in the united states, people did not realize it until recently. in my view, chinese fellows associations got some extra dollars, i think that the chinese united front activity in american, australian and taiwan and japanese universities are much bigger than they were a few years ago and much bigger than we thought but not as dramatic as what we were saying, in the united states we have to be careful because of civil liberties but we need to be aware. my view is that universities should be aware of it and police themselves. the united states, the university of gorgetown, there is very little japanese press out there but the same thing is happening in japan, there have been problems with chinese professors in japanese universities had gone home for break and had their families had pressure. there is a lot of pressure on japanese universities. i think that its one of those issues where we should be comparing notes, i do not think that we should overreact. i like to have students from chiern, they are dynamic and interested -- china, they are dynamic

of the largest per capita investors in the united states. butountry may not be big, we support directly and indirectly almost one million jobs in the united states. some key executives of the companies that provides these jobs are also here with me at this visit. the same time, the united states is our most important for an employer, and many u.s. companies play a vital role in providing investment and creating jobs in sweden. president trump and i have discussed how our nations can support jobs and growth. it is a crucial issue for sweden. that means embracing new, sustainable technologies which permit our economy to grow at the same time reducing emissions , and also how we can secure good jobs in a labor market constantly changing do to automation and ditch totalization. -- digitalization. sweden and the united states are two of the most innovative economies in the world come and we see great opportunities ahead. is built onerity cooperation, competitiveness, and free trade, and i am convinced that increase tariffs will hurt us all in the

the costs of these there are no logical changes and that i guess led some states in the united states to vote for mr trump because they felt left behind when we have to do is to prove globalization is not the problem that innovation is the key is adding value is seen glued. everyone into. the benefits of trade and that's why would they get a full chapter to small and medium enterprises in the c c p t p p let me ask you about that precisely because they are a lot of people that are very concerned that this trade agreement is just yet another one that is going to. work in favor of big business at the expense of the little man of the working class of the middle class of small and medium sized businesses as well why should they believe that this new trade agreement is different well because i think that there are there is. enough. into it to ensure that women intrapreneur as for example will have a chance to have access to credit to have access to marketing to have access. to the. ability to export to all of the markets because there is a clear and mandatory. elements in the agreement to

the united states. later on it says nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law. nor deny to any person, that's the critical frisk him within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the loss. mae ngai, why is this a landmark case? >> a lot of people assumed the 14th amendment applies to citizens but i think it applies to persons it means every person living territorially in the united states is protected by the constitution. that's huge because that really is an equal rights provision. >> this program if you're a regular watcher of this series we saw our first one you know the best part about it is your interaction. in 20 minutes will be take your phone calls around the country. we also have twitter feed with the handle landmark cases or hashtag landmark cases and we've only got a a robust conversatin going on on c-span's facebook page and you're welcome to join any of those as a way to connecting with our guests and being part of the conversation. we

states ad united states, again, because these leaders are so important. on a short-term basis, having these leaders here gives us opportunity to talk about things that are very important, countering terrorism, managingth refugee crisis, for example, or even responding to disaster relief because these people are already here. so if that's a leader or exchange student, and if it's a student of course they're getting exposed to american values. we mentioned human rights, democracy, rule of law. free speech is another one. we're talking about countering aggressive regimes. getting the opportunity to be able to speak and gather freely. and i know you're a senator also -- center on technology. open and free data flows and cross-border communications. i think that's really important. thank you. >> if i could ask ms. royce on the summer work travel program, the j1 visas. 17 senators sent a letter to secretary tillerson last summer in regards to the importance of the continuation of that program. it's been under concern. i can just give you one example. i have tal

torucial moment of decision the united states. it was that inevitable, but that was the chohoice we made. so in 1893, at the behest of sugar growers in hawaii, the united states promoted the overthrow of the hawaiian monarchy. the idea was hawaii would admittedly become part of the united states. they did not happen because there was a change of presidency in washington and the new president, grover cleveland,, hated that intervention and did not want to take hawaii in. five years later in 1898 when grover cleveland was gone, the spanish-american war broke out. the united states became interested in the pacific because we destroyed the spanish fleet in the philippines that we decided we should take the philippines for ourselves. we became interested in the china market. --s was a real, fantasticic for american business. american press was full of stories about how many nails we could sell in china for bigger the chinese to use nails. how much cotton we could sell. how much beef we could sell if we could get the chinese to eat beef

