hello, i'm christian fraser. this is the context on bbc news. as we gear up for a second trump presidency — what will it mean for the war in ukraine? our correspondent visits soldiers on the front line. one of the president—elects other fixations at the moment is expanding the borders

of the united states, to include greenland, the panama canal maybe even canada becoming the 51st state. panama canal is a disgrace, what took place at the panama canal. jimmy carter gave it to them for $1 and they were supposed to treat us well. i thought it was a terrible thing to do. if those hostages aren't back — i don't want to hurt your negotiation. if they're not back by the time i get into office, all hell will break out in the middle east. well, we need greenland for national security purposes. i've been told that for a long time. are you also considering military force to annexe and acquire canada? no. economic force. because canada and the united states, that would really be something. but why are we supporting a country 200 billion plus a year? our military is at their disposal. all of these other things. they should be a state. that's why i told trudeau. i hope to have six months. no, iwould think, i hope

long before six months. look, russia is losing a lot of young people and so is ukraine. all of which has foreign leaders weighing that familiar question: just how seriously should they take him? his advisers say these new ambitions are part of a broader strategy to counter the rise of russia and china in the west — perhaps more specifically in the arctic. our next guest has characterised it as the seeds of a new "trump doctrine." the renowned geo—strategist thomas barnett has just written a very american—centric piece for politico, titled "the real logic behind trump's global ambitions". welcome to the programme. thank you for having me on. i read this on the plane over, as a brit reading, it was fascinating, but you made a point, it doesn't exist in a

void, donald trump isn't reacting to a sense of fear within his own ranks which tells us we probably should take it more seriously. think about modern _ take it more seriously. think about modern globalisation, | take it more seriously. think- about modern globalisation, the history of it since the second world war has been mostly east— west integration process, which is pretty much done, i know we are starting to see a desire arise among the major powers and superpowers to decouple, the risk those relationships a bit. at the same time, you have the structural changes that are dragon a future of north — south integration. the of climate change devastating the lower latitudes, going to drive people to the north, we are seeing that was species all over the planet, you have the democratic disparities, birth dearth, publishing collapses in the north, the first child and young population in the south, and then the economic, the future of consumption will be

concentrated in the global south. when you look at those changes, this would be a north— south world, and that will be in america, over time, south world, and that will be in america, overtime, the south world, and that will be in america, over time, the next several faa — decades, will be more hemispherical he focused, and we are getting a glimpse of that future in the bombastic delivery by donald trump. you are it is not — delivery by donald trump. you are it is not one _ delivery by donald trump. you are it is not one thing but all things at once, and it is coming quickly. like he is the president to grasp the nettle while others have swerved it? think about it, he is a great climate change denier, and the great isolationist, so he is the next one to go to greenland, in this instance, and if he is willing to look at these concepts, that will look like when nixon went to vietnam in 1962. so there's an opposites attract what also that ability, rather uncanny, to a sense of fear within the

ranks and weapon as it for political mobilisation and he knows it is a winning argument with it lots of people, sounding better than us retreating from the world and us fighting with the chinese and russians in a renewed cold war that no one wants. it speaks of that frontier mentality of the united states and frankly the eu is going, so if the eu can grow and the economists can say, hey, canada, and think aboutjoining the eu, they did that last week, it is not crazy or weird to think about canada turning to think about canada turning to the united states or greenland turn into the united states in the long haul. you sit in your— states in the long haul. you sit in your article _ states in the long haul. you sit in your article that - states in the long haul. you sit in your article that we i states in the long haul. you sit in your article that we are done building a world order, which we have overseen from 1954 to 2008, does that in your view mean that eventually americans willjust want view mean that eventually americans will just want to decouple from europe? ida. americans willjust want to decouple from europe? no, i think there _ decouple from europe? no, i think there are _ decouple from europe? no, i think there are three - decouple from europe? no, i

think there are three main i think there are three main manufacturing demand hubs in the look global economy, north america, europe, which is the biggest in many ways in terms of demand, then china and east asia, those three will get along with each other but they are also going to compete, and they are going to compete in they are going to compete in the superpower brandon ward to see who can kind of network and capture and weigh over the — win over the brand loyalty of this emergent mobile majority middle class, centred increases the in the global south. china is ingress of with its both enrolled initiative, russia has his malinga ways, europe may not be in stuff like that, it may be focused on the middle east and africa, and america will be focus on latin america and south america, because when the pain hits and agriculture is devastated and people are on the move in more numbers than they are today moving towards they are today moving towards the poles like the species are,

