the most have lowest friends and relatives. musician i'm at that have bush and he's dr. rima but trying to ease their suffering the and give them a chance to be to your feet and head, which is to be, but desperately need of these things. can you try to move that is the human forgive, we want to promote this initiative in other shelters and the caps will displace people. we want more children to take part and be able to enjoy a few moments away from the scenes of this destructive war. uh huh. the, the bed don't mind as well how to use the space as indian lake directed. you can cool, let me see it out in central guys because we come home to causes of displeased at a senior. dina. yes,

and that's it says she hasn't seen her father in 6 months and wants to return home . because to me and the most i am from northern garza, i like to music the music license, doctor's true war. we always hear the sound, the shelling and reads, but the music helps hope to go back to my house one day. opening on past the function, which is really affects have to 17000 children to breathe. so many more are injured or schools have been destroyed and education will disrupt . i'm really happy and what, how do i think they forward on? i hope this will help immediately the problem. i want children to go back to the school, our normal life, and the daily activities. i want these children to improve the talent enough misery, enough destruction we've had enough most awake. hi, uh,

why live out why i said of this performance maybe over. but how much and his daughter hoped to return soon if they survive is rather relentless attacks. this instead of this was just before we go, let's take care of it to van to can city where the pope is greasing. worship husband, what and. oh, well wishes to come from across the world to see him investigating city greece, those for the stairs sunday. that's the mobility issues that have some stopped him meeting. the crowds to say would say, i'll just say around the phone, counting the cost, the world's population is shrinking rapidly. how will that affect the global economy? regulators on both sides of the atlantic get cracking down to pick monopolies, plus the june the gas and take your offices narrowing. but when will it be?

what doubts counting the cost on the challenges here as the united states is under fire for its continued support of israel's brutal war on causes. and while it becomes further invest in the cost of the war and you pray, many are asking, how is this affecting washington's global stance? is the us overstretched and click the signal, the end of us middle polarity, will ask renown political science as john mearsheimer in an upfront special, the nearest time. we thank you so much for joining us on upfront. my pleasure to be here. it's been nearly 20 years since you co authored your seminal piece of titled the israel lobby, dealing with the lobby's undue influence on united states foreign policy. have there been any major policy shifts or any other changes or developments since you wrote the piece so? well, i think there are 2 things have changed. one is i think that we help to open up

this course about the lobby. before we wrote the article and then the book, a, not many people talked about the lobby, explicitly, lobbies influence on u. s. foreign policy. and i think in terms of the, this course, we had a significant influence in terms of actual policy. i think we've had little influence at all. i think that the lobby remains as powerful as ever, and american foreign policy towards israel and towards the greater middle east remains gratefully influenced by the lobby. i mean, one could argue you're being too hard on yourself, but you're selling yourself a little bit short to the extent that there is at least resistance now. and that resistance does matter. i mean, there's a campaign against the lobby group, a pack, the american israel public affairs committee,

and how they influence us politics. specifically the targeting and progressive democrats, according to one paul, 62 percent of respondents who voted for president biden in 2020. agree that quote, the us should stop weapons shipments to israel until israel discontinues. it's a tax on the people of guides and now president biden certainly continues to provide military aid and financial support to israel. there's no doubt about that. but there's at least the perception of a risk that biden is taken now that wouldn't have been there 20 years ago. is that safe to say? well, i think there's no question that a attitudes towards is real and towards is real policies regarding the palestinians has shifted in the body politic, especially among young people, and especially among democrats. and there's no question that causes problems for president bite. but the fact is that the lobby still remains

exceedingly successful at influencing the policy at the elite level lobbies influence in congress and the lobbies influence on the white house remains as powerful as ever. so what you find here is something of a disjuncture between public opinion on one hand and the lobby's ability to influence policy on the other hand. and how that plays out over time remains to be seen. it could be the case that bike is defeated in the fall, in large part because he is supported israel down the line up to now and that he continues to support is real down the line and that comes back to bite him. that may be the case, and if that does happen, then attitudes towards israel and towards the lobby and towards the as really