owed the united states $2 million. the united states tried for 220 years to get that money back and decided to go to war in 1846. as compensation for those debts, the name of that compensation as california, utah, nevada, new mexico, part of oklahoma, and basically 500,000 square miles of mexican territory. this is not the way, when the united states did this, it was not acting as a rogue imperial power, it was acting as what responsible states did that is because the old world order gave them the right of conquest. states had another right. if they had the right to go to work, they had the rate to threaten to go to war. this is incredibly important because it undergoes the practice that we call gunboat diplomacy. as many of you know, in the 19th century, japan was excluded, excuse me was secluded and excluded with the exception of the dutch, twice a year from trading with japan. the united states and other western powers were very upset, they claimed japanan was violating its obligation to engage in legal commerce and

in the united states is only seven percent so you can see that just because the united states is just such in the market with three hundred twenty million customers mostly producing everything it needs by itself you can wage a trade war if you insist on it of course there will be always people suffering in the united states but it will not be the majority for example germany never could be made to trade it would kill the whole economy and that's not true for the united states and that's exactly the reason why is not the first president to start a trade war i mean the same. and of course it backfired as clued said. in the end jobs were lost and gained but you know. what happened regen is still very popular and that's exactly the nose that physically economy it's just nonsense but politically for the united states it's always a good idea for a president to start a trade will i know you can count on time stating it will i want to come back a bit later to more on the economic effects but let's look at a second set of potential effects of all of this goodness something that was hotter ment

they've enhanced united states own forces. above all we remain united in a capital in jerusalem which will be the ultimate garantor for a peaceful and democratic jewish state. i won't deny -- [applause] >> i won't deny in times like this with anti-semitism on the rise and iran emboldened, with the path for israel secure at home and peace with neighbors may seem elusive and sometimes seems impossible. we have to look at the hope that have driven our two countries, that justice will prevail over evil, that truth will triumph over bigotry. that we can unite in common cause in advance of human democracy and peace. that theodore said if you will it, it is no dream. nearly 70 years later, his words ring true. the will that drove those first pioneers to the desert, who turned sand into thriving fields, who translated their dreams into a modern day israel that recalls the past while embracing the future, these are the values we cling to today. as we prepare to celebrate israel's 70th anniversary, it is you who kept the shared values,

states isn't due that i thought you know the united states is trying to give sovereignty to iraq and doesn't even listen to its own and the the political system that it actually imposed you know shouldn't isn't it time for the u.s. to stop quote unquote helping the iraqis go ahead chris. well i think that i mean for a president bush campaign we were going to have nation building then we had nation building on steroids i mean but i think you'd be fair to look back at that but i think the biggest issues with the post with iraq was not so much the the initial invasion but it was all of the post-war activities whether it was the disagreement between the pentagon and the ministration over troop levels decommissioning the iraqi military and all and frankly just the post-war governance i think that's where the problems had if iraq was a flourishing democracy today i think maybe we'd be looking at it differently but i think it's more the way that it turned out that's causing this issues but i do want to say it's a very long complex history i don't disagree at all with the the contradictory f

states would no longer have reason to keep its bases in south korea and go all of the united states of the deep state of the american establishment east get to keep those troops in bases in south korea they're not there so much against north korea but against china and it's a huge footprint it's also called the it's also cost to russia's far east and so there's my colleagues have said here before the deep state is very much against this to in the me still have a very good chance to have that council that mean that it's very interesting here even though mark the thing is the dilemma that faces the deep state is it. if there is an outcome in the hypothetical. on the korean peninsula with the initiative on the side of the koreans that sends a message to the entire region the japanese are going to say oh so what conditions in which you withdraw from your troops from from japan the philippines we're going to have taiwan see it is a dilemma a domino effect a domino effect but you know the thing is is that you know i always when i used to teach european history is that you know why did the

