1st public testimony could affect several ongoing matters in some of these matters court rules or judicial orders limit the disclosure of information to protect the fairness of the proceedings and consistent with longstanding justice department policy it would be inappropriate for me to comment in any way that could affect an ongoing matter 2nd the justice department has asserted privileges concerning investigative information and decisions ongoing matters within the justice department and deliberations within our office these are justice department privileges that i will respect the department has released a letter discussing the restrictions on my testimony and i therefore will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest for example i am unable to address questions about the opening of the f.b.i.'s russian
investigation which occurred months before my appointment or matters related to the so called steel and dossier these matters are the subject of ongoing review by the department any questions on these topics should therefore be directed to the f.b.i. or the justice department the 3rd as i explain this morning it is important for me to adhere to what we wrote in our report the report contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made we stated the results of our investigation with precision i do not intend to summarize or describe the results of our work in a different way in the course of my testimony today and as i stated in may i also will not comment on the actions of the attorney general or of congress i was appointed as a prosecutor and i intend to adhere to that role and to the department standards
that govern finally as i said this morning. over the course of my career i have seen a number of challenges to our democracy the russian government's efforts to interfere in our election is among the most serious and i am sure that the committee agrees now before we go to questions i want to add one correction to my testimony this morning i want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by mr lew who said and i quote you didn't charge the president because of the o l c opinion that is not the correct way to say it as we say in the report and then i said at the opening we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime. and with that mr chairman right answer questions. former u.s. special counsel robert one of the testifying publicly for the 2nd time today in front of the house intelligence committee this morning it was the house judiciary
committee that. appeared before and said that u.s. president donald trump could be charged with crimes leaving office. had to go into standing by for some capitol hill and can talk us through what we've just. saying that betty. what you just heard is robert mueller taking away one of the main victories that the democrats thought they got in the 1st 3 hours of his testimony was up the because basically the justice department has been saying the attorney general has been saying that this he wasn't charging the president because of this but basically a justice department memo that says the president can't face indictment he said during his testimony that that's in fact why he didn't charge the president but now basically going back and saying no that's not the case we didn't reject pollution taking away what the democrats thought was a clear victory in the 1st hearing the other thing that they're pointing to a success is the republican actually asked could the president be indicted after
leaving office and not robert mueller the for the 1st consul said yes he could so that said the democrats are trying to spin this is that they feel like they got important information about him over and out at the same time if you talk to the punditry in america this is been a disaster for the democrats they are saying that robert mueller is coming off as looking ineffective like he doesn't actually know what he's talking about what they wanted is they wanted a sound bite from him but that broadcast people who are paying attention to the lower court that would say that the president had several contacts with russian officials and that he did in 10 different cases possibly obstruct justice and he took offense he didn't do that he's keeping his into a short he told congress he didn't want to testify so what you're seeing him say is look at the report the report stands for itself i'm just simply not going to answer that so. democrats get in 2nd shot in the next 2 hours and see if that makes any difference but what robert muller just said there that takes away one of the big key victories of the democrats thought they have but even he thinks the pedicle had
the live on capitol hill out zeros white house correspondent kelly how could joins us now live from the white house the president himself not a tool impressed with what's going on on capitol hill today is he can believe. yet not impressed and certainly trying to shape it before the testimony started and during the break between these 2 hearings tweeting that as well as along with his press secretary stephanie grisham that they believe they have scored a few victories in all of this is well in terms of the republican side calling these hearings that embarrassment to our country stephanie griffin the press secretary saying go on to expect more of the same in the 2nd half referring to that intelligence hearing that is beginning now a couple of reasons why republicans believe that they may have been successful in this in the president will not thrilled this is taking place potentially breathing a bit of a sigh of relief that he has made it through at least the 1st part of the morning
testimony and that is really 2 there are 2 points that the white house is looking at number one they don't believe that the needle in terms of impeachment has moved any more no closer no further away so that would be one victory that the white house is looking at the other one is and we had suspected that they would be trying to send the message up to republicans to be asking particular questions in the hearings and that is to really question the origins of the investigation so you saw that repeatedly republican lawmakers really pointing to the fact this is something that robert mueller would not speak to though but at least getting that out to public opinion that it was democratic backed opposition research that perhaps ignited the f.b.i. investigation muller would not confirm or deny that but the fact that it's now the public realm will have people asking questions further questioning the whole objectivity of the report repeatedly you heard there republicans were furring to that f.b.i.
