imagine. And I'm assuming that's why you chose to speak in your native language, because you do speak English. I speak English. And it could provide us interview the technicalities of words. But I have to be specified, very specified. I totally respect that. Specifically in this position that you're in.
- [28:29]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yeah.
- [28:29]
Patrick Bet-David
I mean, when you think about when I look at the numbers when he won in 20, 19, 73.22%. And he said, I promise I will never let you down. Right. His words that he talked about now transitioning into where we are today. Okay, so let's go to Putin. In your eyes, when you break down the history of what's happened between Putin and Ukraine and Russia and the history of it, I'll even give you a timeline here in a minute. And when you see it, I'm sure you recognize the timeline. You're very critical of Zelensky, very. Based on what you're saying, what is your impression of Putin? You know, when you think about what he's doing with the war, with the way he's handling it, with the fact that, you know, US put sanctions on him two years ago. I think it's a little bit over two years that he set the sanctions. It's affected the economy, the inflation, what they're going through. But what do you think about what Putin did with the first actions? Your impression of him?
- [29:29]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Putin, he single handedly took several decisions. Single handed decisions that are directly directed against my country. And not only the first is that he. When he took away Crimea in 2014, then the whole activity in Donbas and full scale war that began in 2022. He is the leader of a country who single handedly took a decision to go with military aggression against Ukraine. And I qualify him as such. No less, no more. That's officially. Unofficially, I have my particular opinion about him as a person and political leader and how he came to that life. Better said, to those decisions I openly state that which does not add to my popularity among many Ukrainians because I have my own view of things. And if you wish I can share this with you, but it will take three to five minutes. It's a long text.
- [30:16]
Patrick Bet-David
I would love to hear it.
- [30:17]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I want to hear from my point of view. Putin, upon completing the Leningrad University and working in the west and he comes from political intelligence background, he is the most pro western Russian politician until now. His mindset. In his mindset he is the most pro Western politician. Let's recall his coming to power. His first proposition to the west was to accept Russia into NATO. Then he offered to make Russian missile defense system as part of the Western American missile defense system. He is the first leader who called George Bush after 911 and offered his help. He organized a stopover base for the US and NATO in Volga. It is the same person who today is saying no to NATO bases in Ukraine. And Americans during their campaign in Afghanistan were using Russian territory and their stopover bases in Russia. It took a long time before he switched to anti Western courts. I can even name you the stages of that process. In the beginning he started fighting with those whom he considered Russia's internal enemies. Those are the oligarchs like Berezovsky, Kosinski, TV channels, etc. So he began taking action as a KGB officer who's used to oppress internal opposition. He got in trouble with the west, but particularly with the soft power side NGO structures that were bringing Western influence. Especially the influence that democrat globalists were introducing through the means like USAID and source fund etc. He understood that this is the soft power that is directed against him. But he purposefully set up Russia as A non ideological state. He said economy. From my point of view, Putin is a leader who is a right wing liberal, conservative type, something like Cecil Ross or Stolipin in Russia in the end of the 19th century. A statesman and a right wing liberal, free economy and so forth, so forth. But he has a KGB officer inside him and he has some traumatizing experience back from St. Petersburg times when he was Sobchak's assistant, who was St. Petersburg mayor at that time. And as they say, he was intensely interacting with criminal structures and it left a definite mark on him. So these are the three sources that formed his personality. He was asking to join the west with all his might. But then the revolution take place takes place, let's say in 2002 when Ukraine officially under President Kuchmai is taking the decision to join NATO with the background of Chechenian campaign and Russia blaming the west for meddling and supporting Chechenian magi heads. He took it extremely painfully. Then the revolution in Georgia happens and caucuses which is a key area for him. He takes it as a Western particularly American expansion right in Russia's underbelly, to put it that way. Then the first Maidan in Ukraine, the orange Maidan 2004 he takes it as a Western intelligence agencies, in particular American agencies directed against Russian influence. Then some time passes and in 2007 it's his famous minute speech where he says declares that he's now enemies with the West. It took him seven years to get to that point. And they begin planning a definite large scale special operation against Ukraine comprised an entire spectrum of attacks, economic, political, cultural, etc. Etc. But they were still not talking about a military decision. Then comes the events in Georgia 2008. Then on that background, Ukraine emphatically brings the question before NATO and the collective west about accepting Ukraine into NATO. NATO Bucharest summit in 2010 and the American president at the time says that we accept Ukraine into NATO. But Merkel and Old, the leaders of Germany and France categorically refuse. And Putin understand that this is an issue that he can never be at peace with that from Ukrainian territory and with Ukraine's help there will be a systemic threat to Russia's security. At least how he sees this we can, we can argue how reasonable this is. But I'm just describing the way he sees that. Then the key event was an attempt of Maidan in Russia. It was the Bolotna Square spearheaded by Navalny and other leaders of opposition in 2012. And that scared Putin to death. He understood that this colorful revolution as the West's method of action as they took it is already inside Russia. Then he turned Russia into an ideological state in order to create an ideology of Russian peace as a software for Russia's expansion. And back then, the decision was taken to take away Crimea and it went on further. From Putin's point of view, he's carrying out a defense war. I think if we talk psychologically, he holds a deadly grudge against the west because he always wanted to them to like him, always wanted to be part of them. He was accepted into G8 and kicked out of G8 from that big eight. And he's still angry and he's trying to prove it to the west with this whole war that they need to consider him and that Russia has real interest that he's honestly defending. This is his mindset and this is his logic. From what I understand, people blame him for supposedly wanting to rebuild the Soviet Union. I don't think so. Rather, he wants to revenge for the Soviet Union's defeat. It's the motivation. And from his point, the west broke the agreement, they're based on the fact that when Gorbachev brought the troops out from Germany, he was promised that the west will not expand, NATO will not expand eastward. But there were five waves of expansion and he was bearing with that still. But when they touched the former SSR countries, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, he took it as an intrusion into his area of responsibility. It's the logic of a person who's like in St. Petersburg in the 90s, who took over a marketplace, as we say. So we agreed that this is going to be your territory of influence, this is going to be mine. Then you intrude into my territory of influence and there must be some response. So from his point of view, he's waging a defense warfare. From his point of view, he has the moral superiority in what he's doing, and he sincerely believes in what he's doing. And at the same time, he finds himself in a very difficult position. And it's been three and a half years that I'm in big politics. And I continue learning every day. I'm trying to understand what's happening, and new things open up to me every day. My experience has convinced me that the average person thinks that politicians lie when they come to the microphone. But all the experience convinces me that politicians tell pure truth 99% of the time. And when he says that we're not fighting with Ukraine, nor with Ukrainian people, but rather with the Nazi government that took over Ukraine and Ukrainians are brothers and sisters, as he Confirmed today at the conference. He's telling the pure truth. He's truly thinking that way. So it's a complex character with regards to Ukraine and the world with complex motivation. And I tried to express it with maximum precision. And the way I understand it, laying down his foundational motives and the way he's looking at the world.
- [37:07]
Patrick Bet-David
Do you think Putin lies 90, 99% of the time? No, tell me the truth.
- [37:14]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think he tells the truth 99% of the time when he speaks about key issues. What he mentioned today, about 80 kg of meat per person per year in Russia. There's a big question where he got those numbers from. But as to his positions, for example, in his interview with Tucker, when he does this long historical, he says what he thinks.
- [37:33]
Patrick Bet-David
Yeah. So, okay, so let me ask you, when you say he wanted to have a good relationship, he makes the phone call, hey, we're willing to entertain being part of NATO. And then, okay, let me go check with the people, you know, Clinton, Bush, whoever it is, hey, we're going to check on the comeback. You know, I'm so not right now. Maybe later on we don't. What do you mean you don't me to be a part of NATO and then, hey, 9, 11 support. I don't like what this happened here. Whatever you need, I defend it. I'm not for terrorism and all that stuff. He's kind of putting his foot down. But when you say he wanted to be pro west and then now it's against west. Well, the west is who, who let him down. If you were to give names of people that you think independently, because the west can have nine leaders, six of them were good with Putin, but three didn't keep a promise to Putin. Who are the specific people that you think that Putin said? Yeah, I don't trust this guy. It's out. Is it the entire system of the west he doesn't trust with how we are or is it certain individuals that got him to this point?
