and in the slow, these are deserts of northern chile. this search is on for a treasure that's fallen from the sky. last month, a large media right of approximately 4 kiddos was caught on camera as it into the atmosphere landing in the desert. the news attracted astronomers, geologist, city treasure hunters from the world over the name of knowing exactly when it fell is a major discovery because we can determine the conditions under which it arrived. fresh without terrestrial alteration. after more than a month, most european, until the and scientist ran out of time and money and abandoned the search. this is about as close as you can get to looking for a needle in a haystack except that there is no, hey, here rather. no one is cactuses with incredibly long and sharp thorns, lots of loose rocks, which makes will this rather dangerous. now, scientists estimate that then we do right, fill somewhere within

a 6 square kilometer area of where we are right now. they've only been able to search about 20 percent of it, so there's still a long way to go split geologist, samantha, and i've been out and meet you write hunter's quoted him on saturday, aren't giving up money to get that piece. you want any like this expedition has a rare thing for a scientist and myself, a meteorite hunter, joining forces. and i've learned a lot. they told me not to use magnets that could alter a certain properties that the media rise 8 i want to meet you write hunter's, as they call themselves. a collection is or treasure hunters who buy and sell pieces of different planets, asteroids or media. really the majority to solve on their entrance to earth, but not all simply some when we're always searching for where we come from. so it's part of knowing not territory. the solar system is possible to show a major, right that fall in a dry desert, particularly sought after because they degrade very slowly providing christine

information about the composition and origin of our planetary system. most side of it runs a small media right museum. and the last city and he's asking the government to regulate media, right? so the foreign scientists and collectors can't just help themselves and take them out of the country. meanwhile, the search for the precious treasure continues in the gillian desert to see in human, i'll just be era for these are does a to the it's that's it for me mill out of a city now rich, but the news continues here on out 0 off the upfront, stay with us, the report is retreat in a brutal civil war. if it coming to hadn't been the, the is ready and vision with not being so low before the coming door had become gentlest accent. you could be in the safe and safe,

and then you went out into civil war. i started off leaving this one of the grand suite to the coming to a hotel. the next room i was in was underground, tying the prison. so as a hostage, they was, the commodore will hotels on al jazeera in the world. take stock of donald trump's electoral victory, geo political allies and adversaries of the united states. wonder what will come of a 2nd, trump presidency from ukraine to gaza. the incoming president will have to deal with some of the biggest, international crises and deputies on day one. this week we'll be discussing what trump 2 point o means for the rest of the world, and an upfront special, the mean to discuss what a 2nd separate ministration could mean for us. foreign policy is a now see line. former us state department official, who resigned in protest of the biden administration's support of israel's war on gods stephen wall, author of the israel lobby and u. s. foreign policy. he's also

a professor of international relations at harvard university and online with the political analyst and former deputy director at the app american institute. thank you all for joining me now. i'm going to start with you. uh 2024 president elect donald trump has made around a personnel announcements for his upcoming administration. we have start is real support or mike huckabee he'll be nominated as in bass that are to israel. mike waltz is set to be national security advisor, marco ruby, it was set to be secretary of state and at least the fabric as you went in basset. or are you expecting radical change in policy from washington based on these personal decisions. going to be clear policy was already in such an awful place under the biden ministration. um, however, i do anticipate that things will get worse, especially with someone like a former governor mike huckabee who is a committed, evangelical christian, has talked about the fact that the policy and people do not exist. he's described

as rarely settlements as simply neighborhoods. what i, what you hear from is really ministers is that they're planning to annex the west bank. you have settlers waiting to move back into gaza as soon as the, the firing has stopped. and so all those, obviously things are ready. so horrifyingly bad under the current administration, but i do worry that, that moving forward, we will simply continue to see the same policies as well as green lighting the annexation of the westbank. for example, the concern there would be could this spark conflict per perhaps with jordan stephen, what do you make of this? do you use? do you see a radical policy shifting? you see this as a more intensified version of the current policy? yeah, i think the letter phrase, it describes it. you're certainly not going to see anything better than what the, the bad policy we have in there by and it could easily get substantially worse. a 2 other points. uh, the one person you didn't mention was the designate for secretary of defense p tags