agent that was removed from the investigation because he was sending texts back and forth with his lover very clearly not objective in any way but in fact talking about how he could repeatedly get donald trump or the investigation could get donald trump the fact that that is now. sort of beyond the conspiracy theory round being asked out me open is certainly something that the white house will see as successful and there's no doubt that they are urging more of the same as we dive now into this hearing in the intelligence aspects of it committee many thanks white house correspondent kelly how could there live in washington steve clemons is editor at large at the hill he joins us now live from washington d.c. what you make of what we heard then when his opening marks before the house intelligence committee where he wanted to correct the early exchange in which he agreed with lawmakers description of of the decision not to indict trump taking away the one of the the democrats major victories from this morning's hearing
but there's no doubt about it that this theater was designed in a way that the democrats thought they were going to get a big win and they're not getting that and that failure to get that win is giving the white house a very big victory today and i think it's going to be a muddy picture i think. robert mueller promised not to go beyond the contours of the report and that's been frustrating for both sides of this i agree with patty culhane that the most interesting moments have come in sort of yes no moments where he is just responded affirmatively or negatively to something and the most interesting exchange was ken buck congressman from colorado who queried muller about whether the president could be found guilty of obstruction of justice or charged with obstruction of justice after he left office and muller said yes so that's the only moment that was illuminating in ways that we might not have thought of before so it is a big win for the white house and i think the democrats are not winning in 3 hours
of testimony as you say that was the only moment what is the point of all of this steve what have we lunde. well i think what the democrats had hoped is that robert muller would bring a definitiveness and a backbone to these issues about the president's behavior and those at the those around him while he was in office and that hearing it in his voice and having millions of people fix to this t.v. today would take them over a report off of the you know pages to be read and create a 3 d. audio version a visual and audio version of that report that would attract more people to the findings that muller explicated in that document and i think that was the fundamental purpose here others may have wanted more but that's what they really wanted and i think that hasn't worked out because muller we now know negotiated not to read sections of his report so they're not going to have robert muller like at you know somebody doing an audio version of their book providing written you know
reading certain segments of that which would have been very powerful for t.v. and so all of that is gone and so what we've had is a somewhat bumbling occasionally lost. person testifying in congress rapid fire questions from committee members sometimes confusing and it's been sort of messy and i think in that i think the objectives that the democrats have had of creating a moment of theater that would explicate and show really outrageous behavior from the white house is just not turned out to be the kind of storytelling that they had hoped for and we're going to see is it more of the same in the hearing this just got under way how does this one differ from the house judiciary committee. well adam adam schiff whom i talk to many times about this is very obsessed with the russia dimensions what they did the malfeasance of the russian involvement and the
really the shrug of the shoulders that that donald trump regularly gave to russia what was going on what were the issues there why did so many people lie through the process and are now in jail or have been charged over russia issues and so i think the content of that will be different than the obstruction concerns which the judiciary committee where was looking at i think in this case of russia where the real core of the investigation in the appointment of robert muller was about the russian interference and whether there was collusion so i think adam is going to be out of shift is going to be more sharply focused on those issues easy he knows the terrain inside and out and we'll see whether he's able to do something that congressman nadler and other of his both republican and democratic colleagues are not able to do steve many thanks steve clemons editor at large at the hill live in washington we will keep listening to rebuild a system in a so that you don't have to anything that you use with the said in that hearing we will of course bring it to you here on al-jazeera
a. busy news day to day the other the day's other big story is that britain's new prime minister says that he'll do a better deal to leave the european union the pledge from boris johnson comes just as he succeeded to reason they let them attend extra he says that brags that will happen on october 31st no ifs or buts but the britain will be fully prepared for a no deal we have 2 reporters live for you on this historic day anderson says in westminster we begin though with lawrence lee who's at 10 downing street boris johnson getting straight down to work lawrence appointing a cabinet. yes i'll tell you some more about that in a 2nd or 2 but some of the play when when he spoke earlier this afternoon having come back from seeing the queen as prime minister johnson fulfilling his life's ambition he basically gave
a speech which was predicated on what he thinks has gone wrong in the u.k. . picture of a country that he thinks is basically lost it's lost his mojo and lost his self-confidence and the 3 years since the bricks of those happens have led the country down the garden path and it's and it's feeling a bit sorry for itself now and so what johnson says he wants to do is to completely reenergize the united kingdom with this can do spirit and he's the guy to do it. and then he went on to list a range of policy ideas that he wants to concentrate on outside brick set because obviously you don't want him to be seen as only absorbing bricks it is fairly uncontroversial stuff really small police but all spittles in schools and at a broadband all this kind of thing i'm going to leave the european union to do those things that's all have you but he plainly thinks at the same time that leaving the european union will somehow set the u.k. free and unleash this amazing creative spirit in the country that somehow has been stifled and lacking because of european union membership and of course he also said
