tv Going Underground RT February 10, 2018 4:30am-5:01am EST
hello and welcome to cross talk where all things are considered people of the pentagon recently released its new nuclear posture review its critics are stunned not only the use of nuclear weapons is now more thinkable but also the threshold for their use has been lowered dr strangelove would be proud is the world facing another danger as arms race. across talking the nuclear posture review i'm joined by my guest michael holland in washington he's a senior fellow at the brookings institution also in washington we have kevin camps he is a radioactive waste specialist beyond nucular and in london we cross to add real
because he is a foreign affairs consultant and analyst all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want i always appreciate kevin let me go to you first in washington you know i read the report quite thoroughly i was quite stunned as i said in the in the introduction i'll reach of my three takeaways here the report exaggerates exaggerates perceived threats to the u.s. number two it fuses conventional and nuclear war and pushes for the development of low yield nucular weapons i mean that's quite stunning if you look at the history of arms control and by the way it's going to cost about one point three trillion dollars what were your takeaways from the report kevin in washington. well i think your title for the show is very apt i mean dan ellsberg in his new book the doomsday machine confessions of a nuclear war planner said at the time that dr strangelove was released in the theaters in the early one nine hundred sixty s. that it was nonfiction so here we go again we're going to do this all over again a new arms race and that figure of a trillion three that's probably an underestimate anything that the pentagon
touches anything that the department of defense or department of energy touches the cost escalation factor should be referred to as going nuclear they often go over budget over schedule so what could we do with a trillion three in this country in the next thirty years infrastructure repairs paying off the national debt these are the kinds of things education social welfare that need to be taken care of well who is not a new arm who know who knows that actually maybe in more in the in the national interest than the national security even this new program we're going to go to michael michael you wrote an article for usa today trump's plan for nuclear weapons makes sense make your case real quick. well first of all it makes some sense i agree with kevin's concern about the money and in my article i did criticize the across the board modernization agenda which by the way is not new the president president obama intended more or less the same thing. and so and so in that regard i would like to see us prioritize things that we need for safety and reliability
versus things that we need just to modernize the entire force that the nuclear weapons do need to be safe and reliable and i think we need to be twenty one bomber as well because we can we can use that for conventional warfare of the kind we see in the middle east for example but i don't think we need to modernize the i.c.b.m. like as much as the pentagon believes and i don't think we need as much new capacity for a nuclear warhead production so just to be clear the usa today gave a more robust sounding title that i personally believe my my view is more mixed on the review there are some aspects to it i agree with others that i think are excessive it really london i mean i when reading the report of the you know we always say you know you don't think the unthinkable but this is thinking the unthinkable in actually making it possible when i'm saying first use of nuclear weapons under conditions against countries that do not have those kinds of weapons i mean that is really amazing ok and they throw in the cyber think ok so why one
year ago russia you know was tampering with the utility company in new england is the president the united states post the press a button then and then you find out of the fabricated fake story i mean i find this a trigger and this in this is what the nightmare of the nuclear age was all about is that who's got their their thumb on the button here i mean so somebody taxes impress structure and you use nuclear weapons is that rational go ahead. russian. my opinion if there's a precedent there's a person and for the very first star in the americas explicitly in. trying to block my ass and saying that it will use a nuclear response to. attacks it is a precedent so when you look at the language how you know it is created the structure i mean in the sense of. you know what sort of threats
america has obviously it is exaggerating the nuclear power cup abilities of of china are obviously this whole report is aimed at russia you shouldn't be. other way it is aimed at russia is from the very beginning and we should know that even though that many proppants of donald trump were. supportive though it's him saying he's the man who is facing obstacles in the white house he's trying to you know the deep state or whatever no he's the man in the house he's the man who is over there and even though that you know the whole american system is broken it is a fact that it is you know disproportionate it is this proportionate how can you use the language of this sort of language i mean you know threats to the vital interests of the united states its partners and allies vital vital interests
but what are these threats ok you know what kevin you know i mean one of the other things are you know it's it's really quite shocking is that using. this smaller weapons in their in their capacity to destroy i mean but if you're on the receiving end of even a. nuclear weapon half the strength of quarter of the strength of hiroshima but if you're on the receiving end of it you're not going to say well how should we respond because it was twenty five percent of the the the grade that had not nagasaki you don't you know one thinks that way no one thinks that way if you're. attacked with a nuclear weapon you are going to respond and you're going to throw everything you've got because that's an x. the stench will threat what do these people in the pentagon thinking and i want to talk about this guy keith payne about his article not in one nine hundred eighty i'll ask michael about that i'm sorry go ahead kevin well george shultz just days