here. this hasn't been confirmed, but i've seen at least one video of him giving a speech. declaring his support for the extremist idea of rebuilding the 3rd temple in israel, which implies destroying the l are something mosque, which is the 3rd holy is side is one of them is that's what he really believes you're going to have yet another cell. it, in this case, running the defense department. the other point i noticed that all of these people and i think some other folks need move astray. sion are hard line, anti iran hawks. and i remember it was trump who took us out of the nuclear deal with the ron and allowed around to get closer to a nuclear weapon. but if they take a very hard line pastor towards iran as well, then the danger of a war in the middle east goes up. even if trump would rather avoid that to. i'm going to, we also have seen some of the hard line, right? wingers in israel celebrate donald trump victory and we get it. we could speculate

why i'm thinking about is really national security administer. it's a marketing we're, i'm also thinking about is a little small churches, the finance minister. they were on social media. they were in other spaces, openly celebrating the trump victory. but in many ways, they are illogically aligned with the legs of mike huckabee who in 2015 compared israel's claim to the west bank. as equivalent to the united states of sovereignty over manhattan does is really right wing get more involved in or maybe even empowered after the election of donald trump. yeah, i mean it's again funny because we are already speaking about a low point before all of this happened. but what you had is a government. and by then that gave israel what it wants, in terms of military funding and diplomatic protection for the atrocities they were committing against palestinians, but always with some level of tension. it's always with some us discontentment of publicly criticizing indiscriminate bombings or talking about the need that they

would never accept or re occupation of cause, though, there is always this rhetoric about tension and what they get in a trump administration. that a staff with these complete religious fanatics is the through the aspects support for israel's plans that there is no longer this pretense about the us supporting palestinian human rights supporting palestinian statehood. and that effectively is a recipe for atrocities that are even greater than the ones that we have seen so far. and it's a really terrifying prospect because even the official numbers of what's coming out of gaza right now. it's certainly an underestimate that you can't get the full magnitude of the atrocities that have been committed. now if you're going to endorse israel's expressions, policies and israel's attempt to liquidate the palestinians, struggle for freedom and justice wants them for all and eliminate that for israel. moving forward, we are looking at an absolutely horrifying situation in the prospect of a very, very dangerous escalation in the region. i know i, i keep hearing this idea that under trump, it'll get even worse because it's not even

a pretense of concern of who just talked about on that for policy and human rights, etc. or is there any reason to believe that the by the administration is pastor, was restraining? is really all the, i mean i, after looking at it as i just, it's hard for some people to believe that it mattered at all. no, i mean i certainly agree with you that the, the idea that bite in was doing anything to try to prevent what, what israel was trying to do is, is false. and in many ways, i think this does contribute. i mean, as omar was saying, getting rid of the pretense at least gets rid of the hypocrisy. i mean, in many ways, i think this contributes to this perception of trump as someone who means what he says and speaks or openly and honestly and if, even if the things he's saying are horrible, whereas you have the democrats and the binding ministration. as on our side pretending to care about human rights pretending to care about the international order and the rule of law and yet acting completely against it. and so, i mean in many ways, i think that the, the,

what the body of ministration has done has further undermined these causes of human rights or the international order. and instead, what we're going to see under trump is just this full embrace and an open spoken embrace of the policies that by the ministration was implementing. anyway, i know you, you reside from the state department because of the, by the administration's, a continual political support, military support for israel. is there any reason to believe what the, by the administration representatives would likely say and have said in the past, which is we're doing the best we can, we're behind the scenes pushing israel. they're just not listening. you know, the us has massive leverage. the us could have at any point upheld american law, which under us laws we is there is no longer eligible to receive us security assistance. this was a just of a 30 day letter where the ministration passed an awesome days before this taping. exactly. so the, this was openly acknowledging from the administration that israel is blocking

humanitarian aid, which renders israel no longer eligible to receive us security assistance. and yet they gave them 30 extra days. there is no provision in us law whereby they should have 30 extra days to continue starving people illegally. and yet this has already been happening for more than a year. and you know, the expression that comes to mind is put your money where your mouth is and that's, you had a body administration that was saying that they want israel to change course while at the same time telling them yahoo, that we're going to give you all the weapons that you want all the military funding that you want, and we're going to shield the diplomatically, well, then you're not really asking them to change behavior. when you make it clear that you're gonna support whatever they do, there's an obligation of responsibility and then effectively a sub contracting of american foreign policy to nothing. yahoo, you're allowing that to me. i want to shape american policy, which is to say that continued american support for whatever is real, choose us to do. that is a recipe for failure. steven mark rubio, a donald trump selection for a secretary of state has been known for his hard line stance on