- [38:35]
Oleksiy Arestovich
For him, main point of orientation is the United States of America and any of their leaders. Why? Because he's measuring the real weight and he sincerely believes that he's stronger than any Western state except United States. He's stronger than France, Britain, Germany, not to mention Italy and the Baltic countries. And the strategy consists of to create a situation when he can have a two sided relationship with any Western country, bypassing over national structures like NATO and us because together all the countries of the west are stronger than Putin, but he's stronger than any country separate except the United States. So he's orienting only against the US for, for him, Ukraine is a proxy power of the US and so he's trying to speak over the head and come and negotiate, because again, he repeated today he's not going to talk to Zelensky. For him, the US Is the focus of his grudge, attraction and recognition. It's a very Russian way of thinking. I don't know if you can understand it why, though.
- [39:34]
Patrick Bet-David
But why is it, Is it a person? Because United States can be five different things under five different presidents. Right? So when you say United States, who, which specific president, which leader, which regime? When you say the West, Putin lived.
- [39:50]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Through four US Presidents, and during this whole time, he has been the president. And today we know that, for example, the administration, I always underscore that you cannot say United States collectively, the West.
- [40:04]
Patrick Bet-David
That's exactly what I'm saying.
- [40:06]
Oleksiy Arestovich
The administration of Trump's administration and Biden's administration is, are two different types of west and two different worldviews and systems of motivation. And he understands this. Moreover, he's trying to play with it. But he's working with the given. He's a professional intelligence officer. He's has been taught to work with the given. If it's Biden, he works with Biden. If it's Trump, he works with Trump. But he sincerely believes that a country has objective, interesting independently from the last name of their leader, the size and the geographical location, and real geopolitical interests, and he's always trying to appeal to that. So notice his style is real politics. He's always talking about real politics, real interests, and he's offering to act. And within those parameters and framework on the television, what did he achieve in this, in this war? He achieved a great success. You remember the debates of Kamala Harris and Trump. There was a very curious moment in there. President Trump says that to Kamala, that you failed in your negotiations, your talks with Russia, if it had been me, the war would not have started. It's a very free paraphrasing of what took place. So she's losing it for a second. And then she says, in a very free paraphrasing as well, she responds, why do we even have to speak to people like Putin and the rest of them? And that's the thing that Putin always feels and it. And it touches him very painfully. And he demands, he wants for others to speak to him on the same level, like equals. So his interview with Tucker is his attempt to prove why he. They need to talk to him as an equal and he's talking about a multipolarized world, not just United States who had usurp the power and we're telling everybody else how to live. So in this war, he's posing as the representative of the global South. He tried to put China, India and brics and the Arab world on his side. So he's showing them like I'm the person who is capable to stand against the west, this new colonism that they're promoting. So he's discussing those terms for you. I'm the defense against that. And the summit in Kazan when his political isolation was torn apart and tens of world leaders joined him. So that's the culmination of this war of 2022. He is showing that I managed to be this ram from the global south and to force the west to face this new political reality where the world is not single polar anymore and that it doesn't matter who the president of the US is, even though things change after Trump.
- [42:46]
Patrick Bet-David
Yeah. So to me, I just, I just had Rob pull up a report to see when's the last time President Biden spoke to Putin. The fact that President Biden haven't spoken to Putin since February 12th of 2022, that's almost three years. That doesn't make any sense to me. That doesn't make any sense to me that you don't speak to him. But let me, let me go back to understanding the profile of Putin. So he's made comments where it's like, look, these presidents in America, they don't run America. They're going to come. Four, eight years, they're gone. Four, eight years, they'Re gone. Four, eight years, they're gone. Where? You know, I'm going to give you my impression of what you're saying. Tell me if this is exactly where you are. How long has Xi been in power? Rob, can you type in how long Xi has been in power? China, Xi, how long has he been in power? You know, what is the timeline? Since what year? Okay, he has been in power since 2013. That's 11 years. 11 years allows you to know and read how to negotiate and do business with this person. China, easier to know the person. Good, bad, ugly, doesn't matter if they're a criminal or good person. But at least you see patterns of consistency with 11 years. Do you think a part of, you know, his lack of trust comes from, hey, you know, they sit there and they negotiate with them and Ukraine says, I'm willing to give up these warheads to you guys in return for protection. So they give up the 1700 warheads, you know, the whatever, the nuclear warheads that they had, you know which story I'm talking about. And then while they're doing this, Russia says, I'm willing to negotiate with you guys as long as you guys don't come east. And you have the meeting where James Baker at the time US Secretary of State. This is under Bush. You got, I think it's Reagan or I think it's under Bush. Then German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, they make verbal assurances to Mikhail Gorbachev, February 1990, we're not going to go west. Okay? And then Baker famously told Gorbachev that NATO would not move 1 inch eastward beyond Germany. Right. Okay. So now Putin's watching all this stuff happen, then he comes into power and then he's trying to find a way to improve the relationship with west. And then he realizes they don't keep the promise, NATO doesn't keep the promise. I can't trust you guys. Do you think that's the part where he's like west? Whatever they say, don't believe it. Because in four years it could change their promise. Today is not a 30 year promise. Their promise today is maybe a four year promise. Do you think that's how he looks.
- [45:23]
Oleksiy Arestovich
At the west from his point of view? The west looks like people that promise for the period, leaders who promise for the period of time while they're in power. So it fits.
- [45:36]
Patrick Bet-David
You're right, four years.
- [45:38]
Oleksiy Arestovich
To put it this way, roughly, he's in power, he can promise for four years and then every time you need to deal with new people, many times opposing positions because the opposition comes to power and he needs to renegotiate from zero every time, every time having those problems. And I think he tried to resolve the problem on a key level. He showed that in order to defend Russian interests, he's ready to use military force. And you can't not consider that other than that in his eyes, Pozdemoyev system was destroyed, which had been created after Second World War. And now we need to build a new collective security system in Europe or the whole world. This is one of the key things he mentions, one of the key things that I myself talk about. But in his opinion, the west does not want to pose the question this way. So he said today that the west is playing one sidedly to oppress. I'm offering a collective system of security, but you are oppressing us. You don't want to consider us. This is not equal relationships. We're not par.
- [46:39]
Patrick Bet-David
Who do you think he trusts more? Do you think he trusts us more or do you think he trusts China more?
- [46:45]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I don't think that he poses the question that way. I think he only trusts, believes in himself and Russia themselves. Look by the fact, sheer fact of their size and the border with China and the nuclear power even they're, even though they're allies, they're containing and restraining China. And a certain measure when SSR lost the Cold War and Kissinger traveled to God and Nixon in 1975 and this triangle of SSR, USA China had been resolved not in USSR favor. China and US ended up being allies. Today the question is posed the same way in this battle of United States and China, which is a key thing for Americans and China, where is going to be Russia? This is something I always say inside Ukraine when you want the Russia to be what are the extreme nationalists are demanding? That the Russia needs to fall down, that the west needs to destroy, take away their nuclear warheads. And I always ask, do you think the west needs a broken Russia or do they need Russia as a factor that restrains China? And Putin clearly understands what he's trading with. He's trading with his position in relation to China. He is letting them understand that if things go really bad with the West, I'm going to go and join China. You're going to have to deal with joint potential of China and Russia. And if not, I'm ready to stay neutral and contain this, play this role of containing China. So this is one of the key arguments in the negotiations.
- [48:16]
Patrick Bet-David
But I'm asking a question a different way. The way I'm asking a question is, you know, who do you trust more? Do you trust your enemies more? Do you trust your friends more? I trust my enemies a lot. Why? Me too trust the fact that my enemies are doing whatever they can to kill me and put me out of business.
- [48:32]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Quote the Bible here. There's a good phrase in the Bible. My enemy, why did you betray me? Why did you leave me? And it's clearly saying that the enemy, it's this character subject that is most honest towards you. More honest than your friends, especially in the politics.
- [48:54]
Patrick Bet-David
I believe you and I'm fully with it. I fully subscribe to that. So the reason why I asked the trust question is, you know, does he trust the fact that us will not keep their promises? Does he trust the fact that you know China? That's why I'm asking a question. Maybe let me ask you the question here for you because you're at a position right now where a story just came out saying Ukraine to hold. This came up a month and a half ago, two months ago, Ukraine to hold elections immediately after war. Zelensky chief of staff says, I'm sure you've seen this. And when that happens, you know, I think you may be going back for you to run for office because, you know, folks want you to run for president and that's an aspiration that you have as well, that you think you can do a better job than than Zelinsky can from your perspective. And I know this is going to be an interesting answer you'll give. I'm assuming I kind of have an idea what the answer is, but I'm again curious to know what you'll say. Who do you trust more on what they're going to be doing, Zelensky or Putin? This episode is brought to you by Global X. Since 2008, Global X ETFs has been committed to empowering investors with unexplored intelligence solutions. Global X specializes in exchange traded funds that offer exposure to the artificial intelligence ecosystem, including themes like data centers, robotics, semiconductors and cloud computing. To learn more about Global X's entire suite of ETFs from covered calls, fixed income, emerging markets and more, Visit global.
