depend on the policies that from in acts -- that president trump in acts when he comes after, after inauguration. and in particular, there's a desire i think articulated pretty clearly by prime minister netanyahu, that the israelis will be able to move from the lebanese theater to the iranian theater and actually address and by address, i mean, destroy the iranian, the iranian nuclear program. what's your, what's your position on that? and both in terms of what you would like to see and what you since president trump's attitude will be. well, first of all, the difference between an agreement with hezbollah or a cease fire with hamas, to me, a cease fire. hamas was simply a allowing the terrorists to regroup.

this is different and with hezbollah and that, and this is where i believe president trump can really make a difference and that is to try to store, to restore a, a level of governance in beirut. and so that's, it needs to be uh what was, hey, the paris of the middle east, i mean, and um one of the great cities of the world of a great country and uh and just uh it needs to be restored and, and the lebanese military who we've worked with for decades, needs to be restored and refreshed and to create the stability in, in the southern portion of lebanon. >> ok. we got a few minutes here. we can maybe open it up for uh questions. there in the back gentleman with the white hair.

we've got a, we've got a microphone to your right. >> would it be even better? congressman joel rur of the hudson institute? i just wondered if you could given that there's a change in the balance in congress with the, with the senate now coming under republican control. could you describe what do you think, what's been pending? what's been, what's been jammed up? let's say what legislative priorities or are there specific important pieces of legislation that maybe have not made it through over the last couple of sessions of congress that might be opened up in the new congress? what would you expect to be sort of the first things through if the log jam breaks, it's a new -- quick it is a new world and that very significant legislation, the assad anti recognition act 300. it was bipartisan, so much of this was bipartisan, but for some reason, the senate bogged

it down. 330 votes to not have a recognition and normalization of relations. and so it's been held up um inconceivably to me uh in the uh in the senate, but that's symbolic of so much legislation. some related to the supporting the people of the republic of georgia and over and over again, legislation promoting freedom and democracy for the people of venezuela. over and over again that had made it through with the leadership. and i give credit to chairman mike mccaul and ranking member greg meeks to get through legislation, but it's gotten bogged down in the senate and even with, as i mentioned a vote at 330 just and did not pass and something as elementary is not recognizing a dictator who's killed half a million people.

>> let me ask you a little bit about uh if i could ask you to give us a little bit of a civics lesson for those of us who haven't worked on the uh on, on capitol hill uh leadership of committees. what, what difference does it does the character of the leader make? what are the, what are within the purview of the leader? and how important is that position? >> the committee chairmanships in the house and senate are very important and, and i have to tell you, i'm rejoicing in the senate. senator tim scott of south carolina is going to be the chairman of the banking committee. wow. ok. and then senator lindsey graham is going to be chairman of the budget committee. >> and so it would be wrong if there wasn't a south carolinian in charge of major committee in the house, right? there would be an imbalance. >> no, no. what i'm telling you is the economy is in good hands and fiscal responsibility.

but, and so the chairmanship, so i can tell you right there, right away. and so that's quite a change. and then in the house, the number of chairmanships are uh on the republican side, we have term limits and so that's six years. the other party does not. and so many of their chair, people, members have been there for a long time. but on our side, um it shifts and so this year there'll be shifts on several committees and that the current chair, chairman and chair women have reached the six year limit. >> so, but what, what exactly is the, is there are the responsibilities of the committee chair? >> they actually control the calendar. and so that's what's so important which bills can come up and are substantially almost universally within the dictate and control of a committee. >> does, does the, does the

chairman have to work in coordinating with the ranking member or is it pretty much just your call on safe home affairs and also on armed services? >> it's quite bipartisan. and so you have chairman mike rogers working with adam smith on the armed services committee. but then you get, and we uh within the foreign affairs committee, it's quite bipartisan, but then you get to ideological committees. ok. i'm on the education workforce committee. and thank goodness, we have a real bulldog named virginia fox is the chairman of that chairwoman of that committee and because there are ideological legitimate differences between the political parties. the ranking member there is a top notch individual bobby scott. but ideologically, we don't agree. >> in the back there. >> brian maguire, european news agency. thank you for taking time to speak today.

just on trade. first of all, you lay out a lot of businesses that are doing great work in, in south carolina. and it's, it's a message that sounds to me like we're america is open for business, right? president trump is talking 20% tariffs on european businesses are not hearing that very lightly. what would your message to president trump be in that regard? well, i actually, and very much can see that he can use tariffs . we're legitimately because we've also as good as things have been. we also have in the district that represent cnc steel, new core steel and we've had in the past dumping from people's republic and i've been to shanghai to see the ba steel facility there. and so tariffs can be very, very legitimate and, and i think it's legitimate that our canadian and mexican friends maintain their border and our border. and so, and so that a way to get a legitimate attention has done it and, and i consider it

positive that prime minister justin trudeau has visited mar a lago and i'm very hopeful because it's, hey, it's so mutually beneficial. tariffs too. the horror. there's probably not anybody here doesn't know of a family that's been affected by the fentanyl crisis. and so the president is making it very clear to mexico and to the people's republic that this manufacturing importation has got to stop and, or there will be tariffs that have some pharm pharmaceutical background. >> i wrote an article together with a hudson colleague, i don't know, maybe four or five years ago about china and the middle east. and there was a guy on twitter who loved the article and he just kept retweeting it, retweeting it. and he made, he made maps to go along with the article and i

sent him a message and he kept writing here, here's a map to understand what this article says. and you have to read this article and everyone you should read the article, by the way, it's china's emerging middle eastern kingdom in case you're curious. but the point is i wrote him a direct message and i said, you know, thank you for your support. but i i'm kind of curious why did you like the article so much? and he wrote me back and he, and he said that his favorite niece had died of a fentanyl overdose. and he said until that moment, he hadn't really understood the importance of the, of the china issue and this and the message of donald trump on the on china. but from that moment, he said he was converted. i thought that was to me that was a very, it was very moving, but it was also a very interesting example of the things that make foreign affairs real to people. >> well, it does and i'm just in the last month, i mean, just to