weapons than the united states does just the right now united states is talking about spending one point two trillion dollars over the thirty years to try to develop new tactical low yield will know the one point two trillion is for the whole thing and it's mostly for the you know the newer shiny or versions of the same old same old what was remarkable in the russian side is putin's speech with a level of presidential nuclear saber rattling that we really haven't seen maybe ever in the nuclear age but certainly not since khrushchev. with these videos of weapons after weapon after weapon now none of those with perhaps one exception i would argue pose any new fundamental threats to the strategic balance there fundamentally the united states and russia are have been for decades to scorpions in a bottle each capable of destroying the other but only at the price of being destroyed itself and putin said well these weapons will overcome u.s. missile defenses u.s. missile defenses were totally ineffective against russian forces already so they'll be more effective against russian forces so it re

united states. in the next year, russia will continue to use propaganda, social media, false flag personas, sympathetic spokesman -- sympathetic spokesmen and other means of influence to try to build on its wide range of disruptive operations. we expect russian influence efforts to continue in other locations, as well. for example, we assess russian aggression in the ukraine will persist, even as we seek to bols -- bolster ukraine's ability to protect itself. let me turn to the final plan -- regional plan that i plan to talk about today, the middle east and north africa. this region will be character rides by political turmoil, economic fragility and civil and proxy wars in the coming year. iran will become the most prom -- will remain the most prominent state sponsor of terrorism and adversary in the middle east. its provocative and assertive behavior increases the potential for escalatory actions especially in iraq, syria, and yemen that threatens u.s. forces and allies in the region. turkey is se

the united states interest, and i think some do, if you think that the united states right now for our own interests should be involved in the civil war in yemen being led by saudi arabia, then members of the united states senate should have the courage to vote for u.s.n participation in that war. nothing more complicated than that you want to come to the floor of the senate, take the case why you think it is good public policy for us to be involved in that civil war in yemen, come to the floor and oppose our resolution. but what i hope very much that we will not see today is the tabling of this motion, and the refusal by members of the senate to vote up or down as to whether or not we wish to continue aiding saudi arabia in this humanitarian disaster. if you believe, as i do, that we should not get sucked into the civil w war, which is already caused so much human suffering, please vote against tabling the motion to discharge, and vote with us on final passage. if you believe that the united states should continue to assist saudi arabia in this war, i urge you to have the courage to t

is stored communications act limited to the united states. of the government wants to use the act to unilaterally reach into a foreign land to search import private customer correspondence physically stored in a digital computer is protected by foreign law. that is a scenario -- >> correct me if it is incorrect, but we are told until this very case microsoft was complying with these disclosure orders. this case is the first time it objected. but there were past efforts of the same kind and microsoft disclosed the contents of the communications. is that so? >> yes your honor. i want to make sure the court understands this is a new phenomenon. this whole notion of crowd storage and another -- cloud storage in another country. we did not do it until 2010. so the fact that we analyzed our legal obligations and realized this is actually annexed next her territorial act unauthorized by the united states government. the fact that we were sober-minded against it -- about it should not be held against us. are assuming the answer to the question. the g

fold and made them a more reliable partner for the united states from the united states point of view mr chang and what would you like to see the united states do with this opportunity that's been presented to them from the south koreans especially after you know the last year of heightened tensions that we've had would this not be a wasted opportunity if nothing was done. well there's very little that can be done i mean from the u.s. political side it doesn't matter if it's donald trump or another president any president who allowed a nuclear north korea to have nuclear capabilities against the united states would be voted out of office and probably along with his party so that's just not something that can happen politically the issue here is that the u.s. should be working with china and russia japan south korea and saying you know even if they don't have six party talks let's get it together and have a unified position what is it that we need to do i'm willing to take our troops out of south korea if this is helps china come to terms with taking care of the d.p. r. k. and by that

states, of attacking the united states. threats like al qaeda or isis. and on that point, the best evidence we have suggests their involvement in yemen is arguably undermined our fight against isis. the state department's most recent study, its most recent country reports on terrorism says that the -- which, by the way, happens to be the authority on that subject for congress and the american people -- it says that we have inadvertently strengthened isis by killing off its antagonists, the houthis. this just reinforces the forc forceical character that they have the potential to undertake. we bomb with one hand. we give humanitarian aid with the other hand. we whack at terrorists from one group and another springs up in its place. defenders of our efforts in this war in yemen often claim that the real reason we're fighting the houthis is because they are a proxy for iran, which is the true threat to our nation and to the world. this would be perhaps a reasonable rationale but there are conflicting reports about the houthis