u. s. foreign policy. i fully supported israel and it's a war on guys a uh, what should we expect in terms of policy, but also in terms of blow back. i mean, i think uh, you know, as trump himself to the back in 2016 mark or rubio is a lightweight. i don't think anybody takes his ideas on afford policies being particularly sophisticated or well thought out. he's been bought and paid for by a pack and others for a long, long time. so very pro israel, he is also a real china hawk, which is something of course that i think attracted him to, to trump. and in fact, the administration is it'd be very hard line on china, at least in a, in appearance. i think the other point to note about all of these appointments though, is that they are relatively weak individuals in the sense that they don't have independent power bases of their own. they don't have a lot of staff here. you know, fox news commentator doesn't have a big, independent power, vanessa, etc. i think that's true of ruby. i think that's also even true mike waltz. i look

at the set of people. he's nominated this time and they look to me like people aren't likely to stand up to trump. and if they did tried to stand up, he wouldn't face much political cost in get, get us thing them down the road. in other words, he's setting things up. so the white house, you know, his chief of staff, whoever he decides to a point to keep positions there are going to be able to do pretty much whatever donald wants to do home. and what about the wider region here and last year israel has bomb level, non human. it's targeted officials and military facilities in iran as well and trumpet said openly that israel should bomb it, runs nuclear facilities, input worry about the rest later. what trumping the white house doing dramatically increased the chances of an all out war between is really near on i, i think we do increase that risk. i mean, trump has this reputation of sort of being an anti war president because of some exploitation of rhetoric. he's used in places like michigan talking about ending

the wars and bringing peace and all of that. he says no more than one. there were no wars in control. it's utter nonsense and look at his actual record. actually if it's stuff that just flies into the radar and people give him a passport. but you've had any like one of the drone war in the region with significantly more and far more significant civilian casualties because he did away with any kind of calculus about civil risk, the civilians. and so you have thousands upon thousands of people being killed by the drone warfare under the trump administration, has significant expansion over at that compared to under obama. you've had facilitation of saudi arabia as war on u. m. and also with devastating consequences terms of how the people at least being killed, if not hundreds of thousands more likely that is also unfolded under his watch. and for somebody who allegedly does not want war, the assassination of general. so they money in iraq brought the us to the brink of war with iran. and as trump himself seems to lack any basic understanding of international politics and decision making, that whatever decision he decides to make is on a whim without really

a deep understanding of the consequences of his actions. i think that we are closer than ever to the possibility of a much wider regional war that does get director running involvement. and that means the other devastation of the entire region and possibly a level, you know, adapt all that we have not seen in that region. for a very, very long time, stephen take what almost as seriously at the same time, i also know that trump is very a war verse, at least for his rhetoric. he doesn't want to be seen as a wartime present. it is. will that pull him away from the brink of war, or are all bets off now when, when iran gets in the mix. and i'm, yeah, i disagree just a slightly, you're a sort of nuanced pull it over. just said, i mean, i think trump understands that words in the middle east have been very bad for his predecessors. right. the warrant garza was bad for buying a bomb and never quite got out of some of the wars we were in as well. certainly it was a disaster for the bush administration. i don't warranty. i don't think he wants to see american ground troops, you know,

somewhere in the middle east and unable to get out in various ways even tried to remove some of our troops from the middle east when he was president of the 1st or that doesn't mean he's a 1st to using force as we just heard, he's willing to use drones. he wouldn't be willing to use american air power because he doesn't think that that's actually going to have consequences for americans. it's not gonna lead to american lives being lost. it's not going to be that expensive. what do you guys understand here is that once you start losing, using large amounts of military force, you start to lose control of exactly what happens after that. it's one of the reasons you see countries like saudi uribe actually, i think trying to pull back a little bit, trying to improve relations with iran. not wanting to see military force get used in large quantities because they know they're going to be affected. so it might, they might fear it's not that trump is willing to, you know, go to a big bore in the middle east way. george w bush was in 2003. it's rather he would do smaller things, thinking there's no danger of expansion or escalation and he would wake up later to

discover that he was facing a much bigger problem that might involve actually much deeper american involvement . how likely it is, is that to happen in your estimation. i mean, i think stephen makes a really good point and knowing the amount of money that a lot of these goals leaders are selling out to trump and his family. to say, hey, let's maybe avoid an unnecessary war with iran because we know that these countries right now are really trained to focus on economic development. they did learn some lessons from things like the war and yeah, and then which ended up being taking much longer. and, you know, steve pointed out that there were unanticipated consequences of that kind of violence. so i think that we are, if there's anything to feel at all optimistic about it might be that certain key leaders in the gcc have had a taste of what war is and are hopefully going to be pushing for less confrontation . don't just on that point. it's kind of interesting to think about the fact that