- [50:23]
Oleksiy Arestovich
X etf's.com looking for a pickup truck.
- [50:28]
Patrick Bet-David
To get just about anything done? Look no further.
- [50:31]
Oleksiy Arestovich
The Chevy Silverado EV isn't just the.
- [50:33]
Patrick Bet-David
Most powerful Silverado ever with next level towing capability and technology. It also offers game changing versatility with the available multiflex midgate and tailgate. Which means Silverado EV helps you carry large, bulky and oddly shaped items up to nearly 11ft in length. Chevrolet together. Let's drive. Visit Chevrolet.com to learn more. Putin. You trust Putin more. Why is that?
- [51:03]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Because the enemy is the best teacher. Putin is my opponent and it's an honest battle. But internal politic is always dirty and usually your best friends are the ones who betray you.
- [51:23]
Patrick Bet-David
Have you ever spoken to Putin?
- [51:25]
Oleksiy Arestovich
No. Never spoke with him. Officer, we have incompatible ranks.
- [51:29]
Patrick Bet-David
You've never been. You guys have not spent time together?
- [51:32]
Oleksiy Arestovich
No.
- [51:33]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay.
- [51:33]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Never.
- [51:34]
Patrick Bet-David
Well, I'd be curious, you know, to know what that looks like. But by the way, going back to what we're talking about with the war, okay, war starts. It's been chaotic, tragic lives reporting numbers. You're on the inside. We'll watch the news. The news will tell us, you know, 198,000 Russian soldiers have been killed and 550,000 have been wounded since the beginning of the war. And we'll Hear these numbers gets bigger and bigger and bigger. And then reports will come for Ukraine and say, you know, we've only lost 31,000 soldiers. That number today as of December is 43,000 soldiers. But this is what the media is reporting us, and we have to believe it. What is the real number?
- [52:19]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think that the real numbers, according to my evaluation of killed and missing in action in our condition, what that means, killed and missing, it's around 150,000, more or less, and about 400, 500,000 of injured. And Russian losses are three times as large, I think, of killed and injured. But we need to understand the next issue. Our relation ratio of killed and injured is better. Ukraine has a very good military medicine. So for one killed, we have five, six injured. In Russia, it's 1 to 2, 1, 2, 3. They have a very poor field medicine. And since they are attacking, for them, they have a larger problem evacuating than us. And so they're losing in that ratio between injured and dead. So many people die right there in the field. So they could have 350 people killed and only about 600, 700 people injured. And not the way it was supposed to be. 1.5 million if it. If the ratio would be as in developed armies in the world, like in Ukrainian army.
- [53:22]
Patrick Bet-David
Do you remember the story that came out that said, you know, Ukraine dug up 2 million graves because of what's going on with war and all this stuff? Do you remember the story or no? 2 million gray grapes. Yeah, the story came out that Ukraine had built out multiple places to be able to bury a lot of lives. And so that reporting speculated some people to say, whoa, you know, maybe, you know, Ukraine's lost more people and, you know, we don't know about it. You're saying Ukraine's probably lost only 150 to 400. And maybe, you know, Russia's lost 450,000 to one and a half million people injured.
- [54:03]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think it depends how you counted their very specific place in this whole thing is losing the people who were drafted from the occupied territories. Yes. So there's a specific place, and this is the loss of people that were drafted from our occupied territories. Donbas, Crimea, and now it's even Zaporozhyan Kone regions. And people who died being Ukrainian citizens died being part of the Russian army attacking us. So what did Putin do? He forced Ukrainian citizens to fight against other Ukrainian citizens, drafting them from those DNR and LNR. From there, about 70, 80,000 people died. How do we count those? Is this a loss on the Russian side, Ukrainian side, or a separate category. It's a big question. It's not a small amount. It could be up to 100,000 people. So this is why the general correlation, it's 1, 2, 3. And Kellogg, one of the representatives from Trump.
- [54:57]
Patrick Bet-David
How is that possible for the average person? How is a smaller country like Ukraine able to kill three times the amount of people to a powerful country with the second most nuclear warhead? Some. On some numbers, they're first. You know, how are they able to do that to a nation as big as Russia?
- [55:16]
Oleksiy Arestovich
That's a typical ratio on the battlefield between the attacking and retreating, or better said, attacking and defending sides. We are defending. Everybody who is attacking usually carries more losses. For them to not carry more losses, they need to have a radical technical advantage, but they don't have that.
- [55:34]
Patrick Bet-David
Moreover, three times the amount.
- [55:36]
Oleksiy Arestovich
So three times, look, there are battles when it's 1 to 10, 1 to 15, that's on average only comes to 1, 2, 3, 1 to 5, I would say more or less.
- [55:48]
Patrick Bet-David
Got it. Okay. So you know, when you're watching, I don't know if you saw what Putin said earlier today. Rob, if you don't mind pulling up the clip. Just three hours before you got here, Putin was being interviewed and he's being asked a question about his willingness to negotiate with Trump for the Ukraine war. And if you want to kind of get one side of the mic on, you can hear what he has to say. If you want to put that on. Rob, if you want to play this clip, here's Putin. Go for it. Offer to the President Elect Trump when we meet. First of all, I don't know when we will meet because he doesn't say anything. I haven't spoken to him for more than four years now.
- [56:30]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I am ready for it, of course, at any time, and I will be.
- [56:34]
Patrick Bet-David
Ready for a meeting if he wants it. Politics is the art of compromise. And we have always said that we.
- [56:44]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Are ready for both negotiations and compromises.
- [56:48]
Patrick Bet-David
It is just that the opposite side, in the literal and figurative sense of the word, refuse to negotiate.
- [56:55]
Oleksiy Arestovich
We are always ready for this.
- [56:59]
Patrick Bet-David
The result of these negotiations is always compromise. Do you believe him?
- [57:05]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes.
- [57:05]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay.
- [57:06]
Oleksiy Arestovich
He demonstrates a consistent position since March 2022, since Stanbul negotiations. And you notice today he said that the basis for us is the Stanbul talks and the real position on the so on the ground, and we are ready for compromises. Putin is a very complex person, but he has two remarkable qualities, real or figurative, in parentheses, he perfectly impeccably maintains the same line that he announced. And in the eyes of everyone in Europe, everybody he deals with, he stated clear goals and he showed that he can achieve them by force. But he has not changed the goals. He consistently says the same thing. Stanbul talks, we're ready to talk and etc. It's more Ukraine, more likely here that looks like an unpredictable partner that from one side is showing itself as a victim, as a suffering side from the other side. Putin, it's making us to look like we are constantly refusing to negotiate. This is what happened today. So he's building a perfect trap. See the first step, he says, we're ready to talk. Step number two, he says, I'm ready to compete with the west over Kiev and try Aria Snik, which is the mass destruction weapon and let the Western air defense try to protect them from that. And number three, he says, I'm not going to talk to Zelensky, though he's not a legitimate leader if he will be reelected and I'll talk to him. So this is a slap in the face to Zelensky. It's like a red rag. So when Putin says he's not legitimate, how is the west hearing this? Zelensky is a horse who's not even going to participate in the race. Why would we even bet on it? So he receives this emotional trauma, plus this threat to Kyiv, and they react very sharply. And it's just street cussing and swearing him and your mock publishing this posting this outside of any political relations, even between countries in war, just cursing, swearing. And now Putin says and shows this to this world and says, I'm for peace, I'm ready to go for a compromise. But these people, you can't even talk to them, you can't be negotiating with them. And this is how we look in the eyes of the whole world. Because with this whole offer and this provocation, how did we react? Saying bad words, calling him names, which liquidate any possibility of normal talks, even thinking about it, even just a ceasefire. This is why Putin has a very clear position. He took it in the spring of last year. It was corrected since 2022. Zelenskyy is not a legitimate leader. He's over his time. He does not represent the people of Ukraine. We're ready to talk, but for this we need compromises and people in power who are legitimately there. And he has not changed position since then. Since that time we called him names, got to intrude into Kursk Oblast and we did many times things that undermine Ukraine's image as the country that really desires peace. Now, the prime minister of Hungary spoke twice about the Christmas truce and exchanging prisoners of war. And our government very harshly reacted to that, saying, nobody authorized Orban to do that. So for Zelensky and his emotional heat, I don't know if he noticed this, but they are painting him as the only public political figure who is against stopping the war. And I am warning them publicly through my direct statements, and I'm sure that they are watching me in Zelensky's office. Look what they're doing to you. They are constantly putting you in a position of people who are against stopping the war. And you're the victim side. Putin, on your background, begins looking like an adequate, reasonable person, person who is offering peace, of course, on his own conditions and achieving his what he wants, his goals. But this is a very dangerous road and he is outplaying us.
