tv Washington Journal John Dale Grover CSPAN May 25, 2019 9:57pm-10:24pm EDT
program -- multitier program -- multi-year program. you will see us to virtue asian and polling -- you will see us do persuasion and polling. guest: we have a lot of good stuff in the works and hopefully we can come back and tell you about it. we are not a flash in the pan. this will be a long-term alliance. host: dan caldwell is the senior advisor for concerned veterans for america. vets is "washington journal" continues. this is our spotlight on magazine segment, and we are talking with john dale grover of the national interest. is the assistant managing director. i worried you to talk about iran for a couple of minutes. let me show you the headline from the ap, the good news coming out of we enter the weekend.
the u.s. moves to strengthen force in the middle east to counter iran. the number they are putting out is 1500. when you hear this news, what do you think? we areit makes me think overreporting the danger that iran s posing to us, considering are highlighting fears that has changed a little bit, but i think we should be concerned about that. tensions andgoing the difficulty on their part of the entire thing. guest: are there dangers from iran right now? the secretary of state, and a national security adviser, say that there are. what do you think? guest: i think there are. it is one thing to say there are proxies, we have to worry about our threat to u.s. service but they are not russia and china, the do not have nuclear weapons. this kind of speculation is not helpful. host: so your piece in the
"national interest," john dale grover, america must not stumble into it third world war. what are you saying here? guest: we need to think about real threats. the trump administration laid out their own national security strategy. when he to think about shifting away from this. elected on not ensuring all of these long wars that he inherited from bush and from obama. not in the interest of have another one, and it is not in the interest of the american people, either. host: let's put the numbers on the screen for our guest, john dale grover. we will take calls for democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 retiredve in th military, we have a number for you (202) 748-8003. look forward to getting to
our calls for john dale grover, assistant managing director for the "national interest." exactly what is the "national interest"? guest: the center for the national interest is a think tank in washington, these the. we have -- washington, d.c. we have debate on research, what is the best to do for us some idea people from all over the political spectrum as well. host: you write "tehran is not an enemy. there is no immediate danger, and a preemptive war would be the reaction that would cost american lives, money, and bandwidth. " management and the latest chapter. what is the proper management as you see it? guest: proper management is committed asian. one of the things that made reagan so brilliant as he tied peace to strength. willing to d
when you look at the iran deal come on both parts, but essentially, we have the same thing to work out, but it stopped them from reaching the objective. that is the thing if we can stop them from doing that. right now, we will keep pushing each other, and it is a dangerous situation. host: what do you make of the leadership in iran, and are they willing to communicate? guest: i think they are. rouhani was elected on "maybe we can find some common ground," even though we have to talk with mutual enemies. now iran's partial withdrawal, hard-liners in our administration and in tehran's administration are saying "we have got to go."
host: was the iranian nuclear deal a good deal? guest: i would say yes if you save the primary objective is to stop them from creating a nuclear weapon. is it for stopping military tests? no, but you build up. we can deter them, talk to them, and find a way to manage them as of did with the soviets. our next call in garden grove, california, independent caller. go ahead. caller: good morning, john. thank you for your commentary on here. i want to say that i think this is just another diversion tactic of trump being backed into a corner for one, and number two, ishink the war hawks, who mike pence, john bolton, and mike pompeo try to drum up another skirmishes right to get
us into an international catastrophe and maybe caps off world war iii. host: kelly, why would they want to do that, do you think? caller: i think they want to line their pockets from the industrial complex, and i think they really do not care. is anyt think there blood on their hands. they can send it out, and this is how they act. host: kelly, one more question, we know the president at that publicly he does not want any conflict with iran. you are talking about some of the folks around him. what do you make of that dynamic in the white house? caller: we all can trust what trump says, because he is so honest, isn't he? host: that was kelly. your thoughts? guest: i would certainly not say that trump's advisors are pushing for a third world war and all of that. if we are going to talk about different worldviews, absolutely, they come at it with a very different mindset, bolton in particular, thinking, hey,
the only way we will ever have peace is if we had regime change. but as you see in libya, iraq, and i can get bus met the very quickly. host: stephen, you are on the independent line as well. good morning. caller: good morning. iran in pursuit of nuclear weapons or a nuclear power in some way? what are they saying that they are going after in terms of nuclear technology, and why should we not be concerned about such as iran having that kind of technology? guest: it is a good question. i would say we should be concerned about them pursuing that technology. we definitely would not want them to have that, which is the purpose of the iran deal. currently, they say we will by enrichinghdrawn more you marr uranium than theye currently allowed to, but not
much. he does not want to face off against the most powerful country on earth, so he needs to find a way to say hey, and kind of withdrawal from the deal, but he does not want to go so far. i think iran is hoping for a diplomatic solution for this. host: do other countries or should other countries in the this? have an interest in what should they be doing or saying right now? guest: well, i would like to again,hat most of them, it depends on the country that we are talking about. we're talking about saudi arabia, israel, rivals of iran, they certainly would be ok with more military solution, but either way, we need to work with our allies to deter and to make sure that iran is not do anything. but again, i would separate the two. you want to deter some things, but you also want to talk on some things. host: this headline in the "new york times" and elsewhere --