we have world leaders looking for ways to flatter trump personally as a way to influence american policy and creating that dynamic in the world where decisions about war and peace depend on whether you congratulate yourself with mr. trump or not, that is not how the world should work and it ought to be an alarming sign for everyone about the fact that this is who a significant portion of americans have decided to the man who's fit to leave the world in this really dangerous moment. all right, i also want to ask about other foreign policy implications of a 2nd. trump presidency is even going to go to you. a trump has been very critical of the binding administrations aide to ukraine. he also said he would in the war and ukraine within 24 hours after you comes to power, it will all be done in a day, although he doesn't say how, oh, what do you think his approach to this conflicts going to be? well, i think this is not good news for you creating a new list to say, i actually believe that harris said she'd been elected would also have move to try

to end the war in ukraine as quickly as possible. but you would have tried to do so as responsibly as possible and in a way that got ukraine. the best deal it could. i think trump is much more likely to simply washed his hands of the problem and declare it to be the europeans if they want to keep the europeans problem if they want to keep supporting ukraine. i think the idea that he will try to push through a big aid package through our republican congress is very unlikely. the big question for trump though, is exactly what this put into. if putting is satisfied with part of ukraine and a p steel that leaves ukraine weak and outside of nato. the trouble of course, will trumpet this as a, you know, grade a piece making deal that he succeeded with. if on the other hand, putting his ambitions are greater than that, and he actually wants more of you crane than he has now been, trump runs the danger of if he sells that you grand looking week and i leave. but

in any case, i think that, you know, of all the countries that had something to worry about, ukraine is probably the top of the list right now. absolutely. i know on that point, i mean, how do you use forecast this? i mean, does trump ultimately in your estimation, pursue a path that leads to ukraine having to concede more territory to russia? i mean, that is certainly what he talked about on the campaign trailer what his rhetoric would lead us to believe. and so far in his, in the people he's a pointed, there haven't been many clear signals about what exactly this will this will portend for ukraine. i mean i, i think in general, the extent to which that message resonated with americans that americans are tired of spending this unnecessary money abroad, of sending all of this money to israel money to ukraine when people are struggling to pay their grocery bills at home. i think this is a crucial part of his appeal and his, his messaging is omar mentioned as

a sort of anti war candidate as in incorrect as that may ultimately prove. but that, in general, my hope is that the democrats take a lesson from this, that continuing to pursue policies that drag the us into unnecessary wars, or continue to, to spend money on necessarily abroad. this is something that resonates and so i truly hope that in an upcoming elections, democrats will implement those lessons. speed. trump is consistently criticize nato, particularly when it comes to member of countries not meeting their financial obligations toward the alliance. is even suggested that the us would ignore a key part of the treaty and not defend certain nato allies if they were to face aggression from places like russia. how far do you think trump will go regarding nato? uh, would it be an overstatement or hyperbolic for me to say that there's a chance to withdraw the us from natal altogether?

yes. well over here in europe, this is the 64000 euro question. and we know that trump's deeply spoke to the european union and so he won't want to do anything to support that data is, is a more complicated problem for native it was still actually pretty popular institution with the american public. and if you tried to formally withdraw from the nato treaty, he was gonna pay some push back, you know, from the pentagon, from other parts of the foreign policy establishment. so i think it's entirely possible they'll stay formally within nato. well, declaring and putting lots of pressure on european countries to spend a lot more on defense. and in particular, by saying they should be spending that money here in the united states buying american weapons. he's not going to want to see europe ramp up and sell them defense industries potentially become a competitor to the united states or a more effective competitor on global arms markets. and that may be a more effective trump in strategy. they simply withdrawn from the treaty and

removing all american influence from europe strategic future course on. something has repeatedly, as i said earlier, branded himself as the anti war president of to do it. how likely is it that he'll be able to retain that title? but even under the terms you talked about earlier, you know, the drone wars and such moving forward, is there a way given the sort of arrangement of geopolitical circumstances right now we're trump can continue to even move in that direct. yeah, i think it's going to be very, very difficult just because the region right now in the middle east is a tinderbox. and he seems to be completely on equipped to move us in a path of the escalation. so i think that's going to be a very difficult reputation to hold onto, but to announce point, all of this is ultimately about the american public's frustration with the us spending money on every wealth or where else in the world, except when the american people, when he asked, why are we the only industrialized country that does not have universal health care reasons, we don't have money for it when he talked about so many things that are broken