- [61:00]
Patrick Bet-David
You're going to think I'm crazy when I tell you this, but the last 13 and a half years, I've been working on my first fiction book to write, ever fiction book to write. And while I finished this book a year ago, I got the strangest phone call about one of the characters in a book where the guy wanted to meet with me and he read the book and afterwards it's like, wait a minute, am I the villain in the book? This is a story about a character named Asher who is half Armenian, half Assyrian, whose father was involved in the Iranian revolution, linked to SAVAK working with the Shah, that they escape and he gets recruited to a secret society. Well, when you go to the secret society, it's been around for a couple thousand years. They've developed some of the craziest leaders of all time and they test you. There's unique tests that they have at the society where they test to see your emotional, mental toughness. One of the tests that they have is very rigorous. It's purely mental. Of course, there's a physical one, but one is mental and emotional. If you're Armenian, if you're a Syrian, if you're Persian, this is a book you're going to be reading and saying, holy moly. This the kind of stuff you talk about in here? Yes. If you're somebody that's fascinated by history, this is a book for you characters. There's a technology that this society, secret society, builds where you go into a vault. I won't spoil it for you. When you go down, they have a technology where you get to sit down and watch and have a three, four hour conversation. With Tupac, you can set up a debate between Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. Karl Marx is in the book. Who wrote Communist Manifesto? Ayn Rand, who wrote Atlas Shrugged, is in the book. Marilyn Monroe explains the concept of seduction and sex in the book. When you read the book, it's about development of the next leaders in the world and how they do it and how they've been doing it for many years. And it's also about how to prevent the end of civilization and how this organization goes about doing it. So I've never written a parenting book before, but if I ever wrote a parenting book, this is the closest thing to it because it's all mindset, a lot of crazy stories. Again, thirteen and a half years. Trust me, I told myself I will not publish this book until I sell my insurance company and I'm fully disconnected from it where it's no longer My responsibility 100%. When you read this, if you're a crazy, if you're a creative person, if you like fiction books, if you enjoyed Atlas Shrugged or if you enjoy Divergent, if you like books like that, I think you can enjoy reading this book. It's the creative side business books is very easy. Here's how you do it. Here's how this, how it works. This is very creative. If you haven't placed your order yet, now you can order it on Simon and Schuster, Amazon. I'm going to put the link up below somewhere here, maybe even in my profile. Go order the book and read it. I sincerely, I've never written a book where I can't wait to read your reviews to see what you think about this book. So I'm going on this wild journey and we have some plans on this book here. If you support the things that I work on, I would appreciate you going to reading the book, order the book on Amazon and then post a review. So how do you think it's going to end, do you think? Let's just say the negotiation that's take place, Trump gets in, they're having a meeting. There's just no question about it. They're going to have a visit. He's going to go over there and have to sit down the conversation. When they do, what do you think will will happen with the territory and regions? You think Putin is going to get what he wants?
- [64:15]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think that the real terms for talks it would be freezing it on the line of fire that exists today. Putin will not go to talks with Zelensky. I think it's 100%. He's not going to go only if Zelensky is re electing it again. Because Putin is a lawyer and he has this lawyer thinking. He always prefers to achieve to be reduced to writing an agreement signed by. But signed by who? If he considers Zelensky as illegitimate, see Trump, he pushes forward like a bulldozer in a good sense of this word. I think he'll have enough strength and influence to do a double ultimatum for Russia and Ukraine and force him to stop the fire. But stopping the fire doesn't mean peace. And Putin will stop the fire, but he will not. He will talk about some agreements only with the next legitimate president of Ukraine, which the people will choose. And before that there will be no peaceful agreement. So the President Trump, he can stop the war as he said. But achieving a peaceful agreement is the next very difficult task. And we still don't know how the first is going to end up working out with the elections in Ukraine, what it's going to bring and how it's going to end. I say that the question is on creating a new system of collective security in Eastern Europe with participation of Russia, Belarus, considering their position which can compensate and replacement system which is destroyed without. If we don't consider the interest of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, it's not going to work. We can stop firing as but it will not. We will not be able to resolve the problem in its core will be able Trump Putin and you leave Ukraine, stop this war in the. In the route. That's a real challenge. It's not going to be easy to achieve. But seizing the fire, it's possible, yes?
- [66:05]
Patrick Bet-David
Yeah. Yeah. You know, Putin's called Zelensky and a legitimate leader heading a neo Nazi regime. His words on what he called Zelensky for you with where you're at right now. How many of Zelensky's leaders camps on the inside, call you and speak to you and tell you things that undermine Zelensky. Are you in communication with any of his leaders that reach out to you directly?
- [66:36]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Let me put it this way. I have fullness of information of what is happening in Ukraine in the most, most tight circles to put it this way.
- [66:45]
Patrick Bet-David
But these are people that currently would be part of his administration.
- [66:50]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I have fullness of information.
- [66:52]
Patrick Bet-David
It doesn't answer the question.
- [66:54]
Oleksiy Arestovich
So then I need to be very sensitive because I don't want to get it and I'm.
- [67:00]
Patrick Bet-David
I'm not looking for a name, but I told. But I totally get it so. Because there's a difference between directly and indirectly. Right.
- [67:07]
Oleksiy Arestovich
If you want this type of an Answer. I have an answer. It's information from Zelenskyy's closest circle. This is the maximum precision I can give you in an answer.
- [67:16]
Patrick Bet-David
I'm not going to ask any more than that. That's all I'm looking for. So it is directly. It's not. Somebody tells somebody, yes, he terms directly.
- [67:22]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Indirectly. I'll speak directly.
- [67:25]
Patrick Bet-David
Directly. Okay, good. Right. Specifically. So that's good now. So if it's directly, you're hearing it from him. So in this context, if this thing was to accelerate and let's just say war, you know, they compromise, Trump goes there, they're done. They're good to go. The war is done. How soon will you be returning to run for president?
- [67:48]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Well, the mood in Ukraine is such that there will be immediately a whole set of key issues that are impossible to resolve without election. Stopping the martial law mobilization, opening the borders, because we're a country with closed borders. And very many families have been split, split for three years. Every third, fourth Ukrainian person is outside the country. Many times, husbands haven't seen their wives and children for many years. This is why it cannot be resolved without elections. And I think within a month or two, there will be a question brought up about stopping martial law and going into the peaceful state.
- [68:25]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, so next question for you is, you know, had some friends that were there who are friends, friendly with some of the military leaders. Okay. And story comes out, it's all over the place. I'm sure you've seen it as well on the money that's being given with the level of corruption. Okay. A lot of money's gone there. Okay. And you'll hear stories. Okay. Aid given to Ukraine mortal shell scandal January 2024. This year. Year ago, Ukraine's Security Service SBU uncovered a corruption scheme in nearly 100,000 mortar shells amounting to $40 million. The scheme involved senior officials from the Ministry of Defense and an armed supplier with funds transferred abroad without any shells being delivered. That's1.2 embezzlement of logistics officers. In November of 2024, the SPU exposed a corruption scheme of two Ukrainian army logistics officers. They defrauded a state of 27.3 million, approximately $700,000 through a network of shell companies diverting funds meant for military use. Three agrarian and economical ministry officials in August of 2023. About 16 months ago, the National Anti Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, Nabu, uncovered a $1.6 million embezzlement scheme involving the First Deputy Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food and a former Deputy minister. They were charged with the power abuse and embezzling state fund designated for humanitarian aid. Military catering scandal. Earlier in 2023, there were reports about inflated prices for food meant for Ukrainian troops, leading to the resignation of junior defense minister. The scandal involved buying goods like eggs and potatoes at well above market rates, suggesting a kickback system was in place. Last one, procurement fraud. In January of 2023, another high profile case involved the dismissal of A. Lozinski. A deputy infrastructure minister was caught allegedly receiving a $400,000 bribe for rigging procurement tenders for equipment like generators. Do you believe Zelensky has gotten any of the money that's been given to Ukraine?