of the united states. not counting the mexico side. so there is no question that a new modern nafta with more efficiency at the border, more con activity can create a lot more jobs and can make us more productive compared to others in the world. >> eric, and a little bit of time you have left, can you talk about what canada's demands are and where might it come off the rails in the canadian standpoint in terms of dispute resolution commentary, those are a couple of the areas where there's been some conflict, that there may be other areas in terms of canada. >> those are two of the most important areas. the interesting thing about this is the start new issues. these are issues we have to deal with for the first time. this gives our negotiating partners another button and to expand in some cases the demands, that they are real and it's interesting in washington oftentimes we think we are the only ones, we in the united states are the only ones with interesting demands and we have to remember negotiation part

it is certainly correct from the russian point of view that the united states ripped up the any ballistic missile treaty i regretted that i opposed to actually my first book was on why the missile treaty was a still a good thing for us. obviously the book to deal with the day was not. was not a. now honestly u.s. missile defenses have first approximation no capability against russian nuclear forces we have about fifty it at that doesn't really matter you know they're right it's all about the perceptions of the west and sas and it's about the perception of what it what direction it may be going in the future because it's only on mars. long long in the future. so as i say we do need to regulate these things and we do need to understand each other's perspectives as you were saying one of the crucial moments in the cuban missile crisis came when there were two communications from the soviet side. almost at the same time one of them very threatening and angry and one of them much more. compromising and fortunately for the world one of kennedy's staffers was a former ambassador to new khrushche

states needs it at foggy bottom go ahead morgan well in terms of the united states needs or not that's open for debate i agree with your former speaker that it's what president trump once i think president trump is very much of the mind set of being a proactive problem solver and i think you can make the argument that if you look back through generations and generations of diplomats all being the sort of prototypical diplomatic figure not making waves and you can say sort of. or the world is in the north korea isn't any closer to being resolved you know iran deal we can talk about that and you know what i want to get let me as an ordinary me yes i let me let me ask you something real quick because i think it's kind of important that i absolutely agree with you are you serve at the pleasure of the president absolutely ok however i think it's all fair to say and it looks like you guys are all pretty much republicans conservative i don't necessarily dead if i with the party but you know and it's not an insult donald trump is not. very knowledgeable about world affairs ok i mean and i some

of the united states, not counting the mexico side. so there's no question that a new modern nafta with more efficiency at the border, with more connectivity, can create a lot more jobs and can make us more productive compared to others in the world. >> eric, in the little bit of time that we have left, can you talk a little bit about what canada's demands are and where might it come off the rails from the canadian standpoint in terms of dispute resolution, dairy, i think those are a couple of the areas where there's been some real conflict but there may be other areas in terms of canada. >> well, those definitely are two of the most important areas. i would also add cultural reservations. the interesting thing about this is that these aren't new issues. these are actually issues we had to deal with the first time and this gives our negotiating partners another bite at this apple and to have actually expanded in some cases the demands. but they are real and it's interesting in washington, oftentimes we think we are the only ones, we in

the united states stands in solidarity with great britain. the united states believes that russia is responsible for the attack on two people in the united kingdom using a military grade nerve agent. dozens of civilians and first responders were also exposed. the police officer was the first to arrive on the scene. he remains hospitalized in serious conditions. i thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of this atrocious crime. no two nations enjoy stronger bond than that of the united states and the united kingdom. it is truly a special relationship. when our friends in great britain face a challenge, the united states will always be there for them, always. alone, russia's crime is worthy of this counsel's action. this is not an isolated it incident. the assassination attempt as part of an alarming increase in the use of chemical weapons. last year, the north korean regime use the nerve agent to publicly assassinate kim jong-un's brother in a malaysian airport. in syria the assad regime continues to kill its own people with chemical weapon

we reserve the right for there to any russian retaliation against the united states and we are reading this we are reviewing it and will respond accordingly i want to remind you that there is no justification for the russian response and i'm not trying to understand you you guys threw out sixty of their people we don't see this as a diplomatic tit for tat the american diplomats who are being expelled are not. spies under diplomatic cover i am saying that they work for the u.s. state department they are our colleagues who have served there with great distinction but you but you're saying that these are your your action was justified there is wasn't because these people aren't the equivalent to any legs i think we're forgetting what got us to this place well now are dodging questions about whether the expelled u.s. diplomats were spies or not and then reporters pushed again to understand why the state department considers moscow's actions to be wrong and it seems that washington is forcing moscow to take responsibility and humbly accept punishment for a crime that there is no evidence fo