ago said a nuclear weapon is a nuclear weapon so thresholds being crossed i mean i look at the report called nuclear famine by international physicians for the prevention of nuclear war a nobel peace prize winner that said if just one hundred nagasaki sized bombs were exchanged let's say between india and pakistan that was the case study it would cause a nuclear winter that would starve two billion human beings so these are not games to be played with abolition is where it's at the nobel peace prize last december went to the international campaign for the abolition of nuclear weapons and then have the survivors of the only explicit use of nuclear weapons in warfare from hiroshima and nagasaki we had better abolish these weapons before they had kennedy said that in sixty two kissinger said that ten years ago in an op ed to the wall street journal we are living on borrowed time ok michael again we have to remind our viewers that under international law your first use of nuclear weapons is
illegal ok unfortunately that wasn't even mentioned in the report ok i can point out one of the people apparently from what my research is kevin payne president of the national institute for public policy he was one of the drafters of this report and in one thousand nine hundred think was in foreign affairs he was to talking about winning in a winnable nucular war and i would like to quote a quote here where it could be limited to casualties could be limited to a quote approximately twenty million people quote a level compatible with national survival in recovery when in the world is this guy doing with this report. well secretary jim mattis the guy who ultimately authored it and let me explain what i think his thinking was i understand by the way i agree with a lot of the criticisms we're hearing here about where the state of play is between the nuclear superpowers today it feels like it's a throwback it's very regrettable this is where we are but there is a sense and with apologies to russian friends there is a sense that russia has been really throwing its weight around in the nuclear
domain violating the i.n.f. treaty i know we could debate whether that's true or not but i'm telling you the perception from the pentagon violating the i.n.f. treaty having some new concepts like escalate to deescalate whereby russia would use a few nuclear weapons early in a war and try to prevent. force that is you know you know michael that is and this is an area that is. the scenario those are scenarios coming out of the pentagon i can tell you russia of policy on use of nuclear weapons is very very clear we had russia's foreign minister come out and i will quote him entirely defensive scenarios and i'll give him there are three of them in response to an act of aggression against russia and or against our allies if nucular other types of mass destruction weapons are used and also third with the use of conventional arms but only in case our state's very existence would be in danger so i don't care what the pentagon says in its report that is russia's policy ok sorry to interrupt is going
to look it's ridiculous because the most recent international international institute of strategic saw these think based in london. published the assessment of this review saying that they don't think russia is stupid to use the nuclear weapons so i don't know what. pentagon is having this assumption or is trying to put trade or implement and you know persuade the public opinion you know the russians or the people who are running russia you know the barbarians the madman who was trying to subdue the whole world in fact the way around ok michael i interrupted you and you continue please. well we do see russian military exercises that envision early use of nuclear weapons we do see here is really how we actually only way in retaliation and escalation let's be clear about that that is their
military doc i don't think i don't i'm ok listen i like the doctrine i'm not convinced however that it would always guide russian behavior i want to get back to the world you're describing where the united states and russia are both very clear that they don't feel each other as adversaries and they don't envision needing these weapons against reading that right to work that's the world we should be reading that report is very adversarial i mean almost every few paragraphs it's very adversarial i mean i'm sorry michael but it was directed against the united states in china ok ten seconds before we go to the break go ahead michael. it was directed against russia and china you're right and i agree that it's an unfortunate state but i think it was brought a bond brought upon largely by perceived russian aggressiveness in this domain whether you agree with that perception or not that's what ok well so we're going to go to a break here but i'd like to point out to our viewers that it wasn't russia that
overthrew the legitimately elected government in kiev in february two thousand and fourteen after a short break we'll continue our discussion on the nuclear posture review with. the bond market will not crash and this time it will continue to go even lower and negative yields on various bonds will increase from the trillion dollars worth of. now the even more. dollars of negative yielding sovereign debt and we're going to go down the rabbit hole even further but it's certainly smells like what the panic cash withdrawal in places like china and the sell off in all these various markets and what the oil prices climbing higher. that we've got here.