that the be far more democracy if the u.k. were free from the e.u. unable to make its own decisions. it was a fundamental decision by the british people. but they wanted their laws made by people that they can elect and they can remove from office and we must respect that decision i am convinced we can do a deal without checks of the irish border because we refuse under any circumstances to have such checks and get without that anti democratic backstop and it is of course vital at the same time that we prepare for the remote possibility the brussels refuses any further to negotiate and we are forced to come out with no deal. so back to your point adrian about about the new look of the johnson government not so much
a reshuffle as they sometimes called him more of a massacre frankly any number of remains supporting very senior over at least politicians who don't want no deal it's all people the chance of the exchequer people that all resign this morning before they were pushed a load of sackings this afternoon some of whom frankly were hard line breaks it is too but they've supported jeremy hunt in the conservative leadership contest and now they've all been knifed in the back but what's happened in the last half hour or so is that the 3 main offices of states look like they're being filled by johnson came back from elsewhere where you can look to the sackings by the time he came back in 3rd walks sajid javid famously the son of a bus driver who went on to become a very senior banker at the deutsche bank any millions of dollars a year he's going to be the new chancellor from the look of it pretty patel who is going to be the home secretary a few years ago she said she supported capital punishment. the foreign sexy looks
like is going to be dominant rob also very right wing full of bricks secretary as well so these are the 3 main offices of states not being filled in short order and the rest of the reshuffle or the read the rest of the new ministerial teen has we think to be completed by some our lunch time because when parliament ends fulfil for the summer recess but it will be very very different what if michael gove just going there he's probably going to be the duchy of the chance of the lancaster deputy prime minister so he's again another hard line breaks into who's going to have a high office in this new johnson administration lawrence many thanks indeed that's the prime the corner from downing street to college greene anderson it's outside parliament in westminster what's the mood there andrew we started the day with one prime minister ended with another. most certainly but then of course as lawrence has been talking about there's just such
a flurry of sackings and appointments now suddenly this change of power the sort of change of power you get from prime ministers always means a reshuffle the very least this is has been described by one but venture as a midsummer massacre now what we're also hearing is that there is going to be the trend to all of this in that the sackings have been in the main vast majority of people who haven't been loyal to boris effectively who have actually backed hunt and hunt has in fact has been sacked himself now jeremy hunt the have been suggestion that he would stay in his post as foreign secretary but no that has not happened and he has gone he was apparently off with another post he hasn't said publicly what it was we understand that it was defense minister but he's gone so
the the number now it's 17 sackings and counting right now with me to actually look at this and to give us some sort of context to it all is chris wilkins who's a former chief speechwriter for the reason may in fact you were with her that her early years of the premiership. tell me what do you make of all this. that well i think what you're seeing going on this evening with these changes in government is really perhaps i mean it maybe should have happened 3 is immediately after the referendum we had contributed to leave you know the prime minister who voted to to remain in even union and days to leave campaign if you won that referendum truly taking charge of the governments you've got the prime minister now especially led that campaign he's been given a cabinet. it is clearly full of people who joined him in that campaign and he's got a team in downing street if it for you says it with the people who ran that campaign behind the scenes so we've now got a very they government is focused on
a single thing which is even the opinion and i think ultimately what it's about actually has been to get a campaign team to win a general election because i think that's where the united kingdom is now heading what about supplements like patel in consonance home secretary she was fired for indiscretions in her role in the fall of the phone not the district what do you make of that for example and other appointments that don't seem to fit the focus of us possibly but sure sensible decision yeah i think if you'd said a month ago that i was going to be the sexy you might well have been sort of laughed out of the room or the anyone saw it coming but what was interesting i suppose is that the big question about bush on the famous ship was which way he's going to go is he going to be unified is he going to be somebody tries to bring the country and also the conservative party together and therefore going together a government where he reaches out to people on all sides apart from things i mean
always he actually can be focused on this one issue of threats it's leaving the opinion i make that the thing he does better with us and i think me tonight we have our answer he's not going to be unifying character he's putting in place people who've backed him people back to grex it and people who are pretty on the hard right of the conservative party but ultimately there are true believers in this one issue any clearly thinks that's what's going to find his premiership chris wilkins thank you very much for your insights certainly a very active time here in westminster and indeed downing street at are many thanks indeed anderson is live outside the house of parliament in london some britain's new prime minister says that he'll do a new and better deal to leave the european union the place from boris johnson came just hours after he'd succeeded to reason may attend strays the other big story been covering this hour on al-jazeera facing more questions about his russian reports as the 2nd hearing of the day on capitol hill got underway the former u.s. special counsel testifying in washington for the 1st time publicly.