inside the country. the answer is always, it's because we don't have any money for it. and yet we constantly have money to throw at other countries to engage in these like the wars. and there is something to be said about that is whatever your critique is of the form policy itself. we obviously have a bloated military budget and that's really what it comes down to. the fact that the pentagon cannot pass and audit the fact that all of this money ends up in the pockets of military contractors, private military contractors at the expense of the american people. and that's not going to be something that trump is going to change. and so whatever a foreign policy looks like in its details, we're still going to have a situation in which we waste all of our money on an overloaded military budget. instead of taking care of the needs of the american people and that's ultimately going to get in the way of trump selling himself as somebody who restored the wellbeing put america 1st in any way. now, while u. s. foreign policy has always been driven by self interest, are terms for his presidency pushed this ideology further through this america 1st

doctrine, which in body to more kind of stringent isolation, his policy, and the 2nd trump presidency. is there a danger that this will become even more aggressive and more dangerous? they will, the america 1st logic drive even more decision making when we see truck, for example, withdrawal from time and deals like you did before? will he pull out of global alliances? what they see as a 2nd, trump presidency producing in that regard. oh, he's already made clear he's going to pull out of the paris climate accord again. and he's been also very clear that he has scorn for the un. you know, already of us is not funding under uh the, the agency responsible for the welfare of posting and people and refugees. um, so i, i anticipate that he will further undermine international institutions writ large, including things like the international criminal court and international court of justice both of which are trying to pursue some measure of justice and accountability for, for palestine. but you know, more broadly this question of,

of putting america 1st as omar was saying, i mean, there's a reason this resonates with people that's spending on these on necessary, obviously necessary money abroad on wars. we've talked about the power v as are a lobby, but the defense lobby, so much bigger and more powerful spending huge amounts of money to both parties to maintain these bloated military budgets. to spend all this money unnecessarily. when again, we're not actually spending money to, to address the problems that people are, are having here at home. so if, if to any extent trump actually maintains in america 1st one policy, meaning that he's going to avoid unnecessary entanglements or wars abroad. i think that is likely to be a winning electoral strategy if americans feel that he is able to somehow avoid the escalations that we've already talked about. are quite likely given the current trajectory. but if somehow he he manages to navigate around them. um,

i anticipate that this will continue to be something that resonates with people, that they would rather have these resources spent on addressing problems here at home and, and, and again that, that is america's track record of being the, the industry as well. nation on the world stage has largely simply produced violence and horror abroad, at least in the living memory of those of us who sort of observed what u. s. foreign policy has done on the world stage and has not been the legacy of peace and prosperity. it has been violence and destruction that have to be the last word there, a steven watt on the dog. and i will see you then. thank you all so much for joining me on upfront. right. everybody that is our show upfront. we'll be back the

just 2 decades ago, you'd be lucky to see the conquer powers once red native endangered species. but that decline is of any age. what of hundreds of volunteers supporting ambitious campaign to make new zealand printed it free by 2015. we used to catch fire for that's a week. now we lucky enough to catch in the may be one a month. the campaign will require via rad occasion of thousands more wretched stokes possums and weasels. it has changed to put the flank. let's keep the key we is now breeding. and these hills for the 1st time in living memory, newsy to do sunset tower dies because they would know land fighters is one of those islands that have evolved separately from the rest of the world. and we have possibly unique animals here. he hopes these hills could again become what they once was a natural bud century. the sun rises brilliantly. here

the history was written and the nature became theories here, the beast in a totally timeless journey shakes model. war for translation and international understanding is inviting nominations for its 11th edition, starting january the fast and ending march the 31st 2025. for more information, please visit the awards official website at w w, w dot h t a dot q a the

i am us tells news agencies that it has approved a list of as rated captives to be released and the potential society as well as the tax intensified across the cause and strip despite the diplomatic bush the bulk of this opposite of a life. so coming, dying of cold age children freeze to death in recent days and gaza for families who, enjoying a harsh winter under his really pumps. serious foreign minister or just the united states to lift the sanctions during a trip to the castle. as part of a diplomatic tour to seek support rebuilding the will soon come to.