see the efforts legitimately made by president trump have just been so encouraging to me. and then i'm also encouraged, he gets to work with extraordinary organizations like the hudson institute. so thank you all, and the think tanks that are here and across the united states can be so helpful in providing the background so that we can be proactive. i'm looking forward to the um as we see, gosh, president trump being proactive rather than re reflexive. >> we got just a few more minutes here. let's see. we've got a question here and then i have one. i want to ask you before we end. >> hello, david smith of the guardian. thank you. you talked about the values of ronald reagan in terms of foreign policy, but i wonder, do you not have concerns about some members of president trump's team from, you know, jd vance to tulsi gabbard, some statements

that president trump himself has made suggest actually isolationists might have the upper hand with regard to ukraine and others. >> i don't know how the guardian got in here. hey, hey, hey, hey, ok, i'm a thatcherite too. ok. so let's give credit. indeed. the triumvirate of ronald reagan and maria thatcher and john paul, i i to bring freedom and liberty to tens of millions of people. but no, i, some of the statements are isolationist except that that's why i point out that when people are concerned when president trump has been taken out of context concerning nato, what he's been saying is that all the nato countries should come up with the 2% that they agreed to. it's not that he thought of it they did before he was in office. and i had the opportunity to be

at the munich security conference and later it osce in vienna and that day i flew back and had the opportunity. it was not a real meeting, but it was a photo line. i said, hey, mr president, i've just left europe where they now understand in a very positive way that they need to reach 2%. and so, but he was taken out as being negative. and so i think it's taken out of context that indeed and then supporting ukraine, it was donald trump that sent the javelin missiles to try to deter a russian invasion. it was donald trump historically and how incredible to put american troops in poland. i mean, just, just how incredible that is with a polish american daughter in law. i get really very pleased about that. and then also it was donald trump that stopped nord stream 2.

and what a message that was to angela merkel and, and he was perceived as boorish and crude being so assertive that north stream too was financing war criminal putin and needed to be avoided. so over and over. and one final thing i grew up in the most british city in north america charleston. , so we appreciate our heritage. >> yes, sir. in the back. no, no, we we need for the viewers at home. >> thank you. thank you so much, wilson. i'm from georgia. you mentioned georgia. i'm at the fletcher school line diplomacy, but currently volunteering the country, not the neighbor. and as we speak there, around 200,000 georgians protesting against the brute force of the oligarchy. and i wonder what do you have to tell them? and also the prime minister, self proclaimed prime minister who said that your statement, recent statement could be disregarded as the new

administration is coming to, to office and should we have any hope that the barry act will be progressing this week over the coming days? >> i do believe. but hey, back again, the people of georgia, i equate again. let's go back to tiananmen square. ok. before the other people, i still appreciate hungarians standing in front of soviet tanks in 1956. i remember the little guy but, and now to see and hey, i still treasure the young cpa who was murdered in the streets of tehran and bled to death in the streets. but people can stand up and we've seen how it can be successful. we remember the crowds in bucharest as nikolai and elena ceausescu notice that the crowd turned against them. ok. understatement. but again, to see freedom and

democracy and of the republic of georgia. and i have to really coming from south carolina. i've got to be really careful professor as i talk about georgia, the republic of georgia as opposed to the state. a final point on that i was actually in tbilisi for a joint parachute jump. the state of georgia national guard has a state partnership program with the nation of georgia. and so they have a pentagon has a sense of humor, putting them together. i was carefully when they came down, was it the american leg or the beautiful cross of st. george. the georgian military were front line of courageous and professional and every day -- every way working. so what a benefit for the people of georgia, nato, and that you,

so we want to give encouragement to the people of georgia and i believe they will prevail. >> that brings us exactly to the 3:00 mark. please join me in thanking the congressman. [applause]

by china. this is 30 minutes. >> our next guest has spent most of his life keeping america safe. before retiring in 2023 general mark milley served as the 20th chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the nation's highest ranking military officer and the principal military adviser to the president of the united states, the secretary of defense and the national security council.

before that general milley served as chief of staff of the army. and over his distinguished military career, he held multiple command and staff positions that included tours in iraq, afghanistan, korea and multiple international hot spots. i had the honor of working alongside general milley when i was serving as the assistant to the secretary of defense for public affairs and pentagon press secretary under the late ash carter. and i saw firsthand general milley's leadership, his wise counsel and his deep commitment to our men and women in uniform and as general milley enjoys a well deserved retirement. he's actually busier than ever and among his new responsibilities, he's now a senior adviser to jp morgan chase. today, he's going to help us better understand the dangerous world we live in and the threats to our nation and our economy. please join me in giving a warm welcome to general mark milley. [applause] thanks for being here.

it is great to see you. i'm not used to seeing you out of uniform. so, first of all, congratulations on your retirement. are you relaxed now? gen. milley: probably not, but i'm ok. >> good, good. well, we're honored to have you here and to share your expertise and knowledge about it. what is a dangerous world? and, and i know you've given a lot of thought to it and you keep tabs on everything going on the world. let's go around the world to some of the hot spots that you're keeping an eye on. let's start in the middle east. we've seen what's happened over the last few, almost the past year. we saw this past weekend the israeli strikes in iran. you and i in the pentagon been talking about israeli strikes in iran a few years ago. that was a very big deal. it is a very big deal. what's your sense of where this goes next and just how dangerous it is going forward? gen. milley: first, let me thank you and the team for inviting me and, uh, i recognize that i can't see hardly anybody but i

know that the people in the road are controlling basically $24 trillion or $25 trillion of a $30 trillion economy. so good on you for doing that. and you may or may not quite realize it, i know people thank all of us in uniform for our service, but i want to thank you and your service because the two key components of national security and the international scene is a strong military and a strong economy. and i, and i'm here to tell you that the banking community of the united states is strong, 4500 banks across the country. we've got an incredible economy as you just saw with the economists and the envy of the world and a lot of that has to do with you guys. so, thanks so much for your service. [applause] gen. milley: peter, to get to your question on the middle east, look. middle east is a real challenge right now as we know, and you don't need me to necessarily tell you that. october 7th was a horrible day .

hamas in my view, and this can be somewhat controversial, i suppose. and i don't mean to be that way, but hamas is a terrorist organization. there's, there's no daylight in my mind between hamas and what the nazis did at auschwitz sort of thing. their goal, their objective is, is to murder all the jews and destroy the state of israel. and they are dedicated to that goal. they, it's in their charter, they came across that border on the seventh and they slaughtered 1200 people in a couple of if that happened in the united hours. states, the equivalent would be 70,000 americans killed in a couple of hours in brutal ways that don't need description here. so it's, it's understandable from my perspective as a soldier, uh the israeli reaction which was overwhelming military force and they dedicated themselves. their military objective is to destroy hamas as a political and military entity. now, here we are a year later and they have pretty much accomplished that military task.