and. have become blue that. we have children grow up playing. on the computer this war has somehow been to mystic hatred as entertainment to russia there's nothing funny about it is serious. nuclear weapons because russia are a good nuclear weapons with. the information. welcome back to cross like where all things are considered i'm peter beltre amount of discussing the nuclear posture review.
ok kevin i'd like to point out to our viewers you know this was very heated here but this is a very important topic of course michael did write something in usa today but it's gotten very little coverage in on the cable stations which i think is really an indication of just how. these kind of issues are taking that away from the public square because i think people should be talking about these things here having said that kevin it seems to me that there are some lessons being on learned here and we call that mad mass destruction and it seems to me the u.s. is and learning that all the major nuclear powers all understand that you know that's probably why they haven't been used ok since the first used by the united states at the end of the second world war it seems to me the u.s. reading this past year is moving away from that again thinking the thinkable go ahead kaput. well these are all weapons and here we are in the era of trump where you know christmas of two thousand and sixteen trump says make
a present ski flippantly let it be an arms race so you know no lessons are learned from history here it's fascinating how this goes back to world war two if you look at a book like ghar out peru it says the decision to use the atomic bomb a big part of the american decision to use atomic weapons in japan in august one thousand nine hundred five was to tell the soviet union where to get off that the united states was in charge little did the us know that the soviets were just four years away from their own nuclear weapon because they had infiltrated the manhattan project at los alamos and montréal they had spies everywhere getting that information and then with the hydrogen bomb it was an even quicker turnaround between the americans and the russians we have to get over this american russian chinese thing these are on the side of weapons we can wipe out our species as dan ellsberg warned in his book we're talking about in the late one nine hundred fifty s. the ability to kill six hundred million people in a short period of time those of the old days we're now talking about the ability to
wipe out in full scale nuclear war many billions of people very quickly and with nuclear winter that may take care of the rest of the human population so if we want to survive as a species we have to abolish these weapons it's as simple as that well i mean the united states is a member of the nonproliferation treaty and it is obligated to do that again that's not mentioned in the report least that i didn't see it a deal in let me let me go to you here i think there's something much broader going on here and i think this posture is really all about how the united states sees its you know polar moment with the end of the cold war shrinking that window is getting it's closing and i think it is lashing out it's threatening it's saying that the that russia and china are revisionist powers i have a hard time believing that both countries want to go back to the basic principles of the. did nations charter ok as i mentioned before the end of the program the united states trips around the world overturning governments involved in seven
different wars without any kind of united nations mandate and they say that russia and china are revisionist powers i mean that is like the pot calling the kettle black go ahead adrian london. this is this is simple orwellian double speak from america. i'm not talking about american people i mean i have many american friends. who are you know intelligent people when it comes to. the upper echelons of of american political sphere. get that sense and feeling that they are behaving like a spoiled brat who is dissatisfied with the fact that world is no longer looking towards them with the emphasis as it was before. the attacks on russia today with the attacks on russia as a whole as
a. teen or you know china it is emphasizing it is insecurity that. its values or its point of view can be a challenge and this is whole thing about move to polarity that you and i can you know go to the t.v. screen or whatever go to any country and get the source for ourselves to know the news and then assess them according to our knowledge and intellectual abilities but america doesn't want that and it's you know it's funny. to me as a grotesque as a person who was brought up in poland. knowing radio free europe radio liberty was the radio that you know our grandparents or my you know my my parents were listening you know with their friends in some places. far away from not being used by the communists i mean and. i know we have to today i lived in poland in the one