- [70:36]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Whether he personally received corrupt money? To clarify the question.
- [70:42]
Patrick Bet-David
So for example, somebody can work for my company and they can be my, I don't know, executive assistant, let's just say, and with my contacts, they can have one company that is going to be a hundred thousand dollar job. I do that, they're my contact, they can go find another person and they'll do $120,000. But the $20,000 more they'll say pay it to my wife. So the paper trail is not to them. Do you think there was any corruption?
- [71:14]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Formulate this this way. Most of the cases that you were naming are happening in the realm of national defense and security, which is the direct area of responsibility of our President Zelenskyy as the commander in chief according to the laws and constitution of Ukraine. This is his direct area of responsibility. He carries full responsibility for everything that happens then, especially in a country that is in the state of war.
- [71:36]
Patrick Bet-David
I'm asking a specific question, so let me restate my question. Let me restate my question. This is a very important question for you to answer. And, and if you answer it in a way, you know, it's, it's, it's catastrophic for him, right? Do you know the answer? You don't have to answer it if you don't want to. Do you know the answer? Whether money ended up flowing to him through shell account or other people where people on the inside have said, you know, Lexi, listen, everybody here knows how much money this guy's making. Every time we give him 40 billion, 20 billion, 10 billion, 5 billion. There's so many other accounts, shell accounts, that he has money that's going to overseas and all this other stuff. Do you directly or indirectly know that he's gotten paid from all the money that other countries have given to him?
- [72:20]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I'm answered with maximum precision. I do not have information that he received money from corruption scandals, but I can tell you for sure that the level of corruption is off the charts.
- [72:34]
Patrick Bet-David
Catastrophical with him or with his people.
- [72:39]
Oleksiy Arestovich
And people surrounding him in the zone that he's responsible for.
- [72:43]
Patrick Bet-David
Does that benefit him or it benefits his people?
- [72:45]
Oleksiy Arestovich
At a minimum, it benefits the people who are surrounding him.
- [72:48]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, but that's not benefiting him.
- [72:50]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I do not have such information. But he carries full responsibility for what is happening in his area of responsibility, for the level of corruption that is happening there and the measures that he's undertaking to, to put it mildly, I find them unsatisfactory.
- [73:09]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, let me go another thing here. When you think about your country, Ukraine, natural resources, plenty. It's a beautiful place. A lot of incredible natural resources that a lot of people are interested in that they want Russia. When you think about the number one country in the world in natural resources, it's Russia. $75 trillion of natural resources sources. A lot of these big companies want to get into Russia. Right. There's a concept called economic hitman. I don't know if you're familiar with this author. He was a guy that wrote a book on economic hitman. He comes to your country, he says, I'm going to bring some companies and they're going to spend invest $10 billion in your country when they do. That's what he used to do. This man right here, John Perkins, was an economic hitman. He would go to different countries and he would tell them, we're going to come here, we're going to do this, we're going to put $10 billion into your country. If you don't, we're going to do something to you. And on the back end, sometimes they pay these people. Right? Story comes out on rebuilding Ukraine. Right. Rob, if you can pull up the story, rebuilding Ukraine, $400 billion. I think it's Chase and I want to say BlackRock $400 billion. Is this the one Zelensky? BlackRock announced new investment initiative to rebuild Ukraine. And can you do control F400 to see if it goes to it? There you go. Ukraine established a program to attract up to $400 billion in foreign investments to target various areas of the economy, from clean energy to defense to natural resources. Zelensky believes this is the greatest opportunity in Europe since World War II. Do you think the motive of others, not Zelensky, let's set his motive aside. Do you think there's motive of others to have war because now they can raise money and come in and build infrastructure and make more money? Do you think there's profit as a Motive to have this war and continue the war.
- [75:08]
Oleksiy Arestovich
From whose side? Our side, Ukrainian side or US side?
- [75:12]
Patrick Bet-David
Not from his side. From not even the American side. From the. From the banking and the financial sector.
- [75:18]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I don't think that they arranged the war, but they're definitely use its results, that's for sure.
- [75:25]
Patrick Bet-David
Got it. Okay, so then that's. That's still a. Your position is more noble. They didn't promote the war, but if it happens. Hey guys, let's capitalize. We're going to go make a bunch of money.
- [75:35]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Why not?
- [75:36]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, I got you. Okay, so that's interesting that you're saying that. That's good to know for us. Now, I heard a story that in 2022, Boris Johnson, if I'm not mistaken, came there and there was a conversation that there was a 90% chance of a peace deal. But Boris Johnson influenced Zelensky to not reach a peace deal with Putin and Russia because the west would not support the type of peace deal. Is this a true story with Boris Johnson and Zelensky?
- [76:01]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I was a participant of the negotiations group. On March 29th in Istanbul, we signed an agreement. We come back to Ukraine on April 1st and the 1st, 2nd of April, the 2nd, I believe the Bucha tragedy is discovered. Then on April 9th, there was supposed to be a meeting of Putin and Zelenskyy, at which time the ceasefire was supposed to take place and open talks. Johnson came either the fourth or the third. Third, I don't remember exactly. I need to check on that date. And Hamia, the. The. The head of the parliamentary majority of the ruling party, Zelensky's party, directly in an interview said that yes, Johnson was the person who said continue the war. That's his words. I do not know why he said that. Probably wanted to shift the responsibility over to the West. We have a tendency to do that. But I was not present at the meeting with Johnson. I did not receive information from Johnson. I don't have any direct testimony, people who could testify to that. One thing I can say that the talks within Istanbul format continued until May 17, meaning another month and a half after that. They still were discussing them. And Ramstein, for example, was only on April 26, when the first coalition met for the first time by the Minister of Defense of the U.S. austin, who brought armament for Ukraine. What exactly happened? If you're interested, I can tell you.
- [77:27]
Patrick Bet-David
What I think because I'm looking at the timeline here. February 1, 2022, Johnson travels to Kiev.
- [77:36]
Oleksiy Arestovich
He came on the 9th, when there was supposed to be a Meeting between Zelensky and Putin. It was planned and it was disrupted by the Bucha crisis.
- [77:43]
Patrick Bet-David
Well, why, why, why do you do this? What's the reasoning to.
- [77:47]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think it was not only Johnson doing this. I think there were corresponding signals from Biden's administration. I don't know, but I think so because Johnson as an argument wouldn't be enough. The main orientation is obviously, of course, the position of the American country. For us, it was most probably something along the lines of, okay, Putin is losing the war, his invasion has been thwarted. We're going to help you out so you continue fighting and get to a better position to negotiate, get a better place for negotiation, more leverage. I don't know. I'm guessing. So it's not only just Joe Johnson, but the fact that Britain in this conflict is following, pursuing their own interest. I'm sure they do 101%. And these interests actually many times are go against the American interest, it seems to me. Why we listen to that, I don't know. It's a big question for me. Separate questions. Question. I think that we truly thwarted his invasion and the Russians were really lost and confused in those talks. They were going to big concessions, plus the emotional trauma from the Bucha. And it was a big mistake strategically to continue the war. Huge mistake on the Ukrainian side. What happened exactly? I'm just here in the realm of suppositions, assumptions when I'm answering this to you.
- [79:05]
Patrick Bet-David
Yeah. So I'm going through a timeline right now. Okay, so right here, February 20, February 1, 2022, they meet the biggest security crisis Europe ever faced. Okay, great. April 9, 2022, a surprise visit. Johnson meets with Zelensky to demonstrate solidarity while the conflict's taking place. During the minute, he pledged to continue assistance military, including 120 armored vehicles, new anti ship missiles, as well as an additional $500 million from World bank leading to Ukraine. June 17, 2022, Johnson returns to Kiev to meet with Zelensky for a third time where he announced a major training program for Ukrainian forces, aiming to have training up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days. This initiative was intended to bolster Ukraine's defense capabilities. Okay, great. Then September 6th of 2022, he steps down. Boris Johnson, if you want to pull up when he steps down, Rob, that September 6, 2022, the date is what I have here. Okay, so when he steps down, if you just type in Rob, all you have to type in is when did Boris Johnson step down? Right, There you go. September 6, 2022. No problem. So he's out of the picture. Then you have a Liz Truss. Okay, Liz Truss comes in during this time and I'm so curious to know what you're going to say because I'm trying to find a timeline here. List trust. When Nordstream pipeline took place. Can you type in when Nordstream pipeline happened? Rob? If you just type in Nord Stream pipeline event. Nord Stream pipeline event happened when? Okay, so this is getting very interesting for me. Very, very interesting. When did Boris step down? September 6, 2022. When those North Stream pipeline happen? September 26, 2022, three weeks later. Okay, who do they blame? Russia. What does she text? It's done. Okay. Then Wall Street Journal comes out with this article. If you want to pull this up and Americans are like sitting there saying, you know, you know. And by the way, for the audience that's watching this, you can pull up and who Liz Truss is so they know who Liz Truss is. Rob, if you can just Google and see who Liz Truss is so we can explain to everybody who Liz Trusses and to audience tracking. So she was the British politician who served as prime minister of UK for one month. Literally, folks, one month. September to October 2022. So then she texts it's done. Then Wall Street Journal comes out with this article. September 28th, we're supposed to believe a drunken evening, a rented yacht, the real story of the Nordstream pipeline sabotage. A private businessman funded the shoestring operation which was overseen by top general President Zelensky approved the plan, then tried to unsuccessfully call it off, but it was too late. Are we really supposed to believe this story or is there another story? You have to tell us what really happened here.