they have destroyed probably two thirds, maybe 70% of hamas as best i can tell. destroyed most of their logistics and certainly killed all of their leadership. now, hamas is more than just people and guns. it's also an idea and there hasn't been a political replacement to hamas yet, but they've done a lot of damage to hamas. the cost of that though has been extraordinarily high, which is the collateral damage to the palestinian people in gaza. the military task of fighting in a highly dense urban area with a couple million people and a couple of square miles is really, really difficult and the israelis have not gone in there with the intent to slaughter a murder of civilians, but hamas is hiding behind civilians, they're hiding below hospitals, they're hiding inside a mosque, etc. so the military task was extraordinarily difficult for the israelis. but i think now that the leadership is gone, there is an opportunity here. and i think you saw on the news just yesterday where the egyptians are offering to help out with a bit of a cease fire. at the end of the day, you'll

probably see over the course of time, some political program emerge, you'll probably see some sort of hopefully an arab led peacekeeping force, peace enforcement force to go in there and stabilize the situation. but gaza and hamas is only one part of a larger problem. you've got a significant issue going on with lebanese hezbollah on the northern front, the west bank. you've got shia militias that operate out of syria and iraq, you've got the houthis and of course, behind all is iran and you just saw an israeli counter to the iranian attack where the iranians launched a 180 crew -- crews, ballistic missiles at iran or at israel and, and the israelis took those down. but the israelis answered with some precision strikes the other day, limited, not devastating and those strikes were meant to send a message to iran that israel can operate with impunity inside the, inside the iranian airspace. they took out air defense sites, took out some missile sites.

now, what will iran do in reaction remains to be seen? so, in the last 24 hours, iran said they would respond, they would use all the tools, but we don't know exactly what that's going to be yet. so we're in an escalation ladder. this could go in a lot of different directions. none of which is exactly predictable right now. but israel has the right to defend itself and that's exactly what they're doing and i think the us is supporting them. exactly right. host: the capabilities that the israelis have displayed over the last year or so, even in the last few weeks, i'm sure you're well aware of them, but they have, as you said, achieved some of their military goals. gen. milley: they have, they've achieved their military objectives to destroy the military entity or the terrorist entity called hamas. they've also taken out the entire leadership of lebanese hezbollah. you saw that over the last couple of weeks. that's incredible. what from military technical standpoint, their ability to destroy the leadership of

lebanese hezbollah is impressive, but lebanese hezbollah is not destroyed just their leadership. now it's a big organization, lebanese hezbollah. and the objective for the israelis, i believe is to prevent lebanese hezbollah from continuing to conduct missile rocket attacks and to push them back probably north of the litani river. again, very difficult task, not yet complete and we'll see where that goes. but again, the bigger issue will be iran at the end of the day. it's my belief and i may be wrong but i think that iran's hidden hand is behind a lot of this and these are surrogates of iran, lebanese hezbollah and the houthis and hamas. so i don't think they're doing things without some sort of iranian approval. the iranians may not have exact command and control in the true sense of that word, but they have a degree of influence that is much beyond, you know, just talking.

so they've got advisers, they've trained, they man equip they give them weapons and so on and so forth. so there's a lot of influence there. and i do think that iran is playing a very, very heavy hand here. so israel's fighting in four or 56 different directions simultaneous. it's not over by a long shot and we will see where it goes. from a u.s. standpoint, our interest is to maintain, to contain this at a level of conflict so it doesn't expand into a very broad, very significant regional conflict where u.s. or european forces have to be involved in some capacity. that is not in u.s. interest. it is a regional conflict in the sense that you've got attacks coming from multiple directions, but it's not a very large regional conflict yet, it could go that way. it may not, we'll see what happens but that would not be in the interest of the global community. it certainly wouldn't be in the interest of the countries of the middle east, israel and

certainly not in the interest of the united states. host: obviously, we have us forces in the area. they're not directly involved except for the u.s. navy sailors out in the red sea helping defend shipping lanes and keeping commerce flowing. any thoughts about the cadence and what's being asked of those? gen. milley: well, we do have troops in exposed positions. so you have ground troops in syria. you've got ground troops in iraq. we do have some folks in israel. obviously, you've got american citizens, you've got embassy folks there. you've got the u.s. naval personnel, we've got air forces deployed throughout the middle east. you've got a considerable footprint in the middle east that are all in various levels of exposure. if it was a broad regional conflict. now, we're capable of defending ourselves. your military is extraordinarily capable in so many ways. and i know general carilla, the commander of centcom has taken all the appropriate force protection measures for his troops. so our guys are at risk though, nobody should underestimate the levels of risk.

our people are at in the middle east right now. host: let's move into europe if we can in the situation in ukraine. some people have described it as a stalemate. how do you see this playing out next? and what, what's your, what's your takeaway at this moment in time about that conflict? gen. milley: well, i think it is a strategic stalemate so tactically at the tactical level you're getting puts and takes on either side, you saw this offensive by the ukrainians in to kursk. you have seen local offenses by the russians. so tactically, you're getting some advances and retreats on either side. so there's some tactical gains and losses. but at the strategic level, it is, in fact, its stalemate. it has been for some time. and what do i mean by that? well, warfare is always about political objectives. so the political objectives of the russians was to go ahead and well, warfare is always about political objectives. so the political objectives of the russians was to go ahead and

topple the uh the government of, of ukraine, the capture or kill zelensky and his government and then advance to the river and then get to the carpathian mountains that failed, that failed a couple of years ago. and the objective, political objective of the ukrainians, of course, is to eject the 202 150,000 russians that are currently occupying 20% of ukraine. so the probability of russia overrunning ukraine is very, very low militarily speaking and the probability of ukraine militarily compelling the withdrawal of a quarter of a million russian troops is equally low. uh neither side really has the military, wherewithal the military capability right this minute, to achieve either one of those political objectives at the strategic level. so it is a stalemate and it has been for quite some time. and now what will break the stalemate? well, we'll see the, we i think in the case of president putin and i'm not a mind reader, but i believe that he is calling on other countries, north korea, for example, to bring in reinforcements.