those are the headlines so the news continues an officer of the inside story next. can china be a military superpower and beijing has outlined its defense plans that include a modern and advanced on me it's also accused the u.s. of undermining global stability so how will this defense policy play out schools in the asia pacific region and beyond this is insight story.
hello and welcome to the program i'm home he is in kabul military competition is on the rise and china believes it's lacking behinds beijing says the u.s. has increased its defense budgets modernize its weapons and develops its capability in cyber space and space itself or the chinese government wants to catch out its details how it intends to do just that in a national defense paper released on weapon state beijing has declared it wants greater modernization of its armed forces and weapons it says its ambitious plans are peaceful but not if taiwan tries to achieve independence from the mainland china defense ministry has warned it's ready to go to war to safeguard its national unity and says it will take all necessary measures to defeat those that call
separatists let's hear what china spokesperson had to say. one to. the building and growth of china's defense capability is based on its own justified security demands its growth has always been the growth of the force for world peace the white paper has clearly demonstrated china's policy of not pursuing her germany the theory that a strong country must seek hedger many will never apply to china no matter how china is developed in the future we will not threaten anyone neither will we seek fears of influence goble who emotional there are still big gaps between china's defense expenditure and its demands of maintaining the national sovereignty security and interests complementing its obligations as a major power and maintain the progress of its own defense level we will continue to keep a proper and stable growth of expenditure. well the island of taiwan is self rules but china sees it as part of its own territory the u.s.
has angered beijing by approving sales of weapons to the island this month sales worth more than 2000000000 dollars well china says it wants a lie the island to splits from the mainland will not leave much money we are willing to strive for the prospect of peaceful reunification with utmost sincerity and efforts however we have to be very clear that seeking taiwan independence will meet a dead end if anyone dares to separate taiwan from china the chinese army will certainly fight resolutely defending the country sovereign unity and territorial integrity. well the mainland affairs council taiwan's top policymaking bosy on china condemns beijing for marks in a statement it says we are paging authorities to renounce irrational malicious acts such as the use of force and soon prove cross streets relations and handle issues including hong kong rationally can be
a responsible regional member. well let's have a look at china's military power china's people's liberation army is the world's largest military force with more than 2000000 soldiers on the ground in the air and at sea president says he wants to transform the pioli insue what he calls a world class force capable of winning wars anywhere by 2050 china has cut the size of its land based on me by around 50 percent and significantly boosted its naval and air forces as parts of that plan and it's investing heavily in modernizing its military equipment china's defense budget is the world's 2nd largest after the united states its military expenditure for this year is sets at more than 100 and $75000000000.00 president donald trump has demanded the u.s. 2019 defense budget be increased to $750000000000.00.
well let's bring in our panel in bangkok via skype we have john provides he's an analyst at jane's spy office markets it's offense and security consultancy in d.c. it we're joined by lawrence korb he served as u.s. assistant secretary of defense and is now a senior fellow at the center for american progress and sent berlin we have adam need he search china research or korean aversive see in sydney in a visiting fellow at the university of hamburg welcome to you war i'd like to start and berlin if i could with adam lee what would you say we've learned from this white paper. i think the white paper does is a strong political statement in it didn't present any real strategies or any surprise forty's of us that watches china's military but it's
a very strong political statement about how china sees its regional and international environment. how he sees at the role played by the us which is counterproductive and they stabilising in the view of beijing but as well as some other bits which i think are critically important and one of these is. how internal security has become such a big part of china's national security that it's being that it's being elevated to the top of beijing's priority for its armed forces but as well as a focus on political loyalty of the armed forces as well and if they thanks very much for that adamant let's cross it to war since in d.c. and lawrence korb as we heard that this is china's statements of defining its rule in the world what would you say china's message is with this with
this document and how is the u.s. likely to interpret. well china's message is that unlike our own document they're not a strategic competitor us worldwide is that they're basically protecting their own interests and also that their military is getting more and more powerful particularly in their region what we call the indo pacific. region and they will protect their interests and again as they've been doing ever since the revolution that taiwan is part of china and we're not happy with the united states continuing to provide military assistance there and if you should think about you know becoming separate we will use our military force to prevent taiwan from doing that even if the us aids them do you think lawrence korb this is a shot across the by then
a more emboldened china. to say we are ready at this point to take military action and it's time for the u.s. to back oh oh. well basically they are saying that you know bad they're on their way to doing that and they said by 2050 they're going to be a world class military but the fact of the matter is in their region they're also very very powerful they also know mention they complain about the u.s. being a global power and messing around all the world they don't talk about their belt road initiative which is destabilizing a lot of parts of the world ok that reason to very interesting points there lawrence korb the belts and roads initiative and their perceptions of the united states i want to raise these 2 issues at during the course of our discussion but junk about if i could just come to see you how do you interpret this white paper in the states meant from china on the state of its military in the direction that it's