- [82:03]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I have deep sympathy towards Britain, British people, British culture. I've been brought up and that my family has been brought up on British literature. But all I know about Great Britain, 20 plus years of political, military analysis it shows that their historical goal is not to allow union between Russia and continental Europe, especially Germany. This their whole history of external politic of United Kingdom shows that their main goal is not to allow that union between Germany and Russia. I do not know who exploded the Nordstrom now, officially, unofficially, Ukraine is blamed. There is an investigation done by Germany, Russians. Putin says that there's some Anglo Saxon did it. I do not know anything about Britain's role perhaps in that explosion and sabotage. But I do know that this event could not be outside of Britain's interest. Even if the Great Britain did not inspire it or conspired it or got involved. Remember that Great Britain before that Created a whole bloc of northern countries. Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, friends of Ukraine. And their main interest was to restrain Russia and the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Theater. What really took place there is one of the biggest and most interesting questions. And this war that still needs to be investigated. But I don't have even the least of data and suppositions on what. What happened there. I do not know at all.
- [83:38]
Patrick Bet-David
You don't? Okay. All right. I know what Nizayo is. So. Okay, maybe let me ask another question on this. What chance do you think it was Russia behind North Stream Pipeline?
- [83:56]
Oleksiy Arestovich
That Russia themselves exploded that? Yes, I think that's non existent. There would be the last people interested in that.
- [84:03]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, zero. Okay, no problem. What percentage speculation, purely speculating that, you know, Ukraine was behind it.
- [84:14]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Well, I would allow that it could be Ukraine 20%.
- [84:19]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, how about US influencing UK?
- [84:24]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think that, let's put it this way, NATO state 80% that they're somehow this way or the other are involved in this story. Obviously it was not Germany which is the least interested party.
- [84:40]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, so will we ever find out?
- [84:46]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think someday we will. But this could be in 70 years.
- [84:52]
Patrick Bet-David
70.
- [84:52]
Oleksiy Arestovich
But these are the terms of declassifying documents. 70, 80 years.
- [85:00]
Patrick Bet-David
In seven or eight years or 70 years old.
- [85:10]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Why are you doing this for declassifying? It depends on the goodwill and what game they're playing.
- [85:16]
Patrick Bet-David
Yeah, for me, I'm interested to know, you know, what's going on there.
- [85:20]
Oleksiy Arestovich
It could be much earlier. It could be much earlier. Look, if they create a system of collective security in Europe, a new system, it can be only created by politicians with new vision. And these politicians will be interested and definitely cut ties with the past. It means that they will be also interested in exposing to the maximum the truth about the past. And this can happen within a much shorter term than 70 years.
- [85:46]
Patrick Bet-David
If you've seen the clip with Tucker Carlson and Putin, you know, Putin says that he believes it was us that was behind it.
- [85:53]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Have you seen that clip when he said specifically America.
- [85:57]
Patrick Bet-David
He believes it.
- [85:58]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I heard. So it was about Anglo Saxon something. Keeping in mind both Britain and the usa.
- [86:05]
Patrick Bet-David
Rob, can you pull up that clip? It could be. Yes, it could be that it's both. But if you want to play this clip with Tucker and Putin, Nordstream you for sure I was busy that day.
- [86:20]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Nate, do you have.
- [86:24]
Patrick Bet-David
I did not blow up Nordstream. Thank you though. You personally may have an alibi, but the CIA has no such alibi. Do you have evidence that NATO or the CIA did it? You know, I Won't get into details, but people always say in such cases, look for someone who is interested. But in this case, we should not only look for someone who is interested, but also for someone who has capabilities. Because there may be many people interested, but not all of them are capable of sinking to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and carrying out this explosion. These two components should be connected who is interested and who is capable of doing it.
- [87:15]
Oleksiy Arestovich
But I'm confused.
- [87:16]
Patrick Bet-David
I mean, that's the biggest act of industrial terrorism ever and it's the largest emission of CO2 in history. Okay, so if you had evidence, and presumably given your security services, rental services, you would that NATO, the us, CIA, the west did this, why wouldn't you present it and win a propaganda victory?
- [87:35]
Oleksiy Arestovich
This episode is brought to you by LifeLock.
- [87:38]
Patrick Bet-David
The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, more time online, and more personal info.
- [87:43]
Oleksiy Arestovich
In places that could expose you to identity theft.
- [87:46]
Patrick Bet-David
That's why LifeLock monitors millions of data points every second. If your identity is stolen, their US based restoration specialist will fix it, guaranteed or your money back. Get more holiday fun and less holiday worry with Lifelock. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit lifelock.com podcast terms apply so you're getting hungry. Really hungry. Head to Jack in a Box and pick up a Smash Jack. It's a juicy, delicious smashed burger topped with cheese, pickles, grilled onions and boss sauce. And it's now available on Sourdough. The Smash Jack. Only a Jack in the Box? Order one on the Jack app. Today in the war of propaganda, it is very difficult to defeat the United States because the United States controls all the world's media and many European media. The ultimate beneficiary of the biggest European media are American financial institutions. Don't you know that?
- [88:53]
Oleksiy Arestovich
At this point, I have a different explanation.
- [88:56]
Patrick Bet-David
What was that?
- [88:57]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Because your actions against the main member of the Union of the es, who is going to announce it, even if it was a victory.
- [89:08]
Patrick Bet-David
Who'S going to finance it then?
- [89:11]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I have no idea. No, no. Announce it. Tucker was asking Putin why this is the largest act of terrorism. Why is nobody claiming it as their victory? And Putin explaining, because it's all controlled by the media. And I'm saying because it's an action against the largest member of the NATO. So nobody's going to announce it, even if it actually took place.
- [89:31]
Patrick Bet-David
Yeah, I get that. I mean, it's. It's catastrophic. Whoever does and whoever does, two, three countries are going to be tied. So there's going to be two, three criminals, maybe more. And the level of credibility being lost, they, they will protect that and use propaganda to blame somebody else. And that, that game is a very, very effective gameplate. Like he said in there, on, on, on what he believes going on. But that was, that was a big event when you think about Nordstrom pipeline. But okay, so let's, let's go to now. Okay, let's go to now with Putin, Ukraine, with the current climate that we have today itself, Trump coming in, temperatures being lower, the world's getting a little bit, you know, confident that this guy's coming in Canada, Justin Trudeau, everybody wants to be on the good side of Trump. Do you think the climate around the world is going to be getting calmer because of President Trump winning?
- [90:31]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Of course, he came as a person who wants to break down the global system with a big S, which had been built, let's put it this way, by globalists behind whom stands the neo Marxist school of political thought, cultural trans schism and permanent revolution. All of that things against which the right wing America is standing. And Trump and me personally. And these structures are very strong. They have been built over dozens of years and after 1991, they've been absolutely winners since that time. And to overcome that, which is the goal that Trump's before himself, is going to be very uneasy, hot and bright.
- [91:16]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, so let's just say you go back to Ukraine, all right, and you campaign for presidency. What's your vision? What are you selling to the people?