china will not care about problems in latin america, america will not keep as care about europe's problems in the middle east in terms of the flows, everyone will have their problems to do with, which is why another reason why north to south integration over time makes a lot of sense, and assuming that europe integrated east europe after the cold war. thomas, stay there i want to throw this to our panel, i am seen it throughout british presume at the moment because were evident active debate about the chagos islands which has an impact on the united states because of our big base in diego garcia and keir starmer is of the view that they should hand it back and in this framework we are talking about, this expansionist strategy coming from washington, how will they view that question mark america? america will not be giving things— america will not be giving things back, i don't even think under— things back, i don't even think under a — things back, i don't even think undera different things back, i don't even think under a different president and donald — under a different president and donald trump, will americans give _ donald trump, will americans give things back, it wasjimmy carter— give things back, it wasjimmy

carter giving away the panama canal, — carter giving away the panama canal, which is not popular, and — canal, which is not popular, and also _ canal, which is not popular, and also taking a second look at things— and also taking a second look at things like great britain is with— at things like great britain is with hong kong, that seem to cause — with hong kong, that seem to cause ill— with hong kong, that seem to cause ill of the problems, so there — cause ill of the problems, so there often goodwill, and a good — there often goodwill, and a good idea, but maybe it should stay in — good idea, but maybe it should stay in the ivory towers. it is interesting _ stay in the ivory towers. it is interesting you _ stay in the ivory towers. it is interesting you said - stay in the ivory towers. it 3 interesting you said and about giving things back, let me redo what allister heath wrote in the telegraph in london this week, saying that the progressive realists at the heart of the government are horrified by transplants of my greenland and make america even greater. the chair as britain will pay £9 billion, it cannot afford, to an ally of china to sweeten our inane surrender of the chagos islands, one of our last overseas territories. the absurdity is that we aren't really helping the world or repaying our red lips — and that's, we are eating the chinese, the most aggressive facet is a fascist power on earth. is there a danger those on the left look weak when you

are playing to a global audience?— are playing to a global audience? . , ., ~ audience? one always looks weak when they're _ audience? one always looks weak when they're being _ audience? one always looks weak when they're being compared - audience? one always looks weak when they're being compared to l when they're being compared to an imperialist autocrat, of course, that is a strong man and we love all were strong men, and what donald trump wants to be the king, and this is gambit for it, but if you want to see a world where countries take other countries by force or economic coercion, this is the best way to make sure that gets kicked off. that is just go for it, that is of the united states go for it across the americas, which we have no right to do, and then let us seat russia continued to go forward into europe and china, or do you want a world where you respect boundaries and go through international law and international agreements? we can have a lots of greenland through agreements, trade agreements, business investment, you don't kind other countries to do that in this day and age.— in this day and age. thomas, joelle is right _ in this day and age. thomas, joelle is right it _ in this day and age. thomas, joelle is right it all— in this day and age. thomas, joelle is right it all looks - joelle is right it all looks very imperialistic, we will just have a bit of this and that and do as we please. it