the russians have suffered somewhere north of 500 some reports are out there at 600,000 killed and wounded, which is really significant are their ground forces. are the russians still have a capable naval and missile force and air force, but their ground forces have been chewed up really seriously. they've had to have three mobilizations. the russians have over the course of a couple of years. so russian ground forces have lost their tanks, lost their mechanized infantry vehicles, lost a lot of personnel. and i think calling on north korean ground troops is an indicator of the degree of stress and strain that russia is under. and of course, you saw previously where they were using prisoners and so on and so forth. so russian ground forces have been chewed up really, really badly in this war. and russia has suffered having said that though if, if the united states somehow withdraws aid, military aid, financial aid or if europe and nato withdraws that in the coming months or years, that would probably be catastrophic for ukraine and

ukraine would be placed at a great disadvantage. they'd probably still fight, but they'd be fighting at a great disadvantage. and the advantage then would go to russia and russia would get a strategic boost in that and probably end with a strategic win. so that would be unfortunate. so for the united states. i'm in a camp and i think there's bipartisan consensus up on the hill for that to continue to support ukraine militarily. and, and if you think about it in terms of money and you guys are all bankers we've put about, i think it's 3% or so equivalent of the us department of defense budget to support ukraine. and most of that money has gone

into american contractors to build the weapons to give to ukraine and what have, what have, you know, in terms of, and i'm not trying to be cold blooded, calculating here about money and lives. but that investment has resulted in the destruction or the near destruction a couple of times over of the russian ground forces and now the ukrainians have done the fighting. no americans are involved in the fighting, no nato troops involved in the fighting. and i think as a matter of practicality, that's something we need to do, but it's bigger than that. it's much bigger than that. ukraine is not just about ukraine for the united states. it's about how world war i, i ended and what world war i, i was all fought about, which is the so called rules based international order. and it's a matter of principle, it's written into the very first paragraph of the, of the united nations charter. so at the end of world war, i, i, we americans wrote, as you heard jamie dimond say earlier, we wrote the rules that have made us prosperous and made us strong and safe for the last eight decades. those rules are under incredible stress. they're under stress in europe to be sure by the attack of russia into ukraine and the very first rule that underwrites that is that countries cannot use their military to attack

smaller weaker countries arbitrarily to change boundaries unless it's an act of defense. and in the case of russia, ukraine, ukraine was never going to attack russia. so this was an act of aggression, a war of aggression by putin which by definition in the united nations in the post world war i i documents is an illegal act. so he's conducting an illegal act of aggression and the united states stands for something in this international order and it's our job to stand on that principle. now it doesn't require the commitment of troops. it's not a nato article five country, but we are committing all kinds of resources with weapons and money and intelligence and so on. and i think that's very appropriate in order to support ukraine in their fight for their own liberty and freedom. show >> one last question on ukraine, what have we learned here?

we are talking about the north koreans apparently coming in in support of the russians. what have we learned about the capabilities of the russian military? did we think too highly of the russian military? what have we learned? >> the war is a dynamic interaction between competing wills. so the russians clearly underestimated the ukrainian capability. um they are, the russians are fighting a nation in arms, not just fighting the ukrainian military, they attacked with about call it 200,000 or so and seven ax accesses of advance in a conventional combined arms offensive on seven ax accesses of advance and, and uh and they use their air power, the missile power and ground forces. and the ukrainians had early warning from us. we gave them very, very exquisite intelligence. so we acted more or less as the ultra secret for the ukrainian military. and the ukrainian military was able to effectively execute an area defense. and we flooded the zone with the weapons they needed at the time, which were anti tank weapons against the armor assault. in fact, we gave them more anti tank weapons than there are tanks in the world. and, and they were effectively used and through the bravery and courage of the ukrainian people, they were able to defeat that initial offensive defeat, meaning that the russians didn't

achieve their objectives. and then russia readjusted and they brought their troops out of the northeast and they came around to try to create this contiguous land bridge over the summer, first summer and that offensive failed as well for the same reasons. and then ukraine launched two limited counteroffensives which was successful in kan in kharkiv and they were successful. and then over the winter, they tried to build their force with us. and european help to conduct a large counteroffensive in the spring that did not achieve its objectives. so you have, you're back at that stalemate. but i would tell you that the ukrainian people fought an extraordinary fight and are still fighting an extraordinary fight. their resources are not unlimited. and the russian military, i think they're a learning organization. you've shifted now into this. a lot of drone war and a lot of other capabilities of being introduced.

but the russian military, i don't think they were, were overestimated per se. i think that they executed their operations as we thought they would and the ukrainians beat them on the battlefield. and i think a couple of things that did surprise me, one was the russian air force. so the russian air force did not perform the way i thought they were going to perform. and that's because again, the ukrainians, the ukrainian air defense was extraordinarily effective against the russian air force and they shot down the russian airplanes in the initial part of the fight. and so the russians, all the russians have done now is use their air force from russian airspace, launching long range precision missiles into ukraine. so that was, that was one, the other one that really surprised me was the ineffective use of russian electronic warfare. i thought that was going to be a much bigger factor than it proved to be. and i still am not 100% sure why they didn't shut down all the command and control networks that the ukrainians were using. some people have suggested because they're using the same frequency levels, same radio

types, that sort of thing. i don't know. i'm not sure even today, what the full reason is, but the russian, the full capability of russian electronic warfare, i don't think was brought to bear and there were some other big lessons learned but broadly speaking. no, i don't think they were overestimated. i think the ukrainian defensive capability and the heroic nature of the ukrainian people were perhaps a bit underestimated. >> i may move you to asia now. great indo asia pacific. yes, we've seen what the chinese have been doing to bolster their military. we've seen the south china sea and some of the activities there. we've seen the tension around taiwan that continues. what makes you nervous or what has your eye in the indo asia pacific right now? >> well, look, we're, we're in a uh geopolitical competition struggle uh with china. uh it's going to be multigenerational. this isn't near term like tomorrow, next day it's going to be over. um and there is the possibility,

not the probability but the possibility of armed conflict between two great powers. united states and china. uh china has the natural resource, the people, the population, and most importantly, the money to challenge the united states on a global scale. if you look back when i was, i was commissioned in 1980 i did 44 years of service. during that 44 years, the russian military or the chinese military transitioned from a foot infantry, peasant based foot infantry army with no satellites, no navy, no significant air force, no missile force. then in 1979 deng xiaoping reformed their economy and you know that the chinese economy had a growth rate of 10% or so. for maybe 30 years, it came down to seven now down to four. and they've got internal challenges, but china became an enormously powerfully rich country, second only to the united states. and like most countries throughout history, when they