- [91:27]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Three wish, three things. First, an external policy. Creating a system of collective security in Europe, Eastern Europe, considering real interest of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine and all the countries in order so that the war between Russia and Ukraine could not repeat itself. Whichever means of arbitrage, new means to be invented. But there cannot be a war between Ukraine and Russia. There's 10 million citizens of Ukraine and Russia have direct relatives across the border. Every fourth Ukrainian. This is not a normal situation. And there are ways to resolve the problem between us without a war, not to allow a next war to break out within Ukrainian side. It would be changing the project from a nationalistic to a worldwide state with wide views where the people's human rights are defended. The rights to go to the church they want, to speak the language they want so that there is no persecution against people based on ethnic or religious, which unfortunately is not happening in Ukraine currently. Basically so that the constitution is being followed in Ukraine. And the third, it would be new industrialization of Ukraine and a change in direction of their development. We did a huge mistake in 1991. Began as a major industrial power in Europe. And today we are an agrarian state with a very small sliver of services, with a destroyed economy by the war and our own actions. And I think we need to bid on a better technological scientific process, switching on a new to a new technological implementation in this clusters and sectors we can. I want a industrial rebirth renaissance. I call my whole project Ukraine's renaissance. And we need to bring it up from the ashes destroyed by the war, but it's been even more destroyed by our. By our corruption. And the battle with corruption is subject number one.
- [93:26]
Patrick Bet-David
Would you. Would you pursue a relationship with NATO or would your campaign be to not have any interest in wanting to join NATO?
- [93:35]
Oleksiy Arestovich
No, I think that Ukraine needs to remain as a neutral country because one of the main reasons of this war with Russia was our desire and aspiration to join NATO officially and flirting with NATO, who would be always promising and not even intending to ever receive us, but forever just irritating Putin. According to the articles of independence, declaration of independence of Ukraine, we are a neutral country and we were recognized in 1991 as a neutral state. As soon as we stopped being, or better said, wanted to stop being a neutral country, it brought up a whole chain of consequences internationally. And I believe we need to be a part of the collective west, mentally maybe perhaps not very developed country. We still need to learn a lot of things, but we need to have a special relationship with Europe, NATO, United States. But we cannot join because on this stage it means a third war with Russia, which we will not be able to bear.
- [94:31]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay, so what makes you think that NATO and the west would want a candidate like you? Why would they want somebody like.
- [94:41]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Because for us, the price of joining NATO is the war with Russia. And for NATO, the price of receiving Ukraine is the war with Russia.
- [94:49]
Patrick Bet-David
You remember what they did? I mean, think about what they did to Putin when Putin had all these NGOs of people being funded to protest outside. You know what they're going to do in your country if you go out there and you talk like this? You think they're going to let somebody like you win and saying you have no interest of being with NATO?
- [95:09]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, I think we will win. I will win.
- [95:12]
Patrick Bet-David
Really?
- [95:12]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, really.
- [95:13]
Patrick Bet-David
Who, who will want you? Think about world leaders. Who would want a leader like you being replacing Zelensky? Would the west want you?
- [95:25]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I do not know.
- [95:26]
Patrick Bet-David
Would Russia want you?
- [95:28]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Possibly. For Russia would be one the most comfortable negotiator. Because I'm the only Ukrainian politic who says that Russia has some real interest as A country, regardless of the last name of their president Putin. Navalnyo Ivanov I recognize them. I'm real politic. Russia as a state, regardless of who the President is, has real interest and you cannot not consider them. We have 3,000km of land and sea border that we share. We're neighbors, we were part of the same state, we grew up from the same root and we are predestined to live together. We need normal relationship with Russia. Normal that are regulated so that the war cannot repeat. And key irritant for Russia is joining NATO. And it doesn't matter if it's Putin or any other president. It doesn't matter the last name of their leader. It's Russia's interest. And moreover, I know for sure that NATO does not even intend to receive us. They're just teasing us about receiving. But they will never let us join. It has been confirmed. You don't think so by the leaders? Absolutely.
- [96:35]
Patrick Bet-David
We talked about it last year, 2023 in July, that they wanted to accelerate your membership to NATO.
- [96:40]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes. And in this year they many times, multiple times confirmed on highest levels that someday some time Ukraine will join, but not now. You see, NATO and United States has a status. There are five countries with that status, a special close member, but not in NATO. It's Israel, South Korea, Australia, Jordan and one other country. We can receive that status. But the basis of regional security is the main thing. First of all, requiring good relationship with all the neighbors. Russia, Belarus, who went too far and we got a full scale war. We need to re establish, recover these relationships, at least some level of relationship, including Russia. And without considering their real interests. It's impossible to do because the real interest of Ukraine is having good relationships with all the neighbors.
- [97:32]
Patrick Bet-David
Who else would want you? Who from the outside, outside of Ukraine, External.
- [97:41]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Look, I don't know how they're going to react to my program, to my offer, what other political leaders are going to say and political powers altogether. But I have a very clear proposal. We cannot allow a war in Europe. And we need to create a system that will allow to resolve current disagreements without a word. I think that that's my offer. I think it's reasonable.
- [98:05]
Patrick Bet-David
Okay. How are you going to manage the NGOs that are going to do propaganda and talk about how you're a Putin puppet and. Because that's what they're going to say.
- [98:14]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, they're saying this now already.
- [98:16]
Patrick Bet-David
I know, but how are you going to handle those NGOs? How are you going to handle those people that the people that are funding Protesting propaganda to paint a picture of.
- [98:25]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Who you are after my victory or before during the campaigning pre while you're campaigning, I will be maximum honest and precise and Ukrainian nation will decide. I have a clear message to the Ukrainian nation. Ukraine is a failed state. And the problems that the war revealed have been accumulated since 1991 because from the beginning we went on a false wrong path, self destruction of our economy and culture. And the real result in this war is showing that the entire system is corrupt, it's rotten, it doesn't work and we need to change the entire system and I'm going coming with this proposal to change that and this I'm similar to President Trump. My messages are similar to his that the system is no good and it needs to be fundamentally changed. We need to overcome the deep state and corrupt forces. That's my offer now if the people will vote for me and elect me there they will decide.
- [99:22]
Patrick Bet-David
What do you think about Victoria Nuland?
- [99:25]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I think that this is one of the leading officers in Biden's administration, representative of Democrat Globalist.
- [99:33]
Patrick Bet-David
Is she good for the country of Ukraine?
- [99:37]
Oleksiy Arestovich
She played her specific role and that role was. I don't know if it was her task or not, but overall the task of these people was to make a trap out of Ukraine for Putin, for Russia. And we got in trouble with this trap for getting our own real interest and we could have avoided getting in trouble.
- [100:00]
Patrick Bet-David
You, you got, you got a lot of moving parts that you have to go through and maneuver through. Who would be some of the biggest people in Ukraine that is widely respected by others that would come out and say we need Alexei as our president. Would the military be on your side? Would the economy be on your side? Would business people be on your side? Who, what sect would be out there saying we're for Alexi?
- [100:32]
Oleksiy Arestovich
I have direct support from the side of the business, middle business, large business. I have enough support among the military. I'm a Ukrainian officer, lieutenant colonel in Ukrainian army two and a half years and the front line and overall and I have enough support. I'm a volunteer who brings and gathers a lot of support and help for the Ukrainian army. And I have a significant support among the people. And it's difficult to measure that at this time. I think that you understand that right now it's just a general understanding. But once the presidential candidates will be registered, this is always a becomes a specific choice. The value of the program you're announcing, the value of your team, the value of every word you say after the official registration. It's not just people from your country, people from other countries listen to you. That combines both of your questions questions. So for now it's just people looking overall at the situation. But over there it's going to be a real battle of statements, programs. I can tell you that for now I have sufficient supporters in all of the spheres of life of Ukraine. I can tell you I'm in direct contact with them.
- [101:44]
Patrick Bet-David
You're for sure very popular. I mean your online following is in the millions. People listen to you and every time you're putting alive millions of views. Half a million, 2.2 million, 1.2 million and. But I couldn't find anything in English. The only thing I saw in English was one you did 11 months ago with somebody. I don't know who it was. And how many English podcasts have you done? Is it, is it, is it just one that you. When the war has begun. I was made about 30 English podcast every day. The first, first 100 days. Yourself or did you. By myself. No, no, no. It's just, just to other people's f. I. I spokes with cnn, with Fox News and you can found it my just switching on there and I know you did, you did something with Lex Friedman because I think like that would be the one. Yes. Two. Two times. Two times. But neither one of them went live. No, but no one. What. What happened there? I don't know. We have to ask Alex. Okay, got it. Okay. Because I know, you know he's a true believer of what's going on there and Lex is a guy that wants peace and you know he's coming from a place of. You can tell he's coming from a genuine. I don't know him. We don't have a relationship. But is your plan. Because when I watch what Milei did. Argentina socialist, they don't want Milei libertarian. He's crazy, kissing girls, doing all this stuff. His campaign was very weird, loud, afraid, fueh. All this stuff that he's doing. Yeah, exactly. Right. Bukeli young guy coming up, Bitcoin, crypto, all this stuff. There was things that were different. Right. So the, the, you know, even if you go to Victor Orban, there's a lot of them that we can go through. You know, Maloney from Italy or all these things that we're talking about. Victor from Hungary. Where would you put yourself politically? Are you a conservative? Are you a libertarian? Are you your as a person, your background, faith, theology, things that you've studied. Where would you put yourself politically?
