tv Boom Bust RT December 26, 2017 11:30pm-12:00am EST
and that is our show for you today remember everyone in this world we are not told we are loved and up so i tell you all i love you i am tyrrel than torah and i'm top of the wall s. keep on watching those hawks and have a great day and it. leads hong. kong. in some american cities the police have built themselves cling to reputation for people who walk on the street to be united states who are at risk from the very people who are supposed to protect that were people are no more afraid of the police than of a criminal as. you can see something happening in this is like
i don't want to call the cops let that happen rather than call the cops in those young black men lose their lives chasing the good with their fingers on the trigger you never know better safe than sorry i don't know that someone else is going to pull a gun so. unfortunately around and around here we end up killing our guns along with dan still from so much because of this place to be like when the real. battle. was little. words that come to call russia nor i was ever no one has ever heard of a country i never even heard about most school.
don't know i mean a little bit of a bit i'm a little late. i. life among the ruins people in mosul speak to all taney about their struggle for survival five months after being liberated from islamic state. the russian foreign minister describes america's threats against north korea as an acceptable to fine cold with washington's top diplomat. an israeli politician and. palestinians on that way from gaza to visit their relatives in israel. the morning stillings hypes. stay with us now crosstalk.
hello and welcome to crossfire where all things are considered peter lavelle president donald trump's two thousand and seventeen national security strategy report tells us how he sees the world or rather how the washington foreign policy leads for a candidate who ran on a message of change the report is on remarkable in its defense the status quo policies and views clearly washington's neo cons are running the show. the national security strategy i'm joined by my guests in washington michael o'hanlon is a senior fellow at the brookings institution and we have brian becker he's the
director of the answer coalition as well as host of loud and clear a daily new show on radio sputnik all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate brian let me go to you first i'll be quite blunt i mean i read it quite carefully it seems more or less a continuation of what we've seen for almost the last thirty years and actually seems a lot more. confrontational i would say. the some of the points that about trade actually agree with on immigration i actually agree with but more or less the same guy only the people that wrote the two thousand and seventeen report could have written the one justifying the iraq war if you actually compare tex they're very similar in the words they use go ahead. well i think i'm glad you mentioned the iraq war because the national security strategy which is a congressionally mandated report from the executive branch. it sometimes is
a predictor of what's coming in in the case of george w. bush six months before the invasion the shock and awe invasion of iraq. bush came out with the national security strategy which provided although we didn't use the exact words of preemptive war it was the logic of preemptive war another words the u.s. arrogating to itself the right to perceived threats and go to war against them even before the us has been attacked of course that would be a violation of the u.n. charter and international law but nonetheless it became a powerful logical explanation for what came later the question now with donald trump's national security strategy is does this predict where trump is really going in and i think it i think it does i mean he mentioned china twenty four times in the report mentions china twenty four times all of them in a bellicose aggressive way it mentions russia in a in
a bellicose and aggressive way there's no kind words for either china or russia iraq and north korea rogue states and of course non-state actors terrorism is the third dimension of the threat to america and so you have the trump administration sort of bringing together the america first or overarching sort of agit prop of the trump election campaign with this idea that the rise of china or the reemergence of russia now back on its feet means that america is receding that america is being humbled that america is the victim that america is threatened and so i think what trump has actually done is articulate the not just the possibility of a new cold war but the logic of a new cold war and thus it becomes almost official in washington and. things will follow from that ok well that's a very interesting takeaway mike what was your reaction to it because when it was
over a year ago i think it was when we still had candidate trump and he was. in the national interest i think his article was i mean this principled realism i still don't see anything principled and i don't see any really real is a minute here go ahead mike. hi peter nice to be with you i agree with some of what brian just said i do think that there is a tone in the report that is strong and that tries to push back and that push backs pushes back strongly against china russia north korea iran i agree with all that i do think however and by the way you're aware i'm not a supporter of president trying but i never was but i know who he is and i know why he got elected and the putting america first concept if i could just begin with that in my in my first comment because that is the centerpiece of the opening page and i think the title of the reporter at least the subtitle and i think frankly the way in which that concept is described is basically ok now i share some of your and brian's concerns about the tone toward certain countries that we can come back to
that but putting america first of course can be interpreted as these zero sum competition among nations or it can be interpreted as hero principles we're going to try to live by we expect others to live by them and if we can all do that then we can all prosper and at least in terms of the theory of the report at least in terms of the language that's on the paper i think that it's more the second that in fact there is an effort here to say we should be able to get along with other countries so some of the criticisms about the sort of generally negative tone of the report i don't really agree with that i do agree that the report is very tough on china and russia and north korea and iran ok let me read you a short fragment here and this is directly directed to russia and china these competitions russia and china require the united states to rethink the policies of the past two decades policies based on the assumption that in gauge human with rivals and their inclusion in the in international institutions and global commerce
will turn them into benign benign amazing actors and trustworthy partners for the most part this premise turned out to be false i mean this is really really remarkable it is you know it's not the international system it's the international . the system as it's perceived and constructed by the washington consensus and if the chinese and the russians don't want to play by our rules want you to rules they are rivals even adversaries like i pointed this language extremely arrogant because it doesn't it doesn't bring good policy foreign policy result for the united states and i would say put the world go ahead brian yes absolutely i am so i'm so glad that you read that particular part of the report because it says so much it's not just that that part of the report is not simply an attack on russia or china it's a repudiation of past u.s. policy or the perception of u.s. policy since the end of the soviet union when they're talking about going back
a couple decades we're talking about going back to the time of the collapse of the soviet union in the socialist bloc countries so trump is repudiating the past twenty five years well during the past twenty five years the united states sought to function as a unit a polar dominating power but still used multilateral institutions in other words kept the framework of multilateralism and the hallmark of american foreign policy at the conclusion of world war two and key to the construct of the post world war two world order that had the united states in charge but in a multilateral framework where different powers including its defeated enemies from world war two japan and germany had a place they had a place as junior partners where they were given access to markets etc rather than what happened after world war one trump i think is stepping back on a lot of levels of the abandonment of the paris climate treaty the rejection of t p p the rejection of almost anything that has to do with
a multilateral framework to bring up of the joint comprehensive planners trying to sabotage the iran nuclear arms deal we see in this document the us in america first it says america will be the dominant power we're no longer going to pretend. multi-lateralism is enough to keep china and russia and other countries in their place because they are rising and so america must put them back in their place and thus it will be by the by the exercise of american quote american threats american intimidation we see that at the u.n. today trump is telling the rest of the world you know if you vote that long way today on drusilla you're going to be punished that's not engage me at deaths that's bellicosity and using either military or the threats of military or economic aggression or sanctions as the way discipline of.