earned that level of wealth, when they, when they developed that amount of financial throw weight in the system, they also embarked upon a military program to develop their military to be world class. so for the first time in chinese history, they have now 44 years later, 45 years later developed the world class military. now they're not equal yet to the united states military. the united states military is still the most powerful, most effective force in the world. and the chinese know that but the chinese are trying to develop their military to a point where they will be the dominant military in east asia, western pacific, at least by the mid thirties or maybe earlier, president xi has told his generals to develop the capability. he didn't say he was going to invade but to develop the capability to invade the island of taiwan and seize it by 2027

which is right around the corner. now, that doesn't mean he's going to do it. he told his guys to develop the capability to do it. and there's some symbology there because it's the 2027 is the 1/100 anniversary of the people's liberation army as well. but by the mid thirties, china's intent is to be the dominant military diplomatic economic power in all of all of asia. by mid century. by 2049 it's china's aspiration to be the number one global military diplomatic power, at least coequal but preferably superior to the united states in terms of its economic throw weight and its military. now, will china get there or not very much an open question? and that could go in a lot of different directions. china is not 10 ft tall, they have all kinds of internal problems and so on and so forth. but it is worth, you know, paying very close attention to because they are probably the one country who has the legs and the distance that could literally challenge the united states position on a global scale.

russia clearly is an acute threat and it's dangerous. they obviously have a lot of nuclear weapons and they're engaged in active the biggest ground war in europe since 1945. but it's really china, that is the long range serious challenge to the united states. and it's more complicated. we're living in a multi polar world now. so you've got three great powers, the united states, russia and china. during the cold war, we had two immediately following the cold war. it was a unipolar moment, as people say so for a short period time, the united states clearly was pre eminent and the only real superpower out there. but today, it's clear we're in a multi polar world and that's really growing in a lot of different ways and it's a much more complex world today than it was not too long ago. so we're in an environment internationally geopolitically where you have an active war going on in the middle east. you've got the largest ground war since 1945 going on in europe and you've got china that is certainly becoming much more

assertive, if not necessarily aggressive with their military use in the south china seas trying to intimidate and use military coercion against taiwan. and so it is a, it's a world in which there are a variety of warning flags that are out there now. they, this is not necessarily new. these flags have been fluttering for a good 10 plus years, but they're out there and, and i would just caution as we go forward as a country um for people to pay close attention to what i was talking about this so called rules based order. uh if you go back, at least in european history, uh go back to say the treaty of westphalia which ended the 30 years war in europe, um that, you know, where, where protestants and catholics were slaughtering each other for 30 years. and they come up with this idea of sovereignty and sovereign nations and, and it's called the

treaty of westphalia. that westphalian system was in order in europe that prevented major outbreaks of continental wide war for about 100 years until it broke down in the 17 fifties. uh in the uh in the seven years war in europe and in the united states of the french and indian war. uh and then that lasted for 65 years where europe ripped itself apart. it leads the american revolution, it leads the french revolution. uh it leads to the napoleonic wars of 20 years. and then in 1815 napoleon wars were over napoleons in elba and they say, you know, we can't do this again 65 years. so they set up the concert of europe and that lasted for 100 years to 1914. and it breaks down into world war. i where we now go into 30 more years of war between 1914 and 1945 and 150 million people get slaughtered in the conduct of great power wars. so in 1945 we, the united states gathered people together as jamie was saying earlier at bretton woods and we set up nato, we set up the un and of course other countries participated, but it was the united states that took the lead.

we're in the 80th year of that, that, that so called rules based order. and there is stress on that in the international system and there is stress on that domestically as well. there are many people domestically who want to pull back were overstretched and these are legitimate concerns. but if you throw out that rules based order, you really run the risk of, you know, creating this hobs and world of only the strong survive. and that's a very dangerous world. i was at normandy several different times but one of the times recently i saw a sergeant from the 82nd airborne division who jumped in and parachuted into normandy the night before the amphibious landing. and i leaned over to him in my uniform and i said, sergeant, tell me, tell me your great lessons of world war.

i, i, and i thought he'd tell me some tactical lessons about shoot straight or stay low or something like that. and he looked up with tears in his eyes and he said, general, never let it happen again. and you know, don't let that happen. the same message that my dad hit the beach at iwo jima, same message as my mother had, who served in the navy in world war. i i, the great power wars are horrible, terrible things and we need to make sure that we put a great effort at maintaining our superior economy, maintaining a superior military, maintaining mature, seasoned leaders that are thoughtful deliberative, not impulsive, not going to get out there and, and get us wrapped around the axle with a great power of war. so that could be a very dangerous thing. so history doesn't repeat itself, but as mark twain says, it rhymes and we're in one of those moments when history can rhyme. so i throw a flag out there for folks for the next 1015 years are going to be very determinative for our children and our grandchildren. and i think that you should have confidence in your military. your military is dedicated to the constitution and they're not going to turn their back on it. they're going to defend the u.s.

>> we got time for one last question and i want to try and combine that thought right there about the current us military, the capabilities of our women and men in uniform. how good are our people? and then i pointed for those transitioning out of the military. i'm not encouraging anyone to leave the military, but tell me why these bankers should consider hiring someone leaving the military? >> look, you have a great military and anyone who says otherwise either never served no want to serve, dodged their service or don't know what they're talking about. so i can assure you, i can assure you from private to general. you have an exceptional military that is highly trained, very well led, very well equipped right now. you're, you're running probably about 100 to 150 ships in the oceans of the world, keeping the sea lanes safe for commerce.