nine hundred eighty s. i remember all of that had a very very clearly. only remember that from from my view you know from my family's you know stories that you know they were gathering in some you know this place is going to be not all right the police will not get distracted here michael let me go to you i mean do you see any circumstances were the united states would resort to nucular weapons over some islands in the south china sea or poland i mean or ukraine excuse me no i don't however i can let me say one thing to frame a little bit of where this is coming from i understand why people who see donald trump and some of his behavior and some of his rhetoric would think of this in one way i want to underscore it was secretary of defense jim battles of all of this document obviously it was we all know we are now doing the topic to the world about donald trump it was not about because those are going to be very. very long go
ahead you are very long and your comment going to great in my head my comment is secretary of defense to matt is a very thoughtful guy and he's not going to use or recommend the use of nuclear weapons cavalierly and he does perceive a strong russian assertiveness in the nuclear zone well that's ok he thinks he might go back again ok ok not because they. hang on here michael you know it's madness is madness bluffing is just a bluff then. is this whole document a bluff to scare people it's partly it was that no but it's partly psychological it is partly to point out to russia that if they're going to be threatening with exercises with buzzing aircraft with doctrines or concepts on who to dion who has border and recently who is on the order michael america's border on that on the eastern seaboard of california is out but it's not the border you're talking about you know my views on ok really i mean you know my views on nato expansion i think it's gone far enough i agree with your concern that we need
a new security architecture for eastern europe i hear your point on that issue but nonetheless it's russia that's buzzing nato airplanes that's attack it whether it's nato arab league perceives it and that's what i was saying russia's borders you know if the russian planes had that on the same base as a regular basis over new york what do you think that response would be outrage ok we've already had that kevin let me go to you here is there going to be a new arms race here because you know what the u.s. this kind of document is what the third report this year about its posture it's all military it's all force it's all about head gemini ok it is and you know because of the hostility that comes out of washington towards beijing towards the moscow they will react they want is a u.s. one an arms race then they'll get one ok what good does that do for the world go ahead kevin right it will be an arms race trump said let it be an arms race let's spend a trillion three or more you know look how close we came and you mentioned the buzzing of borders look at the cuban missile crisis if not for vassily on
a soviet sub voting against launch of a nuclear tipped torpedo that the u.s. did not even know was there we we could have wiped out the human race in october of one nine hundred sixty two the man who saved the world it happened again in one thousand nine hundred three with stanislav petroff a soviet nuclear commander who refused. believe the glitch in the computer that mistook a sunrise for a nuclear watch by the united states we have played with fire for seventy five years with these nuclear weapons and if we continue to do this it's going to be the end of our species that's what beatrice fan of the international campaign for the abolition of nuclear weapons warned just a couple months ago at the nobel prize ceremony we either abolish these weapons or they will abolish us that's what's at stake here. one of the things that if we get these lower grade weapons don't you think that's going to entice countries for
example south korea japan and saudi arabia i mean if you can play with little nukes ok that's not so bad ok i mean it what is it normalizes nucular weapons for a second tier powers i mean how does that make the world safer i can understand it and maybe brazil and you know argentina will get in the act to i mean the united states has said a positive precedent the only country in the world to ever use nuclear weapons against a civilian population a country that didn't have those weapons you're going backwards adrian go ahead i mean. with the recent move america just literally. in the food because as you've said it's open opportunities for other countries to you know to say look if the americans upgrading themselves what of all the us there's no you know the safety of any more talking about you know north korea and attacking north
korea with the nukes what doesn't mean many nukes it's still a nuke is a still nuclear weapon so. people over there so. i will never you know before this motion i'm strongly against using a type of nuclear weapons because you've mentioned you know we were less. i mean you know my generation had the lesson from the hiroshima nagasaki so i don't want to see people in the career my contemporaries being you know so much devastated as the japanese where. time so i don't believe and you know it's posing one serious question if america wants to lead the world what does it says their moves their recent move moves and you know the actions. here i want to be fair i want to give michael the last word here michael maybe maybe the silver lining in all