trump circumvents congress to sell weapons to the middle east allies. he is moving forward with arms sales to saudi arabia, uae, and jordan. these are sales that have been blocked by congress last year. less of criticism from lawmakers, but what do you think? we shouldannot think be selling weapons to those countries. if you look at the conflict in yemen, a lot of people have died. i do not think that morally and even in our national interest there is a reason to support this conflict theory that does not mean without our allies we should not worry about the objective. line for military, active and retired, rudolph. caller: good morning. i would like to talk for a moment about the divide in our country. i was sent to germany in the 1960's, and we had a long bags
in frankfurt, germany. it was the mason-dixon line. we have the northerners in california on one end, and we have the southerners on the other, and we do not mingle. we just had nothing in common. the weekend pass, the southerners would stay in the barracks and buy cheap american beer and get drunk, and the northerners would go out on the town. sorry, you southerners, but that is the way it was. we were divided, and we are still divided today. host: a question for our guest while we have him here. at the phe german beer x, but no, they chose cheap american beer. there are people working on the bipartisan divide, people, reachk to
all sides from different points of views, different conversations to help people have these different conversations about social issues, so there are people working on these issues. host: let's go to eugene, salt lake city, democrat. hi there. caller: yeah, hi. iran is going to be the new iraq, and if we are not careful, we're going to have war crimes against us for killing all of the, you know, for buying weapons. host: so, eugene, what do you think the u.s. policy should be at this moving forward? we shouldll, i think be with our allies, and i do not supplyinghould be weapons where isis is or all of these radical groups, you know. and i think we need to be more accountable on the world stage. host: what does accountability look like to you? caller: well, it is a strong
u.s. n. the different leaders from all of the different countries stepping in and having a bite to it. right now, it does not have a bite. host: heavy's ineffectiveness rom the u.n. in recent years, and in what area? caller: know, i have not. the u.n. has been neglecting its duties to keep these powerful countries in line. face recalling, eugene. what about the u.n.? interesting point that he brought up. guest: i think they try to hash things out. my opinion would be on the form rather than saying it is something we should overly strengthen, which i do not think is possible. i do not think it is so weak that we can say oh, we can just leave it, for it is not
important.i think it matters . host: we're talking with john dale grover this morning of the "national interest." he is the assistant managing editor, and we are talking about issues with iran. we want to talk about north korea as well. they have been talking about russia and china. what do you see there? any concerns in any area? to the theoryack where each side is exchanging threats, global threats, having tightened military activity, engaging in the type of aeschylus or a behavior where becomes personal and very much a tit-for-tat. we worry about the spiraling out of control. thatis why it is important both sides have offices, we need to have an open china communication. we learned that in the cuban missile crisis. we need to find ways to have some confidence building. it does not mean that you think they are wonderful.
but it does mean that you talk instead of just searching for military remains after the korean war. host: what do you make of the breakup after the last summit?should there be another summit ? what purpose would it serve? guest: if there is another summit, certainly the purpose should be to restart negotiations. ask for everything upfront, north korea wants a lot of sanctions released some of that is a nonstarter for us. what i would say is about the way had no way grew up is if -- if we engage, is and say we will give a little bit here and there, that is what of like happen, but in the last eo, it looks like it did not work out. that is the thing to emphasize. deal,lmost had a step-by-step, and both sides left the door open.
host: let's get back to calls. it is bernard in wisconsin on our line for active and retired military. good morning, bernard. caller: good morning. baser c-span. i watch every morning. usss on group 1 constellation in the u.s. navy when we try to rescue the hostages. one, if the iran deal with such a good deal, the president the treaty, the senate ratified it. president obama did not send it to the senate, there for the next president can do what he wants. i would like you to comment on that. and second, on the mission, i saw it on the teletype, where president carter ordered the abort, and ever since then, we have been running scared from iran. host: harel, what were those times like for you? caller: oh, it was just a job. host: anything beyond that you
want to tell us? caller: i just cannot comment on what was going on, but i was there, and i think we should have went in and rescued the hostages instead of running scared. host: ok. if little bit of historical perspective from someone who was there. any response? guest: i would say obama certainly should have given the treaty to the senate to ratify. that would have been the correct constitutional thing to do. i'll also think republicans in congress should not be so skeptical about trying to build something. we have had a grimace of soviets, with the chinese for a while. they have nuclear weapons. the iran deal took two years to put together. i would say that absolutely he should have submitted it to the senate. understand time, i wanting to go into get those hostages, i think that makes sense, too. undery, we were to weak
carter, and we had a corrected underrated. host: let's hear from rachel in memphis, tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to comment on our actions in the middle east. we are allies with saudi arabia, funder of the lobby extremist form of terrorist groups, and we give an unbelievable amount of weapons, and we are also allied with israel, who has committed more espionage against the united states, including selling stealing nuclear secrets and nuclear technology. we overthrew their government in 1953 and installed a horrific dictator, we have sanction them, crippled them with economic sanctions, that is economic terrorism.