- [103:52]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yeah, I am a. More of A right centrist.
- [103:57]
Patrick Bet-David
Right centrist. Economically you're a capitalist. Absolutely. Yes, absolutely. I'm a conservator by the mindset. Okay. And then woke completely anti woke nothing with you as well. You're not going to try to turn. Absolutely not. I completely understand what what they people. Who is the people are and what is the ideology inside they are. They use. I'm against them. Well, one thing, one thing that I will say is I, I really enjoy talking to you. One thing that I will say is Melee made us be interested in Argentina. Bukele made us be interested in El Salvador. Victor Orban made us be interested in Hungary. Right. And they did a phenomenal job of us being interested in some of these regions. I think if you. The fact that you're creating content right now is phenomenal. But the people that are listening to you are your people that are listening to you. I think if there's more outer people that are also supporting you. We had the Dominic Tarzinski on from Poland. Okay. He was a Polish parliament, I think and then he was also part of NATO or un. He was part of UN as well, if I'm not mistaken. Member of the European Parliament, EU member of the European Parliament. And he was a Polish politician. We had him on, did an interview, 25 million views, all the clips combined and then we had him on our election night when he was there. Everybody wants him to be the president of Poland now. You know, they want him to run in March, April because this guy's like. So the exposure to English speaking audiences got people more interested in supporting them, saying here's the. And that's kind of helping as well. So for you, where you're going, you know, I'd be curious to know if you're going to take that route and be doing more of these types of conversations, especially at a time like this. Because let's just say this does come to an end. When Trump and them meet and there's peace. Let's say then you're comfortable to go back and you start campaigning and you're speaking openly all over the place. Momentum arises saying here's somebody that can be the next president there. That could make for a very interesting story.
- [106:13]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Hablaz espanol spries to joy.
- [106:16]
Patrick Bet-David
If you've heard that sound from Babbel before, I bet you do. Babbel is the science backed language learning app that actually works with quick 10 minute lessons handcrafted by over 200 language experts. Babbel gets you on your way to speaking a new language in Just a few weeks with over 16 million subscriptions sold and a 20 day money back guarantee. Just start speaking another language with Babbel right now. Up to 55% off your Babbel subscription at babbel.com Spotify podcast spelled B A B E L.com Spotify podcast rules and restrictions may apply.
- [106:44]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Imagine a world class graduate education that's.
- [106:48]
Patrick Bet-David
Accessible, flexible and designed for career impact. That's Harvard Extension School. Build actionable knowledge and skills in challenging.
- [106:56]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Online classes taught by Harvard faculty and industry experts.
- [107:00]
Patrick Bet-David
Explore new opportunities and expand your network.
- [107:02]
Oleksiy Arestovich
With high achieving professionals from around the world. Part time learning real world impact. This is Harvard on your terms. Learn more at Extension Harvard.
- [107:12]
Patrick Bet-David
Edu Spotify.
- [107:16]
Oleksiy Arestovich
Yes, that can be look for Ukraine exposure before English speaking audiences. Moreover, United States is one of the key things because the very existence of Ukraine depends on 80% from the help that America gives. Not a single Ukrainian can be indifferent toward American audience and their points of view of Americans. Onto what happens in Ukraine. The person who is represented here of course receives a very strong shoulder of support by the very fact of having an interview for the English speaking audience American audience. With regards to the two main points, I want to say the same thing. I'm intending to be a president for all Ukrainians and not just for my supporters. So people who maintain opposing ideologies will still be under protection. Their rights will be defended, they will will have a right to voice because there must be freedom of speech, there must be battle of arguments and not just suppressing one of the sides. That's a key. And the second point, I'm not a liberal like Malay, but I am supporter of maximum freedom in economics. Ukraine is now on 116th or maybe 123rd place according to Freedom for Economy. It's a shame. Russia, we call them totalitarian authoritarian State is on 109th place, so they have a higher ranking than us. So my goal is to liberalize to the maximum the economy and allow people to make money, give them freedom of speech and defend their freedoms and rights and expand them. So I'm encouraged by the example of Milei and the leaders you named. But I have my own view on things and my approach is rather more American. Maximum private and corporate rights have to be given to the maximum to the people and the state needs to dictate the main guidelines. Fighting corruption, maintaining those guidelines for the society and economy and external policy will be the strategical development of the country and relationships with the neighbors. That's my view. The state needs to be shrinked down the whole government needs to be shrunk down. They should not own anything. It's that belongs to the private people. And they should not meddle directly into the ideological war. Rather to create an atmosphere where some people cannot oppress others using organizations, government agencies, foreign partners, influences and help from the abroad, but having but provide for their true freedom of speech that we never had in Ukraine. And when the true battle of arguments ideologies begins, that will provide for the true development of the country, regardless of who the leader is. My goal is to create a system of rules. And I believe that the quality of a politician is defined by his ability to provide continuity. Imagine I'm lucky and I get reelected. I have 10 years. So the goal for these 10 years is to place foundations that cannot be rolled back even if my opponents come to power afterwards. To create mechanisms in the country that will hold hold for the future. Free economy and freedom and protected. This is a set of tasks it will be difficult to achieve. But this is exactly what I am aiming to do.
- [110:24]
Patrick Bet-David
I'm excited to see what you do next and I'm glad we made this work. I really enjoyed the conversation we had for the audience watching this. We're going to put the link below to all the channels and everything that you have so they can go out there and find you. And remember, this is also translated in Russian. If anybody wants to watch it, the link will also be below. Lexi, appreciate you for this was fantastic. Thank you so much. Take care, everybody. You're gonna think I'm crazy when I tell you this, but the last 13 and a half years, I've been working on my first fiction book to write ever fiction book to write. And while I finished this book a year ago, I got the strangest phone call about one of the characters in a book where the guy wanted to meet with me and he read the book and afterwards is like, wait a minute, am I the villain in the book? This is a story about a character named Asher, who is half Armenian, half Assyrian, whose father was involved in the Iranian revolution, linked to Savak working with the Shah, that they escape and he gets recruited to a secret society. Well, when you go to the secret society, it's been around for a couple thousand years. They've developed some of the craziest leaders of all time. And they test you. There's unique tests that they have at the society where they test to see your emotional, mental toughness. One of the tests that they have is very rigorous. It's purely mental, of course. There's a physical one but one is mental and emotional. If you're Armenian, if you're a Syrian, if you're Persian, this is a book you're going to be reading and saying, holy moly. This is the kind of stuff you talk about in here. Yes. If you're somebody that's fascinated by history, this is a book for you characters. There's a technology that this society, secret society, builds where you go into a vault. I won't spoil it for you. When you go down, they have a technology where you get to sit down and watch and have a three, four hour conversation with Tupac. You can set up a debate between Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. Karl Marx is in the book. Who wrote Communist Manifesto. Ayn Rand, who wrote Atlas Shrugged, is in the book. Marilyn Monroe explains the concept of seduction and sex in the book. When you read the book, it's about development of the next leaders in the world and how they do it and how they've been doing it for many years. And it's also about how to prevent event, the end of civilization and how this organization goes about doing it. So I've never written a parenting book before, but if I ever wrote a parenting book, this is the closest thing to it because it's all mindset, a lot of crazy stories. Again, 13 and a half years, trust me, I told myself, I will not publish this book until I sell my insurance company and I'm fully disconnected from it where it's no longer My responsibility 100%. When you read this, if you're a crate, if you're a creative person, if you like fiction books, if you enjoyed Atlas Shrugged or if you enjoy Divergent, if you like books like that, I think you can enjoy reading this book. It's the creative side business books is very easy. Here's how you do it. Here's how this, how it works. This is very creative. If you haven't placed your order yet, now you can order it on Simon and Schuster, Amazon. I'm going to put the link up below somewhere here, maybe even in my profile. Go order the book and read it. I sincerely, I've never written a book where I can't wait to read your reviews to see what you think about this book. So I'm going on this wild journey and we have some plans on this book here. If you support the things that I work on, I would appreciate you going to reading the book, order the book on Amazon and then post a review.