american relationship, i think will change even more and maybe policy will change. but that has not happened. so for fair enough, the something memo organized by the us state department staffers, which was leaked back in november early november, a warrant that the us has failure to criticize is really war crimes quote, contributes to regional public perceptions that the united states is a biased and this honest actor, which at best does not advance and at worst harms us interest world wide, is the u. s. has continued support for israel affecting it's global standing. there's no question about it. the united states is effectively complicit the genocide that's widely regarded. uh, our ability, uh, you know, to influence people around the world has diminished significantly as a result of this. all of this makes a joke out of the concept of a rules based order, which we preach about all the time. so this is

a disaster for the united states, but i would point out to you that despite the fact it's a disaster, the united states continues to support is real down the line. now the rejoinder to that, at least the most reasonable rejoinder to that would be that this is absolutely a matter of national security. that is really, is not just the recipient of us large, yes, for philanthropic reasons or humanitarian reasons, but that is a strategic interest in the middle east that goes beyond the money. but it is, it's actually directly tied to us. national security interest is supporting israel . vital to maintaining us national security. i think your comments have it dead wrong. israel is a strategic albatross around their neck. it's a liability. we gain hardly any benefits from our relationship with is real. any strategic benefits, and there are significant liabilities as we're seeing now. furthermore, it is

a powerful moral or ethical dimension to this. and the idea of that being joined at the hip with is real, is in their moral or ethical interest is not a serious arguments. as i said to you before, the united states is complicit in a genocide. this is certainly not in their interest. so the idea that you know, we're supporting israel on conditionally because it's an expertise you can, more or less interest is not a serious argument. but the moral side was more saying, if we cast aside the more argument against supporting israel, of uh, is this still a, a strategic interest that trumps that instance? some people would argue whether it's, whether it's being wary of your, on whether it's proxy wars that there might be some vital military reason for being there. and being so staunchly tied to israel, but you say there's no, there's no credible argument there. i don't buy that argument for one second. and stephen, i lay out the case against that argument in both the article end of the book. and

by the way, with regard to a ran, i believe we would have much better relations with the ran today. we're not so the lobby in our chapter on a ran in the lobby book. we make it quite clear, it ran, tried to improve relations with the united states on a number of occasions of the eighty's and ninety's in the lobby, moved in and killed their efforts to accommodate the for rainy ends in any way. and furthermore, if you look at the jcp away, which is the nuclear agreement between basically the united states and a ram that i think affectively shut down. the rainy in nuclear program in the short term uh it was, is real in the lobby. they put enormous pressure on the united states to put an end to that agreement, which i don't think was an error interest. so help me understand why we end up in

this place if there's no legitimate moral argument here to your point. and if there is no legitimate strategic interest and it's certainly a financial burden, we're talking 3 or $4000000000.00 a year. and we're talking about in post october 7th, an attempt to get even more tens of billions of dollars to israel. it's certainly a financial burden. why does the united states continue to double down in this way in the sixty's? we say it's hawk missile sales. perhaps, you know, we might say that it's a, it's a, it's an attempt to leverage a geo political standing in order to access oil more. but now in 2024. what good reason does the nicest have to do this and not doing it blindly there? there must be a reason. what is it as well, let me just point out that the united states just doesn't give is real lots of weapons and lots of money, and supported diplomatically it does it on conditionally. there is no relationship between any 2 countries in world history. and it looks like this

relationship, the united states again, supports israel, no matter what it does. this is truly remarkable. we don't treat israel like a normal country and help it because it's to our benefit strategically. that's the argument you're basically making. this is a strategic asset for the united states as a normal country, and we take advantage of it. that's not what's going on here. so the why, what is the organizing principle behind this special relationship that it's a fascinating argument you're making, but why? why is you was doing it? because of the lobby. the united states has a political system that is set up in ways that allow interest groups to have great influence. just think of the national rifle association. when you look at polls in terms of how americans think about gun control, what you see is that there are lots of americans who are interested in some serious gun control,