going and what's the main takeaway for you well i mean the statement so far right in as much that this shows china's determination to. retain its sovereignty over taiwan and control that situation and also the message to the u.s. but there's also a lot of holes busy i think in the white paper that was issued today there's a lot of there's a lot of ambiguity and there's a lot of areas that china doesn't really come provide any d. many details on for example military bases international military bases it talks a little bit about the one in all of africa but very nothing else. other examples include the scope of military modernization and capabilities that that china is looking to deploy very little information about the main thrust certainly is that that taiwan aspect that the taiwan situation was not apparent in
the 2015 white paper. only passing reference and so this is. the real mind to take away in this in this 2019 white paper and the reason for that is because the united states has played a much stronger role as president trump i think in certainly in supporting taiwan. and that is the main message here but our cause so there is a number of ambiguities in the white paper you know trying to use is the white paper i think really to show that it is becoming more transparent a more open about its military objectives but i think it doesn't really it's failed to do that i think certainly. not though i think it will be a notice of all aspects of it in the united states and abyssinia if i could come to you mentioned that the focus on this white paper it has. the contrast with the
previous white paper in 2015 which is more focused on an external perspective now the focus one could interpret it as being more in sorrow one focusing on china's domestic stability what it uses its territories do you think in some way there is it signals a new determination for the chinese to take more concrete action when it comes to taiwan or is this more of a tie fashion or a tactic to focus more on the internal and domestic policies for quietly expanding influence overseas. i think certainly in the domestic aspects has become top of patients agenda. if you look at the 25th defense white paper taiwan tibet and she is not explicitly mention of though it is implied. but in this case they have been incorporated into the
tasks and missions of the chinese military so it's very clear that this has elevated importance for the chinese party state the other thing is that there is at it language with reference to maintaining political security maintaining social stability so very much code language for maintaining the control of the party. ok one of the other big messages from this was at the fact that the u.s. is undermining global stability i'd like to examine that. staying with you in what way is the u.s. on so many global stability according to this white paper in this report. yes so in beijing's view the u.s. is pursuing what it what it called hedge monism so essentially security a security at the cost of others and being able to exercise a degree of power that is sees as illegitimate. but also in the
region in beijing's view that the united states is increasingly antagonistic towards beijing whether that be in the south china sea all with reference to taiwan and indeed rainfall sman of the us alliance networks and deployments and other forms of intervention in the region and beyond its unilateral ism as well. in henchmen of its military capabilities so all of that threatens beijing and is perceived by beijing as potentially threatening of its national interests at lawrence korb which here are with the u.s. except these arguments that it's america's. might in global stability now obviously the united states feels that it's in the region because they're asked to be there why our allies the japanese the south koreans the australians and
they're there we're there to help protect them for example if the chinese try and take over or some of the islands that traditionally have belonged to japan we would do we would prefer prevent that and obviously we would come to the defense of taiwan if for example the chinese aside that that they waited long enough and they had to use force to to unify the unify the island so we are feel that we're there to provide the stability in the chinese are the aggressors i think it's very interesting now we've tightened our toys with india it's not used to be the pacific command now it's the indo-pacific over. dan and india and china have been traditional rivals in the area. jumped out at me were which we're seeing the teen ira civs here from china has perspective the u.s. is threatening global stability from the u.s. perspective they're merely defending allies in the region and china is becoming
more of a de stabilizing factor can both these things be true. yes i mean to china there obviously sees its military modernization and its military investment it's not a military. activity such as the belgian road initiative which are aimed at getting strategic and economic influence primarily all these go hand in hand and part of china's. strong development that we've seen over the past few days and this will continue and so this kind of this white paper is part of the process of laying down the foundation and laying down the marker as to where china's position in the global in the global between the global powers is it it's saying to the u.s. we're here we're a dominant player in the region and we will continue and expand our power over the
coming over the coming decade and the and the lines that it's put in the sand today with this white paper certainly in terms of taiwan is a is a is a is a warning that will be you know understood in the u.s. but the u.s. all of us see not stand down so it means that there will be a requirement for diplomacy. for discussions and negotiations and also. threats and concerns about misunderstandings in some of the region so that so that there is you know there is a place for. but it requires a certain level of diplomacy because neither of these 2 powers the u.s. and china are going away any time soon in this region and beyond are those they're certainly not in it and it gives rise to. to the question how likely are we to see