have not heard, applies in every state in the united states. i'm not going to tell colorado or california or someone else that the possession of marijuana is legal under united states law. i don't think it is healthy, either. if i were sick, i would not suggest you take marijuana to cure yourself. inot sure it is proven'm to be -- i'm not sure it is proven to be particularly helpful. that is where we are on that. i've sent out a memo that reversed the memorandum of the department of justice. i believe it is a rule of law question. i think the cole memoranda basically conceded and was perceived to have conceded at least that states have the ability to determine marijuana policy in their states and limited in was very effect. i think that was incorrect legally. we simply withdrew the memoranda. we tell our u.s. attorneys to use your resources you feel best. they have not been walking small marijuana cases before, they will not be working them now. if it comes up as part of a bigger case, criminal enterprise, and not being done on federal land, pa

may god bless you, israel and the united states. [applause] ♪ today is the highlight of the policy conference and one of the most important days of this year fothe yearfor the u.s. israel relationship. before you leave for capitol hill please check your schedule on the application to confirm your appointment time and location. updated information is all availablalsoavailable on monitot the convention center. buses will leave immediately following the session and will drop you off at garfield circle. circle. this is returning to the center will pick up from peace circle and run until 3:45. house offices are located on the south side of the hill. senate offices were located on the north side of capitol hill in the russell, dirksen and ha f buildings. each building on capitol hill has multiple entrances with plenty of staff. look for people wearing blue caps and jackets to guide you through security. before you start your meeting you should review the talking points and lobbying materials and be sure to follow the group leader who wi

states from the nuclear agreement, putting the united states as the outlier where we should be putting our attention on iran. this is reflected in the gallup polls showing that the global opinion towards the united states has dropped dramatically. we see the president embracing oppressive leaders around the world, such as the leader of russia, china, turkey, egypt, and embracing the autocratic practices of the president of the philippines and then he attacks our closest allies, calling into question the transatlantic partnership. perhaps more than anything else, this administration has trampled on america's values. as secretary tillerson said early in this administration, america's interest will no longer be dictated by our values. well that is not what the trademark of america is about. it is about our values. the president has questioned over and over again universally what america stands for when he gave space to hate in his response to charlottesville, when he implies that people that come to our country of certain religion or races are less favored than others, when he suggests th

that got a lot of attention in the united states. can i also ask you both when you talked about the threat from weapons of mass distraction you talked about sarah and gas in syria but no mention of chlorine gas attacks in syria which we know are happening almost regularly. is that something we consider a weapon of mass distraction? how are we responding to that? >> we do consider that a weapon of mass distraction. probably more use of chlorine than sarah and. we are assessing this most recent attack. we do not have full information yet relative to that. each side is blaming the other. we don't have the assessments made yet but we are concerned about this and i can come as you saw the president's response to the attack last year. this is something that is under serious discussion as we speak. again, something that needs to be discussed in classified session. >> i remember the president's response last year and that is why i raise it. given the serious humanitarian conditions that are happening in syria for us to allow those weapons of

david: south korea and the united states are going directly into north korea. what is the role of china in the discussions? china has been: a key ally with the united states in imposing sanctions on north korea. china has gone along with all the other united states resolutions, imposing sanctions and penalties on north korea. sometimes china does not comply. by and large, they have reduced their aid to north korea. china will be a key player and in what everle negotiations produce. one of the key concerns that north korea has -- is the united states going to invade, along with south korea and north korea, if they were to give up their nuclear weapons? from chinauarantees and possibly russia in protecting and defending north korea were toh ever disarm nuclear weapons. insistedm jong-un has on the security of north korea. if there was a deal to be made on china, what would be the guarantees? professor locke: it is so important negotiations -- there are so many issues that have to be resolved. it will require the participation of japan, south korea, russia, china,

the only two no votes were the united states and israel. [applause] ambassador haley: but i always say, quality is more than quantity. [laughter] ambassador haley: shortly after the 2016 election, president-elect donald trump called me to talk to me about serving in his administration. we had a meeting at trump tower and we had good discussions about a variety of issues. long story short, his team called me a couple of days later and said he would like me to serve as ambassador to the united nations. [applause] ambassador haley: i said, i'm a governor, i don't know anything about the united nations. we went back and forth on a few things. the clincher was when i told the the president,- you know, i will not be a wallflower or a talking head. i have to be able to say what i think. [applause] ambassador haley: without any hesitation, president trump said, that's exactly why i want you to do this. [applause] ambassador haley: president trump has been true to his word, and i think i have, too. [applause] ambassador haley: some of you might have