this is that maybe russia china and the united states can actually sit down and maybe start thinking about a new architecture for the use of these weapons may be going head michael. yeah i hope so peter i'm hopeful that we're actually at the worst of it now or maybe even coming out of it and i do agree with president trump's inherent instinct that u.s. russia relations should not be so bad and that we need a new approach unfortunately as you know we're still bogged down in the two thousand and sixteen election debate here so it's sort of impossible the united states right now to move beyond that at the moment but i am hopeful that we're going to be able to move out of that on the tactical on the issue of the low yield nuclear weapon i think you are exactly right peter earlier when you said there really is no meaningful distinction we shouldn't think these weapons are somehow more usable again if i want to interpret for you what i believe the pentagon views as the reason for doing this they see that russia has a lot of tactical nuclear weapons they don't want russia to get the sense that somehow only russia can engage in this kind of coercive activity and therefore want
to push back on that on the hopeful that one can move on that last point there we've run out of time gentlemen many thanks to my guests in washington and in london and thanks to our viewers for watching us here are to see you next time and remember crosstalk rules. in american interest to not see any russians die in terrorist attacks as it is in russian interest to prevent any terrorist attacks in the united states or elsewhere in the world so i don't think there's any dispute on that in congress and i think maybe some of the posturing is frankly political as opposed to substantive. in america a college degree requires a great deal. paying a decade's long debt. studying so hard it requires strong.
going through humiliation to enter an elite society. and parching to death sometimes quite literally. want other true colors of universities in the us. because or this is their kaiser report let's talk about the overall economy how's it doing max we're talking about the g.d.p. now forecast atlanta office of the federal reserve predicting a five point four percent g.d.p. in q one two thousand and eighteen preston j. byrne responds wow these are reagan early one nine hundred eighty s.
numbers that's a lot of growth brought on by a policy is that would stimulate growth so what is the opposition going to say to try to make this sound bad i don't know well i imagine your guess from the second half is going to say the atlanta fed has always had an outlier saying wow the economy is booming and in fact they'll have to revise it down to like two or three percent right now they're saying it's five point four percent it could just be a parting gift for janet yellen who was the chairwoman of the federal reserve i can pull up my collar in honor of her you know as she can or something i have no idea but she does seem to prefer putting her little collars up not and concerts she wears pantsuits again with the pantsuits look all this growth is also being reflected in the rising ills of the bond market or falling prices which is an
indication of inflation and of course that would put the kobayashi on a thirty eight year old bond the bull market and that brings all kinds of new wrinkles and twists and turns to the stock and bond markets of course the markets have been kind of tumbling relative to what they're used to they're not real tumbles of the one nine hundred eighty seven magnitude that you're. still which would be a six thousand point drop but you know markets or it's certainly the media gets quite hysterical when it falls at two hundred two hundred points which is fraction of a percent so when the markets have responded negatively to like the positive job numbers that also came out last week the g.d.p. forecasts being forecast higher all of these you know bonuses that major corporations are giving their employees the tax cuts those were all priced in last year and now they're kind of i guess some say seeing inflation on the horizon and
that this is going to be negative for bonds and markets you know wall street and main street time to go at odds with each other what's good for one is usually not good for the other and if wall street's going to take a breather with rising rates and falling stock and bond prices that would generally mean rising relative strength in wages so those are the voters that put this guy in office back in twenty sixteen and they'll do it again in two thousand and twenty if wages are going up twenty eighteen is a little bit more important than midterm elections coming up to september this november so we'll see what happens there but here's another tweet regarding the markets and the economy and this is real another five billion dollars into last night brings january total to seventy eight point six billion dollars which destroys all time monthly flow record by eighteen billion.