you're running about probably 5000 sorties of aircraft every day. you've got 180,000 us troops deployed in about 100 120 countries around the world, maintaining some of stability. that's not happening because of pixel dust and magic dust. that's happening because of well trained, well resourced, well led troops around this world and many of them are in harm's way. so every single day, we should be thanking the lucky stars that we have young men and women that are willing to answer the call to the colors because they're out there on freedom's frontier every day, allowing you to be bankers, allowing americans the right to vote in next week, allowing americans freedom of speech and the right to protest and so on and so forth. those rights are the down payment for those rights. the down payment is the blood of american soldiers and that has been paid for for 2.5 centuries. so you have every right to be

proud of your soldiers, your sailors, your airmen and marines because they're the ones on a day to day basis that are providing the environment for you to enjoy the freedoms that we have. and i will tell you that those that do separate from service, i would just ask you to really consider hiring a vet, what you're going to get is a mature young man or woman. you're going to get someone who's dedicated, hard worker who wants to get ahead. they're well disciplined and they're good people and they're going to, they're going to do great things for america. one of the things that the american military does and does very well is create great american citizens and we take them from high school or college and whether they're officer nco or junior enlisted, every single one of them is dedicated to this country and they're never going to turn their back on the constitution show less text on that note, general millet. thank you for your service. thank you for being here today. appreciate it. oh, great. we're gonna head out this way.

the hudson institute in washington, d.c.

he will share with us is and sites on the middle east. congressman, you bring a depth of experience to this discussion. as a senior member of the house foreign affairs committee you served as the chair of the subcommittee on the middle east. north africa and central asia. and a subcommittee in europe. you're the lucas service -- longest serving never of the house armed services committee for your coach are numerous caucuses, including bulgaria,

france, u.k., korea, ethiopia, belarus, bangladesh, afghanistan, qatar and the republican caucus on israel. >> and india. >> i left a few off so we were not here all afternoon. the right your career you have been a steadfast advocate for promoting peace through a strong national defense, reducing the tax burden on american families and ensuring physical response bloody by limiting federal government spending. we are eager to hear your recommendations towards the middle east, a region of critical importance to global stability and the u.s. interest. thank you for being here today. i will speak one-on-one with the congressman for 30 to 45 minutes. perhaps we will have time for questions. fantastic. why don't we start with what is in the headlines? syria. can i get your reflections on what is going on?

it is hard for most people to follow. >> what an extraordinary weekend. putting syria in perspective, the city of aleppo, three times the size of washington, d.c., has been taken over by the rebels. this is a city that tragically in 2012 that when he 16 was the assault location of russian federation or criminal p utin. amazingly enough, the dictator assad could stay in office and stay in power. the incredible thing is this weekend the rebels, a different composition almost every day, it is a real defeat for the assad dictatorship, for were criminal putin and the iranian

dictatorship. amazingly enough, hezbollah also was in syria. it's another defeat for them. it's an opportunity for the people of syria to rise up and create a free syria. >> why look at the map of the world today, i tend to think of this as a contest between russia, china and iran, north korea against the united states and its allies. do you see that in the same way? >> i certainly do. we have a conflict that we did not choose. this is not the responsibility of the united states, nato, western civilization. this is a decision by dictators who ruled by gun invading democracies who ruled by law. you cannot miss it.

i'm so set people in my party somehow not connected the dots. the dictators are working together in every way. they are working together with lesser dictators like assad. with kim jong-un. over and over again you can see a connection of dictators. the great thing i believe is that with the election on november 5 we can go back to what worked. that was peace through strength. we saw in the middle east. who would ever imagine how exciting the abraham accords -- to see the association of israel with so many of the arab countries. this should be continued. i have the perspective. i led the delegation of congress members to the opening of the embassy in jerusalem. the coverage of donald trump. on may 14, 2018. in 1994, speaker newt gingrich

had congress passed legislation that would move the american embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. jerusalem was the only capital the world we did not have an embassy. every time it would come to the attention of a president that they should locate the embassy, the state department would say it would create a dislocation and destabilization in the middle east. it was donald trump that the guts to say promises made, promises kept. there was no destabilization. it was the exact opposite. that was the abraham accords. i'm looking forward to the future of peace through strength. the emissary to the middle east. mike huckabee. heart be still. the ambassador to jerusalem. then you add to that marco rubio as secretary of state. how incredible.

and then i'm really thrilled that with comes from middle east, at least a phonic as the -- elise stefanik as the u.n. ambassador. mike walsh and security adviser, a team is coming in place that understands peace through strength. >> the rebels in northwest syria, we think of them and they have an islamist, they have an islamist character to them. there's a kind of knee jerk assumption that they're going to be hostile to israel. i think it's pretty clear that they have recognized that israel's destruction or near destruction -- let's say israel's victories over hezbollah have really opened up an opportunity for them. >> professor, you're ahead of the curve because you would think islamic jihadists are coming into aleppo. will actually, you have to look

a little bit further. a lot further and it really opens opportunity indeed because of the defeat of hezbollah, the defeat of hamas, and i am of the belief that these are puppets of iran. not proxies of iran. they're not acting in place of iran. they are iran. it is the octopus of iran. that's where the center of evil is located in the middle east. by the defeat of hezbollah, so the defeat of hezbollah, so significant and all the leadership of hezbollah, sol mainy and all to have the defeat of hamas, which i hope is complete soon. it's a real encouragement to stabilize forces and then another country i think is so important that we work with is turkey. there's been such confusion over who's good, who's bad. who's a threat.

legitimately to the people. our nato ally. gosh, we should be working together. >> that's exactly how i read that. i was going to ease into the turkia question because i get a lot of heat when i suggest that we should be working with turki -- occur coach against the russian counter balance. there may be some friction between them but it's our job to be the shock absorber and keep the tension between them. is that how you see it? >> it is and apparently we need you back in the administration. if weaved been here friday, the thought of aleppo, the only thing you knew about aleppo was

the horrible mass murder conducted by putin which then he tried to replicate in mariapol in ukraine. but now in putting perspective again, the city of two million people. we're not talking about a village but an extraordinary city that was leveled and just mass murder and with assad himself. -half a million people have been killed under the dictatorship of assad and 14 million displacedded from their homes. that's inconceivable. that's half of the population of the country and you try to relate that to americans and it's just inconceivable that, indeed, half of the population would lose their homes, their businesses, their schools, their mosque or church or whatever. and then to see -- i've had the opportunity to visit with the syrian refugee camps in jordan and then i know of significant

camps but even that is impressive to see the people from, many are business people. when it's refugee, i think, ok, we're going to see tattered -- and tents. no, they had -- with yards and then they even had a shopping district within the refugee camp. i know it from back home. some of the people from syria in south carolina are some of our best leaders. i know what this can mean for the american people and the middle east. >> can we talk a little bit about sanctions?