but it's almost impossible to get any meaningful gun control because of the national rifle association. the national rifle association is the interest group that wields enormous power when it comes to legislation involving gun control. well, the is real hobby, is one of the most powerful lobbies, if not the most powerful lobby in the united states. and the lobby goes to a norm as ways to make sure that american foreign policy supports is real unconditionally and it is wildly successful. truly impressive, how good the lobby is. getting us foreign policy makers to support is real, hook, line, and sinker. you have any optimism that it's, you know, is the invincibility of apax that are, of invincibility breaking down. and i think that's a little too strong. i think it's a road in somewhat of what the future looks like for sure. it's hard to say. let me

make 2 points there. first of all, the lobby now has to operate out of the open, and it has to engage what i call smash mouth politics. before we wrote the article in the book, the lobby could operate behind closed doors and for any interest group, the ideal situation is to operate behind closed doors and not out in the open. but when you're out in the open, like the lobby is now when you're engaged in smash mouth politics, it's going to cause you all sorts of problems. that's point. ready one point number 2, that israel's behavior has gotten more outrages over time and a good manifestation at this point is what's happening in regards to today. and this situation is not gonna get any better with the past at the time. it's widely recognized. it is real as in apartheid state. and furthermore, it is engaging in a genocidal campaign at this point in time. well, that tells you that the lobby has really got

a difficult job confronting it. it has to work over time these days to defend is real and it will have to work harder and harder with the passage of time. because more and more people are aware of what's going on in the middle. at least they see what is realistic doing what i would never underestimate the ability of the lobby to adjust to the circumstances and, and prevail. a more that may not happen, but you don't want to underestimate the lobby. that's my basic point. understood. let's move on to praying a bit in october of last year, president biden had asked congress to authorize $61000000000.00 and ukrainian assistance, in addition to another $14000000000.00 for israel, which for now still remains stalled in the us house of representatives. the u. s. department of defense in early february, we stated that without us funding ukraine's defense will likely collapse, given that the funding is now stalled. what do you believe the impact would be for

ukraine and for us policy to well, i believe that ukraine was going to lose this war to russia, whether they got that 60 plus $1000000000.00 or not. the fact is that the ukrainians need weaponry. and furthermore, they need manpower because they're badly out numbered in terms of troop levels. well, we can't do anything to help them with troop levels. and in terms of weaponry, we don't have the weaponry to give them. when you listen to people talk about this 60 plus $1000000000.00, you would think that this is going to allow us as soon as this aid is provided, to take all these weapons off the shelf and ship them to ukraine. and that's going to go a long way towards redressing the in balance and weaponry over there. but that's not true. we can't, we can't give them the weapons they need and large enough numbers, because we don't have those weapons. and that we includes the europeans as well as

the united states, so we can give them dollar bills or yours, but that's not going to do much good. so we can't. number one, we dress the weaponry in balance. and number 2, we can not re dress the man power imbalance. oh, so there's money, largely and effective to the point that it's, it's a little legitimate argument not sending any good. it's worse than that. what it does is it encourages the ukrainians to continue fighting, which means they'll lose more territory and more ukrainians will die. when, if we cut off the aid and what you can go its own way and become a neutral country, ukraine could cut a deal now and get a better deal today. then it will get tomorrow if we give it the to continue finding a little bit like i won't call it appeasement, but thing to effectively yield a significant portions of your land because you can't when uh, when there's an entire global community that could offer support, feels like

a tough decision to me and you get an on site with mohammed ali. you go to rounds with them and it's quite clear that he has the ability to kill you. what are you going to do? quit after 2 rounds or continue to fight and allow me to kill you. well, if i, if i'm wearing gloves and he's not, i've been yelling to somebody, hey, is there a rest there? i can put some gloves on the guy. i feel like rushes by the way, our gloves and know it was watching. well, in the international system, there is no higher authority that can rescue you when you get into trouble. ukrainians are in big trouble, and there is no referee, no god, no higher authority, no, whatever up there that can rescue. and my point to you is that with the ukrainian should do now is they should cut all security ties, cut all security, ties with the west, right, and declare neutrality and work with the russians to make it clear that they are a neutral states that have no interest in joining nato, and then the united states should cut off all way to ukraine,