some kind of military intervention because already the us and china are in the middle of a trade war neither side looks willing to back down. does this increase the risk of a military confrontation not no not not of mediately i don't think because there is an understanding that what's happening at the moment in certainly in areas like the south china sea where china's military power has grown to such an extent that it's terence there's also grown which means that it's the chances of military engagement have decreased. china's military power has decreased the increase to such a right that the big are the chances of any real military conflict has has probably decreased with some certain regional players however that's not the u.s. and that's where the complication is and the real danger i think is misunderstandings miscalculations about patrols in the air is that they do patrols
about that that is probably an area that is of concern but diplomacy will be a key aspect going forward for these 2 notions as a me just how far do you think china is prepared to go with regard to taiwan we heard in that press conference the spokesperson saying we are willing to go to war do you think we can take that statement at face value. i think it's hard to judge their coming. china has been consistently saying for a long time now that it's welling to go to war. over taiwan but i think ultimately the cardinal principle that animates chinese behavior at home as well as policy abroad is the need to keep the chinese communist party in power so if it comes to taiwan or the collapse of the communist party then i think
they will go to war butting in other scenarios you can imagine where the chinese communist parties legitimacy is threatened and has been putting to a really tough spot where feels that military action is its only way out so i think that's the kind of scenario that would potentially have escalation implications and very tragic consequences lawrence korb a similar question to you how far is the u.s. prepared to go when it comes to support for taiwan given these red lines and markets have really been drawn in the sand with this white paper. oh well there's no doubt about the fact that the u.s. would call the taiwan saide if the chinese should be foolish enough to try and integrate it using military military force off the a sleigh nobody wants that because nobody's going to win if that if that happens
similarly the united states and china have to be careful they don't have an accidental escalation when we're conducting patrols in the area they're trying to you know bill run why runways on these islands that they're that they're that they're claiming and i think that's the real danger as well as the fact that something could happen in north korea given what's what's going on there missile build up the fact that we're putting. missiles in south korea theoretically to defend against north korea but the chinese see them as on to my name their nuclear deterrent so those are the things i think you have to be very very care careful careful about and make sure that we maintain lines of communication so an accidental encounter does not spiral into a conflict that nobody really wants absolutely but things lawrence korb the seem to
be deteriorating in terms of the rhetoric building up with this trade war going on the chinese using very much more robust rhetoric when it comes to outlining their position in this white paper do you think this will be ringing alarm bells in washington the release of this white paper do you think in the u.s. there is a recognition that the are not going to be the only superpower in time. well you know i think it will reinforce our you american national security strategy which said you know when you have 2 major strategic competitors china and russia and china is the is the more potent one and that's why we've had to increase our defense spending which in real terms even if you control for inflation is higher than at the height of the reagan buildup or during during world war 2 so it will feed into that narrative and make it hard for people who say we're focusing too
much on defense and not enough on diplomacy to win the to win the day as in the t. think we are looking at and you chinese military superpower already china's very strong economically is this the next frontier. indeed i think. she jumping has made a abundantly clear that china is looking for a superstar power status when it comes to its military force the wipa clearly highlights that the people's liberation army is not where beijing wants it to be knowledge is that tremendous modernization reform has already happened but it also says that it's still lags behind while leading militaries and i think that's what that's what china's military were working towards and it's got mastan in 20202035 of cause to become the world's leading. leading military by 2050 so indeed we're
looking at china's pursuit of that military superstardom it's another matter to kind of evaluate whether that is possible in the frame in the timeframe given by she in pain ok i see you. were coming to the end of our discussion just give me your thoughts are we looking at summa the tree superpowers the u.s. and china or will the u.s. remain dominate in this regard. at the moment the us is dominant in this regard i'm well more ramon so for the foreseeable future certainly for the near term and as was stated just now the chinese military has certain goals that it wants to achieve by the 20 mid twenty's thirty's and 20 fifty's and i think by that time on the trajectory that china is on at the moment with the investment that china has committed is committing to military modernization there will be
a different scope and a different level of military power available to the chinese government at that period. at the moment the us is in a head in terms of capabilities and technology is an understanding but the china chinese is rapidly improving its capability to this very quickly well lots of food pfeffer thought that i'd like to thank all of my guests john lawrence korb and adam. and thank you to you for watching you can see the program again any time by visiting our website that's al to 0 dot com and for further discussion just head to our facebook page that space picked up come forward slash a.j. inside story you can also join the conversation on twitter our handle is at inside story you can take it or at the at our my but for me when i and the whole inside story thing it's by.