states it has somewhat relates to the united states and also. a reform relationship with cuba with state ok is imperative if the united states is to restructure it not american policy. it says that's wrong will build his calculations on the assumption that if his toss the reforms normalize ties within us as of america which again will foreign investments more cash into the country booming tourism however two things have changed recently first of all the u.s. seems to be reversing the iraq with the husband's thoughts and the obama second venezuela which was the main financer back a full cuba is no longer provided significant assistance where does this live live live cuba. let me start by correcting two things had peter said experts have been predicting the collapse of the q an economy for years and here i am again when the saying a new prediction that hasn't happened so i don't think it will happen secondly guess. who was participating in these helical and process as a matter of fact have the members of the national assembly that is going to be e

moderate opposition has about a year to go so if the united states and its allies are able to. put more energy into them more funds and so forth maybe a year maybe a year and a half more so they will try to use that time to destabilize here as much as possible with those resources that they still have left now one should come on to the comparison between john bolton and kissinger and kerry kissinger and resist where known as foreign policy intellectuals john bolton is surely not he is a hard line diplomat. who like so it was. i don't know if you know i don't want is. a rapidly running out and i simply said. with him but that he is a hard line military you stick with a aggressive diplomat who is not an academic the way that a lot of the stones were. only when kennedy made khrushchev kennedy's response was negotiate what's mine is mine what's yours is negotiable mark i want to go to you because you brought this up a number of times since the election we have the u.s. state department putting pressure on the europeans pretty germany for the. north stream to pipeline now we have th

the right of the united stas, the united states has rights to dede matte witithi the united stas.s. that icacalled sovereignty. i i make the decion within the overeignty of nezuela. i several times did what toiked get president bush to meet with resident chavez. when president obama was recently in power, he went to trinidad and tobago, and then we had a meeting with him and with chavez trying to create the conditions for the united statesvevevevevevevevevevevevev relationship with venezuela. but it seems to me that it's not possible. there's a certain irrationality at the u.s.tatate department that doesn't want to negotiate eace in venezuela. but we need to understand that as centralmemecaca grows, it's going to prove the economic situation generally. no one wants to see democracy at risk anywhere in the world, and that is why i regret that there's not understanding on ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctc. amy: the u.s. c.i.a., u.s. government, is well known to have been involved in the 1964 coup in do you see enough evidence of that, both in the ouster of president dilma rouse you have

the united states remains prepared to act if we must. washington's envoy uses the floor of the un security council to deliver an aggressive message threatening to strike the syrian government. know the news britain's prime minister is. to to give a statement on the poisoning of a former russian spy in the united kingdom it follows a meeting of the national security council as the media and political frenzy over the case continues. also as the russian defense ministry releases the first images of its latest missile systems are to get exclusive access behind the scenes. great to have you with us this hour my name is neil harvey this is r.t. internet. the un security council which was supposed to be focusing on relief efforts for war ravaged ghouta in syria has this and that into threats the u.s. envoy has warned that washington is ready to strike the syrian government we also warn any nation that is determined to impose its world through chemical attacks and any human suffering most especially the outlaw syrian regime the united states rem

states i guess your big investment is to buy stock in companies in the united states to help create jobs we have become good friends in a very short period of time. i was in saudi arabia in may and bringing back hundreds of billions of dollars into the united states and they understand that and some of the things that have improved and are under construction will be delivered very soon but if you look in terms of dollars $3,000,000.533 million, $525 million, $880 million, $645 million. $6,000,000,000.889million, 63 million for various artillery so the things that we are now working on will be started with construction and delivered that system of $13 billion you can see their pledge $3.8 billion new vehicles cash of $1.2 billion the poseidon and what it does that creates many jobs, over 20000 jobs in the united states. making the best equipment in the world. nobody even close in saudi arabia is buying this equipment people are at work making the equipment not only for us because we are getting a 700 million-dollar proposal and that is a lot for you guys but 700 million-dollar plan a