i know you've been a proponent of sanctions on assad and the cesar act is up for renewal. can you give us a sense -- for example, for those who aren't following closely, exactly what this means, when sit up for renewal and what's your prognosis? >> it's going to be good because it's bipartisan. i want to give a lot of credit to mike mccall and then the ranking member greg meeks. we'll be working together to maintain the sanctions and i want to codify it further with the new republican congress to codify sanctions and i want them to be against the country, i want them to be against the individuals, i want it to be against the oligarchs, against the businesses. specific as to banks. any way it can be done and then i'm also keenly interested in your perception of what we can do with secondary sanctions.

i truly believe that we can have sanctions on countries that support terrorism and finance terrorism but, indeed, the countries that are benefiting from reduced oil prices. there should be secondary sanctions to deter the markets that are exist tent. >> let's stick with this question of sanksening of assad. i want to understand your reasoning about it but also understand where it stands today in the -- in congress. your understanding then is that these sanctions on the assad are part of maximum pressure against iran is, that how you see it? >> absolutely. and it's so sad what the

administration did on the first day to eliminate the hootie terrorist organization and then look what the houtis have done. i was not aware of 150d. missile attacks on red sea shipping until a couple of months ago. now we know and instead of -- >> you're not being regularly informed by the military -- 1 >> the perception was we were dealing with the houthis, nomads, until you find out that they had underwater sea drones. not many nomads have that capability. [laughter] but the axis of evil do. and i'm still in a state of shock that it was not identified. wherever a launch site is should

be a target and for the innocent civilians of yemen, they should be made aware that wherever there's a launch site in their neighborhood they may want to move. we need to respond immediately and this has worldwide impact. the shipping routes of korea, japan, taiwan, of indonesia and australia and india. so it's foot just a local issue and the thought that now you have shipping lanes, even for the people's republic of china, that have to go around africa. all of this could have been avoided. >> i saw today, a we'll from tusk sincom saying that the u.s. nfl frigates had come underattack by the houthis. and the tweet said we've successfully defeated the weapons new hampshire shot at us. instead of talking about the people who pulled the trigger or the houthis who pulled the trigger or the iranians that

stand behind them, they talk as if we're fighting weapon systems that are making decisions on their own. >> it's disgusting. we're talking about a $39.95 drone in sending a $2 million mitchell to take it down. when did that become comparable? >> i can't believe that our navy is comfortable with that. >> no, they're not and liberation comes on january 20th. >> so you're expecting completely new rules of engagement for the military? >> rules of engagement and hey, a recognition -- and this is what i really appreciate about donald trump is -- and that is he can be insulted by repeat who puts their handout in negotiation or friendship or whatever but when they pull it back, he rex. it began with assad.

he was having dinner at mar-a-lago with president xi and during the dinner he was informed that assad had used chemical weapons. he said mr. president xi, i'll be right back and he authorized the attack on the weapons. he didn't mean to do that during the dinner but -- >> i wonder. if there's one thing president trump understands it's the symbolism of power. that's chinese saying, i don't know if it's an actual saying or one we made up. you kill the monkey to scare the chicken. >> whatever it is, we're quite aware that mr. trump is not perfect and all of us can have disagreements but i'm going to go back. it's peace through strength recognizing that the enemy is iran working with fellow dictators putin and xi and then you have backups of assad and un

and lukisinka. you can think of bizarre people around the world. sadly maduro right here. you realize how dangerous that is. >> you brought up donald trump and you know that you came to realize pretty early that donald trump represented serious in our politics. it surprised me how long it's taken washington, d.c., even republican washington, d.c. to catch up to this. to see that the trump movement wasn't a flash in the pan. they of that it represented something deeper in this society. why do you think washington has been so slow to recognize this? >> they need to get out of the beltway, ok? because once you leave the beltway and you go through different neighborhoods and it can be very upscale

neighborhoods, it can be not so upscale but to see trump signs in the yard. trump flags. i mean, it's just -- i almost go off the road sometimes laughing so hard to see the number of flags on a street and -- but it's a genuine movement and then it's so disappointing to me, the accusations of threat to democracy. it's the exact opposite. he wants to devolve power back to the states, reduce regulations. remember the commitment that he was going to reduce three regulations for every new regulation. but he did better. it was eight regulations that were done away with. over and over again, it's really impressive and then i'm so grateful that i get to see, as i go through the community, african-americans, asian americans, hispanic americans. i was in a christmas parade

yesterday where people would yell out a christmas message of support trump. it's not what you would think but it's just a broad cross section. people have faith in him. >> multiethnic, multiracial coalition. is is it fair to call it a working class coalition? >> yes, it is. it really is. and i'm always impressed when i go to very upscale stores like dollar general and -- and lowe's. ok, or whatever. as i'm going through and people stop me and if you looked at them you would be judgmental and say these poor people don't know what's going on. suddenly they are very eloquent on issues and it's very reassuring. >> so to your working class constituents, what do you think the trump movement means to them? the three top -- >> it would be hope and -- to

address the issues of overspending, inflation. they understood that if you throw a lot of money, trillions up into the air, that could have an impact called inflation. they know that so they want fiscal responsibility. they up that if you allow 14,000 convicted murderers into the united states that there could be a consequence of loss of life and horror of laken riley, just inconceivable so the issues there of law enforcement and then i believe people are equally concerned about moral values and they see a de peeruation of moral values so it's encouraging to see positive people being involved. >> does support for israel resonate with your constituents? >> hey, it's amazing.

i group grew up in what we call the holy city of charleston, south carolina. and at the time of the american revolution, the largest jewish population in the world was in charleston, south carolina. >> i didn't know that. >> the proviviansal usually constitution was the first to recognize jueish. so the -- that's where i grew up. the full total assimilation of the jewish community into south carolina has always been. and then you have that and then you have evangelical churches, truly the biblical references that those two ever who stand with israel shall prosper and those who don't, there is a consequence. it's a universal support and then -- i'm so pleased that,

indeed, i have never in south carolina experienced anti-semitism. i'm just appalled in what i see and i was really proud of elis stefanik. i was at the committee with chairman virginia fox and to have the university prosecutes that anti-semitism or calling for the death of jews, you need to consider the context. what? i mean, this -- that -- and i say that sadly, that i'm really grateful in working with our universities in south carolina and my other colleagues, we truly are respecting of different points of view but not calling for river to the sea, which means death to everybody in between. >> back in 2015 i think it was, yes, 2015, i did a town hall for