and the ukrainian should rely on economic aid from europe in its place. oh, the russian president, dimitri made video of who's now deputy chairman of russian security council, was recently asked at what point russia should stop its invasion. and he stated, it probably shouldn't be keith, if not now, then after sometime, maybe in some other phase of the development of this conflict of president putting himself also stated that russian troops would push further into ukraine after russia's success in taking over the town of, of div car, do you think whose goal is to take over all of ukraine and especially even capable of doing this? and i think that despite the conventional wisdom of the west, he is not determined and never has been determined to conquer all of ukraine. and indeed, he would be foolish to do that. and furthermore, despite the conventional wisdom in the west,

there has never been any evidence that he is interested in conquering other countries in eastern europe as well. the idea that he's trying to recreate the russian empire or create a great, a russia is not a serious argument. what, what's really argument isn't that he's trying to take over the rest of europe, but maybe just the rest of ukraine? no, i don't believe that there is no evidence to support that. he'd be a fool to try to conquer all of ukraine because the western half of the country is filled with ethnic ukrainians, who would resist russian occupation mightily. he'd have a serious insurgency on his hands, and that's the last thing he needs. and as i said to you before, they would be foolish in the extreme to try to do that. but let's move on because there's, there's another thing i want to ask you about. in december of 2023 us defense secretary lloyd austin stated, rushes, military is badly weekend. and last year, the head of the defense intelligence agency said that it would take somewhere

between 5 and 10 years for russian to rebuild the capabilities of its armed forces . some argue that ukrainian resistance with western support wasn't fact important to prevent further aggression from russia when he making it. i think it's just dead wrong. i think the russian military today is much more formidable, that it was then, it was when the war 1st started. armies at the start of a war, rarely look like armies midway through a war or at the end of a war. and by almost all accounts in the ukrainian media, this is in the ukrainian media media. the russian army has gotten much better with the passage of time. they mobilized lots of troops. they've trained them up, the equipment is much better. and most importantly, the tactics and strategy are smarter, which is what you would expect in any army the fights of protracted works. it gets better in most cases, which the past with the passage of time. i think the concern was the wiping out of ground troops and that to replenish those troops and would take 5 to 10 years. but

i hear what you're saying loud and clear, which is that those numbers are inflated and that and that they're, they've replenish troops and much more quickly, inefficiently than that. i think that's exactly right. the numbers of casualties heard flight. ready and furthermore, pool has mobilized a huge number of troops. they've trained them up and they now have a quite effective military fair enough. new recently stated that the u. s. as in trouble in regards to the middle east and ukraine on ukraine. you said a quote, we were committed to beating the russians in ukraine. we were committed to wrecking the russian economy and knocking the russians out of the ranks of the great powers we sailed. this is a devastating defeat for the west. you said, i'm from your stand point, is this the end of america and unit polarity? you know, una blurred, in my opinion, ended in 2017 was the rise of china. and the fact that who brought the russians back from the dead between the period of 2000 when he took over in

2017 due to polar moment lasted from roughly december 1991. when the soviet union collapse, until about 2017, we were the only great power on the planet. and it was the ideal strategic situation to be in. but the world that we live in today is not uniform. it's multi power is china, there's russia and there's the united states. and let me push back on that just a little bit because the u. s. still remains the largest economy in the world, according to g, d, p, and g d, p per capita. in 2023 and in 2024. the u. s. was still ranked as the most powerful military in the world with the world's largest defense budget. in excess of oblique $750000000000.00. there we have military base and in well over 70 countries. right now, can i have a partners really threaten unipolar strength of the united states? well, i was going out to use it. you're absolutely correct that we are the most powerful