i am really offended, and i find it outrageous that we are even conduc contemplating starting a war with iran who should not be under so much pressure by us just for wanting to have an independent foreign policy and determine their own destiny. host: so, racial, what should policyropriate foreign detour iran -- be toward iran? [no audio] number one -- caller: number one, pursue diplomacy, not bring them into submission. that should be number one. common decency between states. we should not act like we are superior. saudiwe allied with arabia who, hillary clinton and other officials, have overly admitted that they are the chief funders of al qaeda and isis
groups, and we give them how much and weaponry? we seldom how much in weapons? contradiction a in our policy, and i do not know if our officials think that the republicans too ignorant to figure this out, but here in flyover country, we know exactly what is going on. [laughs] host: rachel, thank you for sharing your thoughts. aest: we have definitely made lot of progress with our allies, maintaining our influence in oil supply post-world war ii, especially with the saudis. i think it is definitely passed on to have some kind of a reckoning to kind of rethink our alliances in the middle east. that question is how are we going to get there, because saudi arabia and others have a bipartisan consensus. host: the administration is supposed to be releasing soon a middle east plan, a revised plan
for the middle east. what are you anticipating? guest: i am anticipating that to include an attempt at some kind of a peace deal. frankly, i am not exactly helpful for that. we will see how it goes. i think it is always good to try those sorts of things, the behavior we engage in is not conducive to that. we will see what that looks like. host: i meant to ask you more about china, too, and the recent trade tensions. while they could be resolved, but do you see those trade tensions leading to other larger problems in other areas of the u.s.-china relationship? guest: seeking for myself, i am worried about china finally pushing back because we have had so many years of intellectual property theft. back,re finally pushing and a lot of people who watch china, like myself, they owe, we we are finally
pushing back. but god for bid, there is an accident or crash in the south it tosea, you do not want get so bad facing a trade war that you are facing an actual harm question the question is how do you push back but don't go too far. host: let's hear from jacob in memphis -- is it michigan? go ahead, sir. caller: yes, sir. how is that going? i have some curiosities for the young man on the unarmed conflict. what role do you think that israel is going to play in this, and do you think they will push more aggressions toward syria due to the fact that the united states is their ally, and syria and iran are essentially allies at this point? host: thank you, jacob. israel has an say interest in making sure iran does not have nuclear weapons. they have killed iranian scientists before. part of it is also that rivalry, so they want to make sure that they can push back.
you can assume it will take a very hard line on iran. syria, too, they want to make sure proxies on iran are not doing anything that could jeopardize israeli security. the middle east is a very hard doggy dog plays, and everyone is very sensitive. host: and to our last couple of moments here, joel from massachusetts and a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i am particularly concerned about the news the last couple of days about the trump administration bypassing congress to send arms to saudi arabia. with all of the things that we know about the trump family, jared kushner, and their relationship with mbs, it raises a ton of concerns about the way they are approaching foreign policy, particularly with concerns now with this news about iran. i want to get some of your thoughts.
host: we touched on it a little bit, but do you want to add more? guest: it is important that we remain checks and balances, regardless of what party is in office, in the interest of the american people in general, and that we are doing things with proper oversight. host: let's hear from grace. grace will be the final call here. wednesday, massachusetts, independent. hey there. caller: i agree with the woman. same going to say the things that she did, the history of iran, how he brutalized his own people. but i also feel you have got to look at 911. that came from saudi arabia nationalists. and then also look at the fact that many countries came up with a plan for nuclear weapons. so when you kept something in place, you do not destroy it. you build on it. and we do not do that. i look at what is happening, we are selling guns to saudi arabia so we get oil and all of this craziness.
what is happening to those children in yemen? heart is bleeding. i do not know what is happening to my country, and i think -- i look at congress, and they do not work together. this is not the country i remember. i am 85 years old, and i am very, very sad. i think you have to work together for peace and not for war. it is the middle east, like a time bomb there. from what i understand about jared kushner,'s plan is to give business deals. the palestinians do not want that. they want their independence. so i think we have got a long ways to go. this young man for speaking out, because i do not think all americans are listening. that is my hope, that somehow we will not have a war, that we will not be sending young people in to die.
we went into iraq under the wrong principles as well. so we have to rethink our political, uh, history. host: understood, grace, thank you. you have the final word there for the segment, from massachusetts. let's hear one final thought from our guest. guest: thank you for the comments, everyone. i appreciate it. i will say that the middle east has diminished in importance, and that is a reckoning a lot of people in washington have had. of oil,the expor worry about nonnuclear countries, and make that shift to our alliance structures and where we are focusing our resources on. host: our guest has been john dale grover, assistant managing editor at the "national interest ." ♪ announcer: c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up sunday morning we will
discuss campaign 2000 20 political dynamics in pennsylvania, ohio, florida and wisconsin. rolling thunder executive thector discusses organization's mission and why this year's rally will be the last in the washington dc area. and an expert on china and informal trump advisor talks about the president's trip to asia and u.s.-janet -- u.s.-china trade policy. 7:00ngton journal, live at a.m. sunday morning. join the discussion. newsmakers,omorrow former massachusetts governor and democratic presidential candidate william well -- william weld discusses his candidacy and the mueller report. here is a preview. governor weld: