the, the civilian taught us did not stop for the last hour. no. coming from all over the southern gathered a little, the city of how do you this is bombed? why israel has the idea, i just on list the same caleb as function on that area. as the data name, initial invasion in the know of the region, although it has to be full strongly and solely in northern gone. we're also doing so now in the southern parts it will be no less strengthened models. idea of analysis that the coastal bypass road will be open for civilians to head south that the previous car that has turned into a was though a red cross spots button says that those safe places, that big guy that we do is option of displacing the pressure even higher, i was to the left, the reporting to us quite to this traffic and

a possible condition to put things simply today, there is no work station in gaza. and india is ruling party of rain supreme in spring collections, ousting the off position into the congress largest regions. well, that's a headline, does our thanks for staying with our team to national all the way. so we'll bring you more updates at the top of the our next is cross pool focusing on the case in just legacy the hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . the quintessential foreign policy genius are one of the greatest mass, murderers and streets. kissinger might have been both and much more. his death was

not untimely, but his legacy still haunts us. in many ways, he initiated some of the worst aspects of american foreign policy. the to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess george, send me well, in budapest, he is a pod cast or at the goggle, which can be found on youtube and locals. in america, we have martin j. e is an award winning journalist and commentator, or a gentleman cross up rules in effect, that means you can jump me anytime you want, and i always appreciate it. all right, george, let's start out with you. in budapest, um, as i said in my interaction, it wasn't untimely. he did make it to 100 years. i think the as last major trip was last year to beijing, so he was, um, um, he had a vote, a very up of filled life to the very, very end. but he also has a legacy. it's an understatement to say it's mixed. um,

but i would contend that it's not much different than a lot of other secretaries of state sense, but we'll get into that. go ahead. george as well is the no question. it's a m a mix legacy. however, i think if one thinks about kissinger's, he is in power as opposed to his stick of frantic obsequious he is out of power. most of his life was really out of wow. growling and a carrying favors. little was the 50 years. but during his, he is a power either those will years of diplomatic accomplishments. some of those we years of major arms control treaties signed is in which the united states managed to extricate itself from the war in vietnam. and the look for a while as of the united states would not be able to ever accomplish that. um,

but it was with the use of a, a house, a productive relationship with the soviet union, a game which seemed unlikely in the decades before, during the 19 fifties and early 96 is and then of course it, you know, disappeared. you know, within a few years of the end of the mix, some kissinger. yes. so when you contrast that with the accomplishments of the successes, i think it specs up quite favorably. um, you know, it's hard to think of the last couple of decades. what diplomatic accomplishments the united states has a cheese? no, i mean i will come think of any major treaties of the united states assign any major um diplomatic initiatives. the com for a, i mean what the recent years of being characterized by the forever was, was that just go on and on forever. and no one can actually even explain what

they're about with a garage, syria. libby a, i've got a style and then you know, you can just go through the list. what are they about and know the president will separate? just a seems intense. i'm bringing any of them to an end. yeah. martin, it's, it's very interesting is that when you look at the obituaries and even before he died, obviously, i mean, they had 50 years stuck about his legacy as a while. i was in power, a mass murderer, a gross, a violator of international human rights laws, etc. etc, madeline albright, when asked about iraqi children, you know, she said it was something worth the, you know, but they accepted. i mean, but my point is, you can, you can say a lot of things about henry kissinger. but you know, a, he didn't take the job because he was a st. okay. he was a, a very talented and geo political think there, now we can disagree with some of the things that he did, but to put him in mass murder category like that without and being standing alone.

come on. go ahead, mark. yeah, i think i think joe's quick hold on the other to keep necessary. did the growling so good? i mean, i can't think of any states. one of them is since the end of the 2nd level that still held the importance on the credos on the, on the, on the gravitas we had, i'm used to visiting all sorts of the world leaders. you know, that in the last time it's in martin. he worked very hard at it. okay. i mean, it is what it, it was interesting things that he called debated the the midst of about himself. no, but better than any one else. go ahead the okay, let me put it in different way. can you imagine i just need the income of to, isn't it ministration is over in a tour in the world for decades later on. so that will lead to is, you know, quoting his opinion, you know, he was an extraordinary carter. and he's hated because of the was because of a number of interventions,

some which were carried out more directly. hands on others web by america just stood by it and gave them the link mission. yeah. yeah. like a strong useful bangladesh. you know? oh, he's team or you know, so we're living in different times and not only will see an enormous car. so incredibly, car was much, it was also an intellect, which was something that makes some pretty badly needs its. oh, my free time time. uh oh. time out. i'm sorry you, you hit a red line and the door to the yard. well, now, one of the things, well, and i feel very adamant about this. so much of the focus on henry kissinger for the success is the george mentioned. it's given the kissinger never given to nixon, and that's on purpose, george. knowing the question, i think peter, you and i have discussed this many times before. it's um, it's a completely a dis, almost exercise that was practice during the next 10 years because much of the

media, the tests nicks always had it. and when they saw all these uh, diplomatic accomplishments, they were not able to credit mix simple them so they have to cultivate the made. but it was kissinger, those brilean, german jewish professor who was have all these fantastic ideas. and in a mix of those, just simple wow, you know, do you, you go ahead and do what you want, henry, but it was simply, it wasn't true. and you can see from the, the transcripts of the conversation, we've all been publish it, which is next. and that who is the guiding force of the foreign policy? kissinger was a man who implements that. there was a mix of who came up with the idea of uh, the opening to china. it was nixon who actually sold it to bring the war to an end by trying to get the soviet union to influence the north vietnam levy. these old nickelodeon policy objectives, but simply to media the and all way up to an out of never

a given the next to the quarter a. so either way, in the midst of kissinger is a kind of a, you know, the other side of the point was they could continue disparagement of the mix up was, i think one of the, one of the clever as the most fast, like the presidents, or maybe in us history. yeah. because martin almost all the histories of written out the nixon, arrow written by liberals. so what would you expect? go ahead martin. all right, well i've done correct to j. i n s. um i, i was believed that i'm guessing to was a, i'm in a normal state car. has magic current to my point i was trying to make before you company all set the was the little knowledge, apologies. i just haven't had to be speaking as joy as george pointed out, it just something that we have talked about so many times. so i apologize. gotta get back the floor to you or i'm talking about characters. that was my point to character. so you know how, how many characters can you, can you think of it

a lot us 506070. is he the past thought of that dramatist, that kissinger hardly was able to cool, generous, and well, newton's untold so perfectly about it will do so this, i wasn't aware that it was nixon who was behind the very spot moves in the seventy's to, to bring china in from the cold and to, to sideline russia. but he, he also did a huge so there was one of these great leaders, great statesman, the boot. that was a great believer in the other. jenny folks never change their mind because in 2019 he advised trump to do exactly this. the same thing was to get close to russia to a met china. but i think um, i think the point is that we haven't had anybody like him, and that's why he's so hated and loved this way. so i polemic so controversial. i don't think he's ever really going to ever get over the legacy the reputation of the carpet bombing for years in cambodia with weight estimates for vary between 80400000 tests and also the,

the impact the result of that which was to actually you know, support the can i originally from the photos i, i guess most supporters and regionally. i think i think that was one of his greatest blunders possibly ever. and um, you know, i think that's, that's, that's, that's how he's, he's written his legacy. but, you know, moving towards forwarding to today, you know, um, i can't help feeling that we really badly need somebody, highly articulate, really raised a shop with an intellect in the white house. now, as a result of some of these huge um, instructional problems that america and the west has brought upon itself, you know, ukraine and as well, for example. and because of, you know, what i wonder if um, if, if, if somebody like kissinger would have the edge would have had the, the, the impact on this decision making to cut off what button come put off. i think the contrast is in the old days and the days of kissinger where america was extremely bold. it was the soup about, it had to come out. you know,

america was judge by very much what it did. in fact, it was today, you know, where we're living in a completely different without, in a, in a monkey by the world. way americans no longer the suit that we tend to judge america by what it doesn't do, but more. and that's what it says. and if the contrast is, you know, today we have an american president who can only cool for a cease fraud and gaza. and that's really only can do and you know, and hope to the rest of our listeners and, and he's, but of course that's not the case until. and george, it is. i think it's a remarkable leadership in the west right now is it's a, it's an outcome of an id ology. the reproduces itself, i mean, you know, anthony, blinking is no accident and he is representative of the professional managerial class. but there are no nothings there, just accredited george? yes, i think so. um. there's also other aspect of it i think that, um,

in the case of um, the mix and kissinger was a world in which the united states have to accommodate itself to a serious rival power. and that tends to focus american minds. yep. and they have to move towards um, making peace because they the, the, the possibility of the destruction and the american defeat was a, it was something that was really comfortable. and we're going to what has happened since the human to pull a moment, just the victory of the be a business the united states. interpretation of the cold? well, we want, well the, the, the top dog. no one can arrive of us as a think. and i said you can do whatever it wants and that's why so there's, there's no measure. there's no check on anything that the united states, as i said, it can just sent you the dispute policies of destruction,

destruction because them hate. this is a, this is k of we're going to just dump everything on somebody else on does not have to pay for it. you know, we do libya. okay, well, we have which will get an update. okay, well, we go to mess the state, not our problem. that the europeans deal with the war in, uh, syria. okay, no, no problem. let me like yours 2020 years in afghanistan, not on the executive 20 years. i mean, people, we had talked about vietnam, but i mean, the united states was enough to understand the longer of any, was a in pain in vietnam in mc, just come from the moment of john. lyndon johnson's escalation might be a $65.00. it's basically a is, and i've got this, i was 20 is iraq unless it's just building there. and then when was the doing is just basically preventing any other power emerging on the desktop or do i say i have to go to a hard break. and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on the legacy of henry kissinger. stay with our to the

take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shifted reality distortion by power to division with no real opinions. fixtures designed to simplify will confuse really one say better wills, and is it just as a chosen few. fractured images, presented as 1st can you see through their illusion going underground, can the

the, the welcome, ect. across stock. were all things are considered on peter la bell. this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing the legacy of henry kissinger. the

let's go back to martin america has already brought up the subject in, in the, the, what's going on right now is we speak of thinking about the legacy of henry kissinger. and let me the, the shuttle diplomacy that he conducted. and it, during the night after the 19 7th $73.00 war it's very interesting. you have people like blinking the want to repeat it. and henry kissinger pulled something up, blinking never will cause no one takes them seriously. doesn't take the, the administration seriously much the detrimental, the reputation of the united states, but no one else go can make the claim. and i think maybe it's open debate. but it was under the kissinger's tenure, a secretary of state where the united states started. the tilt no longer is i'm kind of a mediator. but on the, on the, i'm became a israel's international lawyer. and that is a trend. obviously,

that has continued much to the detriment of palestinians, and in dallas, of the westbank land, the reputation of the united states. and actually the security of israel. you are, i think you can make the argument a lot of the but then that the significant trend started under kissinger, a, it pre dates, kissinger and the relationship with israel, but the intensity of it. and it has remained to the present thoughts. i suppose. i mean, the idea at that particular time in that particular juncture was that we need israel more vanessa. you know, israel needs to be a partner in the middle east. what is that was there in the cold that was during the cold war? yeah, but essentially that mixed up with us pledge of this, what was it, what do we get of the special relationship with as well? and he said is, well, we didn't know no, really that much. i mean, is it the reason why we have that relationship is, is re, largely because of a hold of course, which is an extraordinary thing to say. i wonder if, if um, if, if, because it was in the room when you said that, you know, but,

but i think we were living in different types. and, um we, we either the, we don't house that america doesn't have that cloud. and even though the edge anymore to, to the leverage that it was hard when, during, because i'm just asian, i'm at the point before that, you know, in the, in the old days of kissinger, america, foreign policy, did it actually impact it? and now we're living in a period of american for long term policy being very much something of the narrative narrative which isn't really taking that seriously. and the, you know, the consequences is the, we are confused about what our role is now in the west. and what we should be doing around the world. interestingly, you talked about, i've got a son country, very close to my heart. you know, when america pulled out, i think a general as ask isn't just about what went wrong. and you said, look to simply this, you know, we, we had no real clear idea, but what we're trying to achieve in this kind of stuff, you know, and i think um, but the, that, that was quite to the a person and, and pointing the moment you know for a lot of people to, to, to, to,

to heat the point that probably the west shouldn't be meddling in things. it doesn't understand him. do we really understand the complexities of the middle east and what the israelis are trying to do and is rep? probably not. you know, but a, and it has often been actually was interesting because by contrast, america did have a very clear policy and it, it is obviously very, very obviously it was to make sure that not one country in the region ever full of suits and became an exec on to like kind of what the name was trying to do to, to be a no telling us what was the most common estate. it was just autonomy. you know that there was a paranoia by kissinger. nixon and others are that times that, you know, the countries has done up to us and just say we don't need to trade. we don't need a new ideal energy, just leave us alone. that was enough to spot extrude her a reaction of paranoid, which really led to them if it was all about you know, stumping out this one example is one country that stood up to have it. but it was also within the context of the rivalry with the soviet union and, and,

and that was, it was one of the main drivers, george, um, you know, again, you know, you, you can take the henry kissinger stamp on the middle least. i think it gets indelible and you know, i, you know, i don't know what he said in the last years of his life about american foreign policy, visa be israel. but just that it was martin is mentioned, i mean, what does the us get out of it? because in many ways, i mean if you live, henry kissinger wrote many books. he wrote a book called diplomacy, which i'm a very sharp critic of case in germany ways. but it's an absolutely brilliant book . it's a premier for geo politics. and but you know, he wasn't always a geo political thinker as he was a neo con, that we would say probably today. thoughts on that? i think so. yeah. i think if, if one thinks about the um, the middle east,

um and you know, there was clearly a rivalry within the uh, the next to the ministration between the, the state department led by uh, william rogers and then, and henry kissinger and the state department still maintains the um, what more traditional at that time us approach to them at least, which was even handedness. um the arabs. uh, friends it was, i mean the united states have been involved in the arab world since. and i think said when to damascus, for goodness, say exactly, mix on went to damascus and they just didn't really have that view. um, i guess it was much more pro is right. and you're absolutely right. i mean, you did begin to see that the, the role of the united states, us to act as a, kind of a, a diplomatic, a representative of the united states. but that was the, the pressure of the soviet union. there was a fear within the next administration that if this goes on, this conflict goes on,

then the soviet union will get a beach and in the, in the middle to use the arrows, is it going to turn to, to the soviet union? the say, hey, you know, we, we need your help, you know, with the arrow. so we're going to deal with this problem visual. and so there was a pressure on washington to bring these conflicts to an end. and that's why there's, this pressure is now gone. i mean, the motors just don't care and i think this is really the problem with these differential was because it makes just don't care. there isn't a sufficient pressure on, i'm only united states to do anything to bring these conflicts done in. so if you imagine what's going on now, israel and gaza, you know, the buys and people say, well, you really have to be careful about the civilian casualties. we, i just, just, you know, we don't, we're, when we're not happy, we do killing so many children and that's it. but nothing else. the only one i, i think you've had this been the in taking place in the mix, i guess engineer or are they able to do much better? there was much tougher pressure on this uh, this ronald reagan kind of, um, uh,

called the bank and, and said knock it off. it was there and left it on. did it knock it off? exact happened. exactly. advise me to do it by. does it absolutely do it any, those are the, this has been the case. was it the reason presidents, you know, they could easily bring his way up the hill would easily pressure as well to uh, to come to a conference table and work something out, smell an insoluble problem. but they've been reluctant to do it. no more. and it's, it's really interesting when we think about kissinger's relationship with, with it israel and us relationship with israel. he was no scientist though. okay. and i think it's, it's, they help the couch, it in terms of what, what george just said. i mean, he thought about it as a g, a political again, but, and, and the problem to solve these would be the cold war. he put all those pieces together . that's what made him quite brilliant in his own way. but ever since then, you know, we, we had that we have that history of from 1973 to the present with israel. but it's