intention of the united states government is. bellatrix still there are some that we are ahead about. less than one are igor soldo to his means that some. yes a lot of. it is where it was done a drama that ministration it's up salute to clear though that right now i think it's remarks differ and as such on changes in american educated dogs american paul and foreign policy in syria and the name in the middle is ice in caracas will react. different in different way at what's reacted in during the shah of iran. they are azhar why because and you know using arguments. for chemical weapons using and so on it doesn't work today and your time. position will go will be on the. depression syrian army we hear about violation of international law abiding chemical attacks and so on now it doesn't work i think that different situation we are facing today and i think all sides should calm and this situation from. a current events not that that was previously the way you talk about it in good current events with all my respect with so much as o

states remains a question there's a huge military presence by the united states in south korea and all eyes are on the negotiations that are taking place the world is anticipating and hopeful about the possibility of peace but what role the usa will play in antagonizing or intensifying the conflict remains in question. we're now joined by gregory who's a board member of the korea policy institute thanks for being with us here on r.t. international. so we've gone from threats of all out war to north korea apparently offering to freeze its nuclear activity how much of a breakthrough actually is this. of course it's really early and at this point in time i don't have a lot of information about the details of the dialogue between the south and north korean delegations but what we've heard so far very promising indeed but everything hinges on the attitude of the united states so a few days ago that case you know the north korean news agency issued a statement saying that it's always been in favor of resolving issues through dialogue and peaceful negotiations but. it's also its belief that t

states and its possible advantage to the united states so i think that the president is going to stand firmly against governments that are going to try to meddle in our elections certainly or any governments that are going to try to meddle with us economically or any governments that are going to try unfair trade practices against the united states certainly any sorts of crimes of war or nuclear threat are going to be met swiftly and abruptly by this president he is fearless in that and he's made that clear but on the other hand if they can if there is a place for us to negotiate even with governments as rogue and ridiculous as north korea the president is going to try to stand on the side of united states and eliminate that nuclear threat and i think that's what any president of any country should always be doing for their own country it's just that it's been a long time since america had a president that cared more about america than they did about foreign nations and that's why you can dog do grown prince mohammed bin solomon in saudi arabia when trump surely knows the fifteen of th

is this a threat the united states should take seriously? >> it is. u.s. intelligence analysts are watching the missile very closely. this is fire power he's been talking about for weeks. tonight, the missile threat has taken a step forward. it is powerful, provocative and tonight it is on public display. vladimir putin's latest threat to america is this intercontinental ballistic missile, named satan 2 for the deadly force. it was rolled out by russia in hi-definition. putin says it has no limitations on distance, capable of reaching the united states. >> translator: it is capable of attacking targets via the north and south pole. it is a formidable weapon. no system, not even missile defense systems are an obstacle for it due to the characteristics. >> reporter: it can carry 16 nuclear warheads, enough to wipe out texas. today's dramatic test firing, which was meant to send a signal to the u.s. comes on the heels of putin's grandiose presentation of other weapons systems earlier this month, including a cruise missile, which can fly low to the ground, wea

there is a lot more about the united states. about a year ago, jd vance, he had a very successful book, elegy," he was here. let's listen to what he had to say. [begin video clip] had at happened was i andessor named amy chua "this is a really interesting story, you're making interesting arguments, you aould consider publishing book." think, whatever -- i will about it. a few months later, i was still in law school, she connected me with friends of hers in the publishing industry and one thing led to another. i had a book deal. [end video clip] brian: why did you recognize his story as being significant? amy: i am so proud of him. it looks like we have nothing in common superficially. i'm a chinese immigrant, my parents were graduate students, he is from a poor family, his mother was an addict but we have a lot in common. we are both from the midwest, we were sort of outsiders. i grew up, not poor, but we only went to a restaurant once a year. my dad wore the same. shoes for eight years. they were thrifty immigrants without much

that the united states has to come out with all the chips. what is the reality? and are people in the u.s., important people who have to sign off and agreed to these negotiations, going to be, you know, acclimatized to the fact that it's a give and take situation? >> well, this is, i think, the greatest risk here, christiane, which is that the president and his team give this an effort but because they don't get every single thing that they want, that they say is hopeless and really create the prerequisite for war, the pretense of war, and that, i think, is the most dangerous road that we are on. it is not that we should not achieve the objectives that will protect our national security and the national security of our allies and partners. we absolutelshould. and that should be the common ground on which we all work, but between that and an agreement, there are lots of choices that are going to have to be made. and if the president feels that they all have to go the way the united states wants them to go, we probably won't get to an nd ourselves at war.obably wil

