John Mearsheimer - Offensive Realism

Become a member to submit questions for future videos. 
Click Join: https://www.youtube.com/@johnmearsheimer/join

————————————————————
PODCASTS

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0Ahf67i2DOoXDmi2HA6Vcj
Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id6810828298

————————————————————
DESCRIPTION

Delegations from Russia, Ukraine, and the United States are now meeting in Abu Dhabi in hopes of reaching an agreement on the all-important issue of security guarantees, which would represent a major step toward ending the Ukraine war. These negotiations are almost certain to fail, however, mainly because it is virtually impossible to devise a formula for security guarantees that satisfies both Russia and Ukraine. Moreover, the Europeans, who have been excluded from the negotiations at Russia’s insistence, are important players who will side with Ukraine against Russia.

————————————————————
CHAPTERS

0:00 Intro
0:32 The Abu Dhabi Negotiations
1:08 Previous Talks in Abu Dhabi and Geneva
2:02 Trump's Optimism vs. Ukraine's Pessimism
2:53 Why These Talks Will Fail
4:14 The Real Issue: Security Guarantees
5:10 No Ceasefire on the Table
6:13 What Ukraine Wants
7:20 What Russia Wants
8:37 Who's at the Table
9:00 Why Europe Is Left Out
12:20 Problem 1: The U.S. Is Not a Mediator
14:44 Problem 2: The Europeans
16:49 Indivisible Security
18:39 The Security Dilemma
21:38 Applying It to Ukraine and Russia
23:28 Russia Demands a Veto
24:25 You Cannot Square This Circle
26:10 The War Will Be Settled on the Battlefield
26:43 A Frozen Conflict
28:07 Conclusion

————————————————————
MUSIC

"The Ice Giants" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Music modified (edited/remixed) from the original.

YouTube Channel member @GSM1 asks: When politicians use terms like communist and socialist, or countries call themselves people’s republics, what do these words actually mean to their audiences today? Have these labels, much like the term anti-Semitism, evolved so far from their original meanings that they’ve become largely meaningless political rhetoric?
I don’t think these labels are meaningless. I think they serve two purposes. First, leaders use them to motivate their public. The United States is separated from its adversaries by two oceans, so elites have to work to get Americans to back costly wars. That is why Saddam Hussein became Hitler, why Iran’s leaders are compared to the Nazis, and why every standoff becomes Munich in 1938. Second, sometimes the labels reflect real ideological differences that fuel conflict, as on the Eastern Front in World War II and in the Cold War.
When ideology and geopolitics point in the same direction, they reinforce each other. When they conflict, the realist logic wins. The United States and Britain allied with the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany, and Washington cleaned up Stalin’s image to do it.

YouTube Channel member  @Seniorquasimodo asks: if Iran builds a nuclear deterrent, will Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the UAE follow, creating a stable balance of nuclear powers in the region? Would Israel and the United States allow it, and what is the future of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East?
In this Ask the Professor, I make three points. First, the 2025 12-day war and the ongoing war that began on February 28 have given Iran powerful incentives to go nuclear, and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq and Turkey would likely follow. Second, the Saudis have incentives to acquire a deterrent even if Iran doesn’t, because the United States can no longer protect them. Third, a region where every state has a survivable deterrent would be stable, but the proliferation process itself is extremely dangerous, since Israel and the United States have enormous incentives to strike before the capability is complete, and small arsenals may be vulnerable.

DESCRIPTION

The Trump administration is desperately searching for a way to end the Iran war on favorable terms. President Trump has indicated that he would take steps after the mid-term elections to bring the war to a victorious conclusion. That is not going to happen, however. The United States has no way of winning its war against Iran. 

————————————————————
CHAPTERS

0:00 Intro
0:27 Trump's Post-Midterm Iran Plan
1:59 What's Happened Since February 28th
2:37 The Four U.S. and Israeli War Goals
4:47 What the War Has Cost So Far
6:09 Iran's Demands
9:53 Iran's Slow Walk on the Nuclear Issue
12:56 The Strategies the U.S. Has Tried
19:09 Trump's Four Options
20:58 Option 1: A Three-Day Bombing Campaign
25:25 Option 2: The Blockade and Bessent Strategy
27:51 Option 3: Diplomacy
29:56 Desperation in Washington and Israel
31:27 Option 4: A Nuke on Pickaxe Mountain
34:09 How a Nuclear Strike Would Work
36:55 Would It End the War?
38:20 The Wider Costs of Going Nuclear
40:43 Where That Leaves Us

————————————————————
MUSIC

"The Ice Giants" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Music modified (edited/remixed) from the original.

YouTube channel member @KamranRazvan asks: What does the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty actually offer a non-nuclear state if international law has no real enforcement?

My answer starts with a distinction between great powers and minor powers. Great powers create international institutions, write the rules to serve their own interests, and break those rules when they conflict with their national interest. No higher authority can punish them. The UN Security Council veto is the clearest example. Minor powers don’t write the rules, and they almost always have to obey them, because the great powers that built the institutions have the economic and military might to enforce them.

The NPT, created in 1968 by the United States and the Soviet Union, shows the pattern. Washington, Moscow, and today Beijing all have an interest in keeping non-nuclear states from getting the bomb. They enforce the treaty, not the institution itself. North Korea is the glaring exception.