i have been looking at your instagram account and reading talking since the apples fall behind the scenes this is a dialogue when donald trump announce his candidacy for president after all after that everyone has a boyce the best chance the democrats have to beat donald trump is to nominate an exciting inspirational cowers magic nominee who joined the global conversation in your pockets where adding to the amount is iraq.
we understand the differences. and the similarities of cultures across the world so no matter how you take it al-jazeera will bring in the news and current affairs that matter to you al-jazeera. the latest news as it breaks it is long campaigned against what it calls attempts to undermine the state of israel from within. with detailed coverage called power being a place by eco friendly plants all over the world environmentalist's here the pulse of what's been said. from around the world there's now things just as visible above ground and on the surface and under all. it could be the biggest line in history. as powerful nations lay claim to territories under the oceans $21.00 geologists are secretly plotting new borders.
as the struggle for resources intensifies some of the world's most powerful scientists speak out. oceans monaca on a 0. this is the opportunity to understand the very different way we're there because it's we don't mean. this is al jazeera. hello i'm adrian for the game this is the news live from doha coming up in the next 60 minutes the u.s.
special counsel doubles down saying this investigation into russian collusion does not exonerate president donald trump. i maryam namazie and london with the top story from here and. i have every confidence that the $99.00 days time we will have corrected. johnson takes over as prime minister of the u.k. with a renewed promise to take britain ounce of the e.u. by october 31st. claims of a full crew sudan's military arrests 18 generals including the recently appointed army chief of staff. and we go on patrol with the navy and guard where pirates are the only danger of the lookout for. in supporting the cricketers get a rude awakening on their return to the far the very welcome bowl down for 85 on day one of their 1st test against our island details from lord's coming up.
robert is facing more questions about his russia election meddling reporter the 2nd hearing just on the way on capitol hill the former u.s. special counsel is testifying in washington for the 1st time publicly at the 1st hearing early out in front of the house judiciary committee said that u.s. president donald trump could be charged with crimes often leaving office he also said at the time the report did not exonerate trump as the president's but claimed let's go live now to al-jazeera profit pedicle haim is following events for us on capitol hill but he what we learned so far in this 2nd hearing of the day which is by the way wolf just over an hour ago. it's pretty much following the pattern of the prior here in this one supposed to be focused on the potential contacts between the truck campaign and russia but we're seeing the democrats try to get more out of
robert mueller they're trying to get him to spell it out he's not doing that the republicans are taking turns attacking his investigation and the legal theories behind it the democrats i think were really hoping that this would move the needle on the potential for peace in the president they wanted to see robert mueller come out in plain english spell out what was in his more than 400 page report he's really not doing that he's answering questions much like he said he was going to he's having one word answers for word answers what the democrats did get is they were able to pin him down in this was about 4 and a half hours ago so this is we're talking about the very 1st thing when he was asked does this report exonerate the president has answered no does this report say the president and obstruct justice his answer no it does not so that's what the democrats are going to be hoping that people hold on to but their part the republicans have been able to try and cast this whole investigation is a bunch of people who hate trump who are going after what they always call the deep state one of the more interesting to see. just came from
a republican congressman he said and you just mentioned it can the president be charged with obstruction of justice once he's in all but once he's out of office and robert mueller said yes he can basically find that he thinks that the president did in fact commit obstruction of justice which is an impeachable offense now all of this goes back to what the report was looking into underneath what circumstances and it was a justice department memo that says a city u.s. president cannot be indicted so muller said in the message that he potentially would have been had he not been the in president but really saying that he still might when he leaves office so those are the big takeaways i think from this hearing that has been going on for so many hours many many thanks but they call him that on capitol hill let's go live now to the white house white house correspondent kelly how good is with us to give us reaction from the white house what are they making of all of this. yeah despite some you know. problematic would be putting it nicely sound bites that have come out of this
morning's hearings and again as these continue for the white house that patty outlined that many democrats would see as a point scoring the white house is also seeing that it has scored some points the president has been tweeting throughout the day rather vigorously for our president who said he wasn't even going to watch these hearings it's quite obvious he is not only is he retreating what he thinks are point scoring by the republicans he's also put in place some of the tweets of his own that have been echoed by his press secretary stephanie grisham namely that the white house is viewing this as an embarrassment to the country that's the word that is being used embarrassment used twice sensually what they're trying to do is discredit not only these hearings but also the report itself and the man behind it robert muller so there are a number of victories the white house sees coming out of this it does appear there is a deliberate strategy to put in place through the questioning although robert muller