a congressman -- congresswoman it was from connecticut. she was a democrat that her statistic husband she was trying to decide whether to vote for or against the jcpra. they detected before her constituents on a radio program basically and then they would call in and ask questions and it was amazing for me as somebody who hadn't been in politics to listen so their questions. because they were almost verbatim questions. one person would say, i'm a professor of anthropology at the university of connecticut. i don't understand why netanyahu is unrunning our foreign policy and another guy who says i'm a mechanic at such and such auto

repair shop. i don't understand why we're supporting our enemies against our allies. >> disconnect? >> yeah, if you have a ph.d., and fortunately i do, but it didn't completely ruin my thinking. you can't just read the basics of who's a friend and who's an enemy. >> it should be bipartisan. one of the highlights of my career was to work with senator joe lieberman. i just am really grateful and i still miss very much the chairman of the foreign affairs committee elliott engel. they were democrats against the jcpoa, which was absurd on it face. we're talking about iran, the successor to the persian empire where we talk about 3,000 to 4,000 years of history and we're talking about a 10-year window. what? that is just absurd and totally

ignoring the danger that the regime in teheran never stopped development of icpm's and claiming they wanted to launch weather satellites. no, icbm has a single use and that is against the united states. there you have the nil -- they already have the missile capability to vaporize israel or bulgaria or independenta. they have quite a range but the icbm development and the total naivete and that is what donald trump is going to reverse. >> let's talk about the balance in congress. particularly in the house of representatives. every time i open the newspaper in the last few days i see the margin -- the majority that the republicans enjoy in congress is getting thinner and thinner and then you have elise stefanik and

mike waltz coming into the administration. so where's the -- what's the majority now? >> hey, i can tell you very honestly, thank goodness for speaker mike johnson because he's going to be hurting caps, which is a polite term because it's worse than that. some of these people -- god bless them. but hey, i just have a lot of faith and then we have a great leader with steve scalise and lisa mcclain now and i'm grateful that we have great leadership with tom emmer as our whip and then -- but the vote is going to be very narrow and what a challenge. >> so what is the election going to mean in the inauguration on january 20th for the legislative

gypped? >> it's going to give us a real opportunity, and a challenge and we must deliver. for example, on sanctionses, we need to codify the sanctions. they're currently by executive order but they could bed soified and over and over again, i'm also -- hey, i know on day one how it was misinterpreted he's going to be a dictator for a day. no, what he meant was that he was going to drill, baby, drill. it's called keystone pipeline. i have an interest in that. the tires used in alberta, canada, for the shale recovery are made in lexington, south carolina, my hometown. these are very nice michelin tires. 12 feet high, $100,000 each. so the we want those canadians to buy more tires. i see real change and the securing of the border. three years ago i was at del rio. it was horrifying. i was visiting national guard

troops and i asked the border patrol agents, how many people across on the transcript watch list? and -- terrorist watch list and they said we're not allowed to tell you. it's thousands. and president biden himself has said that lone wolf could kill thousands. whether it be convicted murderrists, or rapists coming in, so the border will become secure. even before he came in and he didn't mean it as a threat but a promise to our canadian and mexican allies that they would see what tariffs mean if they don't insist on the border and they are. it's in their interests too. i worry about mexico itself

being thoroughly equipment -- corrupted by billionaire cartel operations so what we're doing is helpful to the people of mexico. >> in terms of -- do you think there will be legislative action on the border? >> no, we don't. that's what's so frustrating to me. the state of mexico, all of the different policies really considering reimp police departmented. >> so it's executive action in that case? >> there may be some fine tuning. >> what about legislatively what do you think you're going to be spending your time on? >> i will -- working in every way to back up president trump with, of course, with marco rubio and we lease and with mike waltz and it will be -- with elise and with mike waltz and it will be a team. we have nike rogers with the armed services committee and

mike mccall electric off but maybe a new chairman of the foreign affairs committee and then mike turner with the intelligence committee. we'll all be working together to secure national security and back again to peace through strength. to me it's reagan identity agenda. i was really grateful at the milwaukee convention to help host 27 ambassadors from the eun union. and i pointed out to them different divisions in the republican party that it's basically the reaganite view of peace through strength. and a fun thing occurred is that two hours after that i was at another reception with half of the ambassadors

there and mike johnson began his speech by saying i'm a reagan identity. so, of course, that prompted me to applaud uh to applaud out of context. and uh and, and the speaker was really funny. he said, hey, that's the reason i asked joe wilson to come to all of my speeches. but that's the divisions that we have in the republican party. when they talk about foreign wars. i want it to be a foreign war, not here and i don't want to relive 1943 again. if we had stopped hitler. and september 17stalin poland. in five weeks, 60,000 poles were murdered. people should have noticed that and acted against the axis. >> kind of the division between us republicans -- those of us

who look at allies like ukraine and israel and see them as manning the front lines so that we don't have to. >> that's it. >> and they ski those allies as pulling us into conflicts that are needless to us. >> i totally disagree. my view there -- in this conflict between dictators and democracies so sad lip it is a hot war for the people of ukraine and the people of israel. but they are responding and the courage and i like to point out my view of president zelensky and that is when the putin-esque accusations that he's scrubbed, i point out to people, let me tell you a definition of noncorrupt is. that is that you're in your office and there's a russian convoy 30 miles long coming to kyiv to kill you 10 miles from your office and president biden did something right. he offered him a ride out and he

said, no, i don't need a ride, i need munitions. that is noncorrupt. we've seen historically people leave their country -- 1 and go to their villa in wherever. so i have a lot of faith in the people of ukraine. >> i have an aunt with a villa in bern. you didn't know that, did you? [laughter] >> my gosh, every house there is a villa so that's nice. >> it looks to me -- reacting just to the news of the last couple of days that there's a tremendous opportunity -- if you think of ukraine as a place where the russian-iranian alliance is imposing itself on europe and syria where it's imposing itself on the middle east and you see that astride both of them is turkia.

this movement and the syrian national army stands the turkish military. it seems to me that there's an opportunity here for president trump to really make a big play about working closely with the turks to try to stabilize that whole arena from ukraine into syria. >> and truly, i believe he's put the right people, with dr. bulliss who has lebanese heritage. with dr. huckabee, how incredible for him to be there with marco rubio. we have such an opportunity to create stabilization and to me that is what is so beneficial to our gulf allies and i really appreciate the first time i was able to visit and