the united states is one of the largest investors in sweden and the swedish investments in the united states support over 200,000 american jobs. earlier this afternoon, i heard from several swedish business executives, some of the best in the world. where are you folks? please, some of the great executi executives in the world. people i've known for a long time and certainly know of. and they're investing tremendous amounts of money in the united states in supporting also vocational training for american workers. we are grateful for those investments. we are committed to working with sweden to pursue even greater economic cooperation. we are also continuing to pursue bilateral agreements to advance mutual prosperity. i am please thad sweden intends to procure the patriot air and missile defense system, finest in the world, in a deal worth over $3 billion. this system will increase stability and security in the baltic sea region. a strong and balanced economic relationship strengthens security and prosperity in both of our beginning. we have a lot of things we are working on. we are wo

the united states was spending enormous sons but the united states said that it was impossible to sleep with the financing those reparations because they are not even close to self-sustaining. but there was a much deeper fundamental conflict between the united states and sovie the sovt union when it came to germany andma that is neither the united states or soviet union could count against an ally of the other. it was threatening to both parties fundamental national interest. in mid april after meeting with stalin, george marshall flies home and thinks a famous radio address in whichan he announces the patient is seeking while the doctors did a great and we will not wait any longer. that is the cooperative arrangement that we made with the soviet union at 1945 where an end the soviets had undermined a of them and they've committed economically but they were not doing anything of the sort so they said that it was at an end. while they were in moscow, the president was delivering his famous doctrine speech into things that were worth highlighting about the speech, he famously pledges to t

when you have the president of the united states telling go back to uni vision. he really meant go back to mexico. and after that press conference, you didn't see that, there was one of his followers telling me, get out of my country. this is also my country. and if that happens to a journalist who's on tv, just imagine what happens to millions more who are not on tv, and who are much more vulnerable. >> so, look, the fight over the dreamers continues. right now it's held up in the quar courts. we don't know how long. just as an indication of the atmosphere and the context, i mean, we were all quite stunned when we read a week ago that the united states citizenship and immigration services have deleted the phrase nation of immigrants from its mission statement. now, people all over the world will find that extraordinary. what precisely do you think it's saying? i know you probably disagree with it obviously. but what precisely do you think is the reason for that? >> i honestly believe that donald trump has a nostalgic view of the united states. he wants to go bac

states, is working with, the sworn enemy of one of it's most important allies. - the united states introduced striker armored personnel carrier vehicles, to northern syria, and the stated official reason for that was to deter, using the word deter, attacks by turkey, on u.s. ally's kurdish militia forces. so, we're functionally now, putting assets in place, to prevent a u.s. ally, from striking another u.s. ally. that's a complicated relationship. (dramatic music) - [narrator] in 2016, turkish forces, loyal to erdogan, put down an attempted coup d'etat, which erdogan blamed on exiled cleric gulen. - [translator] i have never supported a coup, or an ouster. i think any change should happen as a result of an election, if that is required. it is important the democracy is not harmed. - erdogan has been reshuffling the senior military staff. he has been removing secular generals. if you know one of the senior generals, and you see that there's a high probability the leader is no longer gonna be delivering the goodies to you. one of the things you have to think about, "maybe i can get rid of this

terrible for the united states. and great for other countries but terrible for the united states. so we are talking about it, and two of the groups that i want to do some very fast action will probably have everything completed by next week. we will be imposing tariffs on steel imports and tariffs on aluminum imports and you are going to see a lot of good things happen. you are going to see expansions of the companies. david, you said you would be expanding. tim, you said you would be expanding. you will all pretty much immediately be expanding if we give you that level playing field if we give you that help. , if you hire more workers, your workers will be very happy. they're going to be very, very happy. and again, what has been allowed to go on for decades is disgraceful. it is disgraceful. and when it comes to a time when our country can't make aluminum and steel, and somebody said it before and i will tell you, you almost don't have much of a country. because without steel and aluminum, your country is not the same. and we need it. we need it for defense. we need it for defen