state on the planet. but the argument i'm making to you is there are 2 other great powers on the planet, and although they are not as powerful as we are, they still qualify is great powers. but the fact is that china is a peer competitor, and china is bent on dominating asia, and the united states has been on preventing china from dominated nation. so we have an intense security competition now taking place between china and the united states in east asia. so in that sense, china is a threat to the united states with regard to the russians, as you well know in ukraine, we are effectively involved in a war against russia. so we have these 2 other great powers in the system, russia and china. and in both cases, we are competing with them at the security level and very serious ways. and with regard to russia, one could making arguments that were worked with russia in the past when countries

have attempted to challenge or break 3 of us orthodoxy. they faced the raft of the u. s. government. some countries today are still in, during a ferocious array of sanctions. others in the past with victims of resumed change operations that were supported by the united states or other western governments. does the us do have the same ability to threaten nations that go against them or have things changed? so i think things have changed somewhat. i think that to other countries like a ran, for example, in north korea, which we're in a much low layer position during the unit polar moment, can now cosy up to the chinese and the russians who are willing to cozy up to them . and this just goes to tell you the weaker countries in the system can find allies who will help to protect them from the united states and its pension for regime

change. so let me ask you one more question. so if i accept your argument that us, you know, polarity is over, what comes next? so we're going to see a genuinely multi polar kind of political environment here. or are we going to see a situation where china eventually takes the us as plays and imposes the new kind of imperialism to were in a genuinely multi polar system. and there is no evidence that it's going to end any time soon. one can make an argument that for demographic reasons, moving forward, we will eventually go back to a unipolar world. and the reason i say that is it's quite clear that the chinese and the russians, but especially the chinese have wicked demographic problems. and their populations are going to shrink in significant ways over time. the united states has a bit of a demographic problem itself. but we have one great advantage that they don't have

. and that is that we're an immigrant culture. so we can import all sorts of people to redressed the demographic problems that we have. and i think an argument could be made that you know, 50 years from now as the united states may be back to, you know, polarity in large part because of the demographic reasons. because you understand the 2 principal building blocks of military power or wealth and demography. you have to be rich and you have to have lots of people in china and russia were in a very precarious situation over the long term because they have declining populations. john, this time i want to thank you for your time. thank you so much for doing this and i'm from with your insights. you my pleasure. thanks for having me on the show. i enjoyed it. all right, everyone, that is our show apart will be back in the

the latest news as a people have been coming here all day to pay tribute to those who lost their lives . vladimir putin has called the attack of bloody and barbaric app with detailed coverage. so many people are out tonight to celebrate perhaps a change for the sending of these people from around the world. joe biden says the federal government is committed to rebuilding it. there's no indication of when that process might even begin. as the world plunges into a climate disaster, we are in the planetary class. this year, a new a pub series exposes the reality of the global emergency. there will come a time where no amount of dollars will be able to make up for what is broken and meets the people trying to make a difference. it was endless economic growth, a growth because rising for as nothing inmate to gross reference dying

coming soon, these cultures solutions that gives us no hope for future that we have to find creative solutions, not just turn our backs. i don't think that has a number. think about it as a person, person yourself, and that person ensures. so as you can see for this is my us, my life, or at least in my life, those dentures. we want we want to great because the women in my country, the not sweet to come up to on we are not. and neither ology, we are human beings on this earth to be treated equally. we are in their thoughts, that's our ancestors. whatever has been done before can be done as long as a human being is doing it. you just have to keep pushing because no one else can

see. the vision is keywords. you the, the, [000:00:00;00] the hello, i'm real about this and this is the news on line from joe. ha, i'm coming up in the next 60 minutes. unicef issues. i've dialed warning. his doctor struggled, street mountain nurse youngsters in gauze the tales while waiting for foods 20 to kind of stand in di, into separate attacks on a deliveries in gaza, such as russia targets, ukraine's power. great. we're going to be alive from keepers. more infrastructure goes down in the southeast 1st of all, things underway in high stakes local elections and to keep the governing our policy