much more in a couch than design just a terminology in paradigm because we just certainly wasn't the. it wasn't particularly sympathetic to jews and the soviet union, a body put together a number of piece plans for the israelis and the palestinians. so we shouldn't forget that, but again, i come up some other point different times, very, very different times. you know, when you look at what you get, scandal nice and kissing, just paranoia of one and individual journalist public opinion. and then i think it's probably even more important than it is now. i mean, it was certainly a different attitude towards press international media both next and kissinger took the press very, very seriously. and i wonder if that would be the same case if nixon was in a position today. no blix kissinger's idea. i think you wrote it, one of his books are part of which one, but he's, i'm paraphrasing you said that your foreign policy is very much something about how you have to have the power behind the policies. i think he was basically saying the

online fist and bill and gloves is really what dr. american foreign policy to. so it's not the case today. no, you know, and i need the contrast of that. is there all the pathetic statement that i'm a made in 2015, you know, backing away from the red lines, threat to syria and against us? do you know where, you know, we have this thing, which probably kissinger finds out to repulsive cold soft policy, you know, which is a sort of you for this and for we no longer in pell, you know, we're not going to show us. so different, very, very different days for kissing joe. but just pick up george's point, i think probably kissinger nick, some would have been more sense. some said sensible. i'm thinking of the french was story, since people are sensitive to a, the outcry from people via the press. then there's today's administration. i mean, i know, and i think it would have acted on it. so i think under kissinger we may well how to seize for commented seats for enforced and that's the key will inform me of it,

every se, every time we had something like this, an american president would demand a ceasefire. this is not happened now rapidly run out of time. judge what we um. we have to give kissinger credit for, for his out of office years. he had the kissinger associates became a very wealthy man. he remained very relevant and germane in international politics . tony blair is imitated him. everybody else h. kissinger created a paradigm. and every one of many, many people fall into those footsteps. george? absolutely. it is a power that, i mean, he did it the moments his uh years in the office and it moved to new york, set himself up in a lavish um apartment and began cultivating very wealthy people. he also cultivated a couple sources, socialites, you know, the, the, the dinner party is that, and this became the, you know, only a very important ingredient on his life. and he flatted the full after the old

kinds of lead is you know, wherever it is, you know, he was, he was what he liked to be flattered too. and he loved to be for the 2. and that's why he continued to get invitations. you know, the people that listen to all his great great states. well, i mean that's what he put his bandages into. and i think he abused it because i think he could have used these. he is much more productively. he could have been a good advice of 2 presidents as a and the instead, he wanted to go on being invited to the wi fi right now. i get the question. i have a question to both of you right before we end here. but at the end of the day, george, for as he was the he wanted to be, he wanted to represent the quintessential consensus. yes or no? absolutely that's. that's what we was martin. here's the thing. so i'll give you jose. well, jesus, that ended really quick for me to cut twenty's the go to a good shepherd, study back and then i think that goes to his personality. he never, never wanted to be outside of the main street of a conventional opinion. a. okay,

gentleman, that's all the time we have a want to think on george and martin. i want to thank our viewers for watching us here are the see you next time. remember, cross stuck rules. the look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except we're so short or is it conflict with the 1st law? show you alignment of the patient. we should be very careful about visual intelligence at the point, obviously is to create a trust rather than fit the various jobs with the artificial intelligence, we have somebody with theme and the

robot must protect this phone. existence was on the russian stage, narrative as tight as i'm sort of the most sense community best most i'll send some of the same assistance to father speedy. what else calls question about this? even though we will then in the european union, the kremlin media mission, the state on the rush of funding and supports the r t supposed net, keeping our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube tv services. for the question, did you say steve or twist, which is the.