that and do as we please. if you want to coach in a term donald _ you want to coach in a term donald trump _ you want to coach in a term donald trump uses - you want to coach in a term donald trump uses it, - you want to coach in a term donald trump uses it, it. you want to coach in a term - donald trump uses it, it comes out very— donald trump uses it, it comes out very nearly _ donald trump uses it, it comes out very nearly imperialistic, i out very nearly imperialistic, but the — out very nearly imperialistic, but the european _ out very nearly imperialistic, but the european union - out very nearly imperialistic, but the european union hasl but the european union has added — but the european union has added members _ but the european union has i added members progressively over— added members progressively over the — added members progressively over the decade _ added members progressively over the decade and _ added members progressively over the decade and nobody. added members progressively. over the decade and nobody has called _ over the decade and nobody has called that— over the decade and nobody has called that nero _ over the decade and nobody has called that nero imperialism, i called that nero imperialism, they— called that nero imperialism, they have _ called that nero imperialism, they have discovered - called that nero imperialism, they have discovered is - called that nero imperialism, . they have discovered is growing as a club— they have discovered is growing as a club that _ they have discovered is growing as a club that people _ they have discovered is growing as a club that people want i they have discovered is growing as a club that people want to i as a club that people want to join — as a club that people want to join i— as a club that people want to “oin. , ., ., ~ ., join. i “ust add one think that is, join. ijust add one think that is, which _ join. ijust add one think that is. which in _ join. ijust add one think that is, which in the _ join. ijust add one think that is, which in the context i join. ijust add one think that is, which in the context of. join. i just add one think that| is, which in the context of the way you wrote it, i did have some sympathy with, if it china and russia are looking actively at the arctic, and we know because of climate change much more of it is open, lean in and the greenland and canada are not going to have the resources to resist russia and china and it is going to fall on the united states.- it is going to fall on the united states. right, and if something _ united states. right, and if something happen - united states. right, and if something happen in i united states. right, and if something happen in latinl something happen in latin america. _ something happen in latin america, we _ something happen in latin america, we are _ something happen in latin america, we are looking . something happen in latin| america, we are looking at small— america, we are looking at small countries— america, we are looking at small countries that - america, we are looking at small countries that would | small countries that would devastated _ small countries that would devastated progressively, | small countries that would i devastated progressively, they are already _ devastated progressively, they are already been _ devastated progressively, they are already been devastated i devastated progressively, they| are already been devastated by climate — are already been devastated by climate change, _ are already been devastated by climate change, so _ are already been devastated by climate change, so if— are already been devastated by climate change, so if you - are already been devastated by climate change, so if you are l climate change, so if you are ecuador— climate change, so if you are ecuador or— climate change, so if you are ecuador or guatemala, - climate change, so if you are ecuador or guatemala, and l climate change, so if you are . ecuador or guatemala, and you are looking _ ecuador or guatemala, and you are looking at _ ecuador or guatemala, and you are looking at the _ ecuador or guatemala, and you are looking at the future - ecuador or guatemala, and you are looking at the future long l are looking at the future long ternr, — are looking at the future long ternr, is— are looking at the future long ternr, is your—

are looking at the future long term, is your future - are looking at the future long term, is your future one i are looking at the future long term, is your future one of. term, is your future one of independence _ term, is your future one of independence and - term, is your future one of independence and going i term, is your future one of. independence and going alone and hope _ independence and going alone and hope it— independence and going alone and hope it all— independence and going alone and hope it all works - independence and going alone and hope it all works out i independence and going alone and hope it all works out or. and hope it all works out or does — and hope it all works out or does it— and hope it all works out or does it make _ and hope it all works out or does it make a _ and hope it all works out or does it make a hell- and hope it all works out or does it make a hell of- and hope it all works out or does it make a hell of a lot| does it make a hell of a lot more — does it make a hell of a lot more sense _ does it make a hell of a lot more sense to _ does it make a hell of a lot more sense to align - does it make a hell of a lot. more sense to align yourself with— more sense to align yourself with larger— more sense to align yourself with larger political- more sense to align yourselfl with larger political economic unions? _ with larger political economic unions? and _ with larger political economic unions? and we _ with larger political economic unions? and we have - with larger political economic unions? and we have to- with larger political economic unions? and we have to look| with larger political economic . unions? and we have to look at it more — unions? and we have to look at it more benignly_ unions? and we have to look at it more benignly like _ unions? and we have to look at it more benignly like that- it more benignly like that because _ it more benignly like that because of— it more benignly like that because of these - it more benignly like that| because of these massive structural— because of these massive structural changes - because of these massive structural changes that i because of these massive i structural changes that are coming, _ structural changes that are coming, and _ structural changes that are coming, and not— structural changes that are coming, and not get - structural changes that are | coming, and not get caught structural changes that are i coming, and not get caught up in this— coming, and not get caught up in this kind _ coming, and not get caught up in this kind of— coming, and not get caught up in this kind of gives _ coming, and not get caught up in this kind of gives a - coming, and not get caught up in this kind of gives a trip i in this kind of gives a trip from _ in this kind of gives a trip from the _ in this kind of gives a trip from the 19th _ in this kind of gives a trip from the 19th century. itl in this kind of gives a trip from the 19th century. it is interesting _ from the 19th century. it is interesting reading, i from the 19th century. it is interesting reading, sit- from the 19th century.- interesting reading, sit down if your braids and you're reading it, grover look at thomas barnett�*s piece in political, and a whole debate about where britain fits in all of this, outside europe, and not necessarily part of one of these big global orders, but i leave that for another day, perhaps. i would take a short break. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news.

during the election campaign, donald trump told us repeat