would not address it directly the origins of the investigation itself namely the so-called steel dossier that many people believe not only was democratic back research but for a long time has been nothing more than a sort of the source of blogs in the conservative sphere now that's out the public realm as well you've also got sort of the question about the objectivity of this investigation namely repeatedly we've heard for the 1st time from robert muller's own mouth that he did have to remove one f.b.i. agent as a result of extreme bias against the president this is being viewed as a victory by conservatives on capitol hill but also this white house for a long time donald trump has been tweeting about this is a partisan witch hunt they now will feel that they have the soundbites necessary to move this beyond just an. angrie president and really have some material for the
campaign trail for the 2020 presidential election but adrian i should put notably what's not being addressed in all of this is foreign interference in the 2016 us election which is what this report was initially all about nothing has been discussed about how to resolve this with another election looming many many thanks indeed let's bring in steve clemons who senator of the hill he joins us now live from washington d.c. steve as we've been hearing there's been a lot of point scoring or attempted point scoring by lawmakers from the republicans and the democrats during these these testimonies today is anyone scoring a knockout blow who's who's winning. and the white house is winning because the democrats are not winning in this theater that they've put together you know i was waiting to hear. muller rob miller to come in and share potentially more detail
than was in the report maybe expound a little bit you know begin looking a little bit particularly in the intelligence committee hearing about why so many people that he investigated lied to and faced charges from him were in jail what the kind of depth and scale and dimension of the russia operation was and robert mueller you know came in not only is reticent witness but to some degree a reluctant witness and said that he wasn't going to go beyond the contours of the report and that has largely been true and not even to read from the report which i think robbed from that the various committee chairs boccieri natter and adam schiff you know a lot of theater where robert mueller is reading some very strong language that's in that report and so what we've been given are either by unary yes and no responses to things or comments that. you know that were largely either he was going to comment or in this so the theater dimension of this which is why it was created just hasn't happened and i think our 2 previous commenters got that exactly
right you were expecting this 2nd testimony in front of the house intelligence committee to be perhaps a little more illuminating the than the 1st in front of the house judiciary committee where want just over an hour in now if you heard anything the we didn't we didn't already know. not in what i've heard i haven't heard anything that i had no of course i new report the other interesting dimension is when you're watching the questioning it becomes sort of clear who has a deep you know dex derrius knowledge of the report who is questioning miller and who doesn't and so there are different levels and that's been one of the things that people read the 412 page report or not but i think in the broad side i think it became very clear that muller in commenting about the complicity or the like the legal lines that the president may or may not have crossed that that was something he wasn't going to shed much light on i thought he would go into much greater detail on what the original instigation of his report was russian meddling in the
you know american election and the people who lied about that in various processes whom he then had in some cases jailed threatening threatened with jail or charged and who were indicted who were a great number of people and so i thought in the we've of that we would hear more and thus far robert mueller has avoided going into those kinds of that the fabric of that in any kind of expose atory way and i find that really disappointing because he could have done that in a way that would not have reflected on these other issues that the department of justice has been trying to control about what he said about the president united states we'll keep listening we'll be right back if there is anything newsworthy it's report steve clemons editor at large at the hill many thanks steve. this is the news from out 0 still to come on the program warnings from tehran over a european led protection force for oil tankers in the gulf. or u.s. sanctions on iran of turn neighboring iraq into a giant a.t.m.
. and japan's prime minister gets a little over excited as tokyo marks the one year countdown to the olympics. boris johnson says that britain will leave the e.u. 31st no ifs or buts he made the promise during his 1st speech as u.k. prime minister for more on that let's cross to mary in the european broadcast center in london. hi adrian yes those were indeed johnson's words britain's new leader vowing to negotiate a better agreement with the european union as brics it will happen by october 31st with or without. johnson is now in the process of selecting his cabinet ministers off to arriving at his new residence in downing street baka has more from central
london. one of the most divisive figures that modern british politics is now the country 77th prime minister. to the sound of a pause and me if i protests. promise to unite a fractured country and deliver on his defining pledge to lead britain out of the e.u. we're going to fulfill the repeated promises of parliament to the people and come out of the e.u. otoh by the 31st no ifs or buts. and to all those who continue to prophesied disaster i say yes there will be difficulties though i believe that within the gene application they will be far less serious than some have claimed there was a distinct lack of details and strategy in the speech but no shortage of ambition and optimism johnson is going to be a very different style of leader this is how the formal handover of power began with a journey to buckingham palace to meet queen elizabeth.