All language subtitles for 25-07-2023trdery

af Afrikaans
ak Akan
sq Albanian
am Amharic
ar Arabic
hy Armenian
az Azerbaijani
eu Basque
be Belarusian
bem Bemba
bn Bengali
bh Bihari
bs Bosnian
br Breton
bg Bulgarian
km Cambodian
ca Catalan
ceb Cebuano
chr Cherokee
ny Chichewa
zh-CN Chinese (Simplified)
zh-TW Chinese (Traditional)
co Corsican
hr Croatian
cs Czech
en English
eo Esperanto
et Estonian
ee Ewe
fo Faroese
tl Filipino
fy Frisian
gaa Ga
gl Galician
ka Georgian
de German
el Greek
gn Guarani
gu Gujarati
ht Haitian Creole
ha Hausa
haw Hawaiian
iw Hebrew
hi Hindi
hmn Hmong
hu Hungarian
is Icelandic
ig Igbo
id Indonesian
ia Interlingua
ga Irish
it Italian
ja Japanese
jw Javanese
kn Kannada
kk Kazakh
rw Kinyarwanda
rn Kirundi
kg Kongo
ko Korean
kri Krio (Sierra Leone)
ku Kurdish
ckb Kurdish (Soranรฎ)
ky Kyrgyz
lo Laothian
la Latin
lv Latvian
ln Lingala
lt Lithuanian
loz Lozi
lg Luganda
ach Luo
lb Luxembourgish
mk Macedonian
mg Malagasy
ms Malay
ml Malayalam
mt Maltese
mi Maori
mr Marathi
mfe Mauritian Creole
mo Moldavian
mn Mongolian
my Myanmar (Burmese)
sr-ME Montenegrin
ne Nepali
pcm Nigerian Pidgin
nso Northern Sotho
nn Norwegian (Nynorsk)
oc Occitan
or Oriya
om Oromo
ps Pashto
fa Persian
pl Polish
pt-BR Portuguese (Brazil)
pt Portuguese (Portugal) Download
pa Punjabi
qu Quechua
ro Romanian
rm Romansh
nyn Runyakitara
ru Russian
sm Samoan
gd Scots Gaelic
sr Serbian
sh Serbo-Croatian
st Sesotho
tn Setswana
crs Seychellois Creole
sn Shona
sd Sindhi
si Sinhalese
sk Slovak
sl Slovenian
so Somali
es-419 Spanish (Latin American)
su Sundanese
sw Swahili
tg Tajik
ta Tamil
tt Tatar
te Telugu
th Thai
ti Tigrinya
to Tonga
lua Tshiluba
tum Tumbuka
tr Turkish
tk Turkmen
tw Twi
ug Uighur
uk Ukrainian
ur Urdu
uz Uzbek
vi Vietnamese
cy Welsh
wo Wolof
xh Xhosa
yi Yiddish
yo Yoruba
zu Zulu

Original subtitles

"It's not clear exactly yet, but it's likely to be bad news for the Russian navy," is the

opinion of Anders Nielsen, a military analyst at the Royal Danish Defense College, about

the end of the grain deal.

The grain deal was originally signed for 120 days and then extended several times despite

the Russian leadership threatening to withdraw from it each time.

At the time it was signed, the Russian leadership hoped that by the time the first 120 days

expired, Ukraine would have already lost, so it was seen as a PR exercise for developing

countries dependent on grain supplies, but cannot help Ukraine in the war.

In the end, the "grain deal" significantly benefited Ukraine, while Russia found itself

in a predicament where withdrawal was no longer feasible due to increasing international isolation.

Russia feared being blamed by African nations for causing a food crisis.

Also, the Russian navy is not in a position to run a full-fledged blockade of Ukrainian

ports.

They can shell Ukrainian ports or sink this or that ship with submarine torpedoes, but

a real blockade requires the navy to be present in the area where the ships are traveling

and inspect them.

And Ukraine now has land-based anti-ship missiles and fairly technologically advanced maritime

drones.

In a sense, during the "grain deal" the Russians controlled the Ukrainian navy by not allowing

anything but grain to be smuggled in, and by delaying their inspections, thus creating

a traffic jam of ships.

Many, including Nielsen himself, believed that the Russian leadership would go along

with the grain deal, as withdrawing from it would be even worse for Russia than continuing.

However, on July 17, there was an explosion on the Crimean Bridge, which created serious

delays in Russian logistics (as well as a personal insult to Putin, so he couldn't just

renegotiate the deal).

As a result, the Russians responded with a series of unrealistic demands to reopen the

grain deal, including lifting some of the sanctions, which of course no one would go

for, as they could put forward lifting even more for the next grain deal.

It looks like the Russian leadership was not prepared for the possibility of undermining

the bridge and did not know how to react.

Their response has not been very consistent.

The statement that any ship would be seen as potentially carrying military cargo is

pretty vague.

Then one Kremlin official did clarify that ships would be inspected.

Conducting a naval blockade has clear rules.

It must be announced in advance and then warn passing ships about inspections, you can't

just shoot at them.

The Russians can naturally spit on international laws, but they still need to come in close

to know exactly where the ships are.

This, in turn, will bring the Russian navy into range of Ukrainian missiles and drones.

The Russian Armed Forces will probably continue shelling ports in the near future, in the

hope that this will scare the shipowners enough.

However, in the long run, the Russian leadership faces a number of unpleasant dilemmas.

At the moment everyone is accusing them specifically of using food as a weapon.

If they send a fleet to enforce the blockade - they risk losing ships.

If they don't, they look like losers.

Russian Armed Forces are also forced to spend expensive missiles to destroy grain.

It is possible that the timing of the Crimean Bridge attack was calculated by Ukraine as

a trap for Russia.

The Ukrainian leadership may have decided to raise the stakes by pushing through the

expansion of the "grain deal" to other commodities.

From Ukraine's position, the "grain deal" was a permission for Russia to "blockade at

a discount" where the Russians controlled the passage of ships through inspections.

And from this position, the Ukrainian leadership decided to disrupt this partial blockade by

taking advantage of the weakness of the Russian navy.

What do you think, I look forward to your options in the comments ? Oh yeah, I almost

forgot, thank you all so much for everyone's comments under the video before last, I'll

have a little more free time now.

Can't find what you're looking for?
Get subtitles in any language from opensubtitles.com, and translate them here.