robotics versus having humans do routine tasks. i think the china approach is practical. it is focused on immediate usage and modernizeation. i think those approaches are more business driven. announcer: watch the communicators monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. joininf adesnik,o is david head of research at the foundation for defense of democracies. with us this morning to talk about the trump administration's foreign policy. withll start overseas national security advisor john bolton telling israel that the president feels that the withdrawal of u.s. troops from israel ticket condition of defeating -- israel's condition

of defeating the islamic state do not align with united states. what methods -- message do you think the president sent when he said he was going to withdraw u.s. forces? guest: he sent the message that everything his team had been saying for the previous three months was no longer american policy. thathad a firm commitment they were going to sustain troops until they were sure the islamic state was not going to come back. host: did that decision by the president and his advisers give us an indication of what may be ahead for how he will make the decision on afghanistan? guest: i think it did. it goes back to what he described when he gave his original speech on afghanistan. a talked about how his instinct was to pull the troops but listening to his advisors, he went the other way and had occasional indications,

unexpected outbursts on syria such as at a campaign rally in ohio in 2018 where he said the troops are coming home soon and then he seemed to be distracted and the team talked him out of that. the samean comes from place, his instinct that he wants to pull troops from foreign locations. host: a decision happening without a permanent secretary of defense in place. patrick shanahan is the acting secretary of defense. how are our allies viewing this? guest: they are quite concerned. some interesting that allies did not give us a heads and if the members of the cabinet don't know what is going to happen, it is unlikely that allies are going to get more of

a warning but it is a concern that major can -- major decisions will be made without their input. the kurds have lost thousands of lives fighting isis my our side and they are the ones are going to be left high and dry very soon in syria. host: is there any sense in terms of the position, that the president is close to naming a secretary of defense? of somebodyatter who has the president's confidence to rise to that position. the name that began to get mentioned was jim webb, a former democratic senator. president trump shot that down. all the names being mentioned are at the mention stage only. most interesting is the people who live in mention for the longest time like senator tom cotton, someone who publicly

criticized does it -- the decision to withdraw. host: -- have arrested them -- arrested a man in moscow, accusing him of being a spy. he was revealed to be a former marine, discharged. is this part of a larger political game on the part of the russians and how serious of an issue is this? guest: it is a serious issue anytime another american is taken into custody overseas. there are americans who sometimes commit crimes overseas but there are effective -- there are dozens of americans effectively being held hostage in iran and turkey. it is interesting to see what will happen. the russia case is unusual. it has come out that this person has multiple passports and a record of theft in his time in the military. it is hard to figure out what is happening but it is certainly possible. the bigger case of retaliation is what the chinese are doing.

the canadians at our instigation arrested a top text you think you from china and china are basically collecting canadians off the street without much pretense. host: that they wind up arresting americans? orthis a three-way conflict is it between the chinese and the canadians? guest: it is absolutely involving us. we are talking about the problems that tech companies awei, they are taking our technology through means illicit and -- host: david adesnik is our guest, director of research at the foundation for defense of democracies. we welcome your calls and comments. we are talking about the trump administration's foreign policy. (202)-748-8000 the number to call for democrats. republicans, (202)-748-8001. for independents, and all others, (202)-748-8002.

looking into 2019, we are already talking about some of the issues on the table. what do you see as the biggest challenge the foreign policy for the administration this year? guest: one is figuring out how the syrian withdrawal actually works. i have been talking to pentagon officials and many major decision is made with so little notice, it is hard to work out the details. the logistics are how do we get the troops and equipment out safely but then you have the difficult questions like how do we protect the kurds? if we were going to withdraw, there could have been a negotiating process. this is something the russians and iranians and turks desperately want. we could have gone to the negotiating table and say what guarantees can you give us to protect the kurds if we withdraw? we put the concession out there was a certainty, we give up the leverage. host: what is happening in afghanistan in terms of the telegram?

-- of the taliban? guest: they are not going very far. in part, the policy -- will make them want to negotiate that we have only shown that we will give -- get weaker militarily. the afghan government has been losing more ground. the more we continue to push these talks without being from a basis of strength, their long-term strategy, we have the watches, they have the time. host: back to the political front, the domestic application of that is those sorts of comments strengthen the president's decision to withdraw u.s. troops, particularly in a more accelerated rate. guest: as things get worse in country, it makes him less and less willing to end her a losing endeavor. why is he putting his reputation out there if things are not

succeeding? a bigve a -- he gave speech when he first of the numbers of troops, promising victory. now he is reverting to that policy he wants rejected. host: let's go to our calls. we first go to new jersey. caller: good morning america. happy new year to everyone across the country. of this trauma administration's foreign-policy decisions -- trump administration's foreign-policy decisions are terrifying to me. the fact that we would get a call from a turkish president and all of a sudden withdraw all of our troops from syria only proves that he has a personal relationship with these foreign governments and that terrorizes me for america. real quick, i wanted to say on

your last segment, i was trying to call in. i pray that michael bloomberg runs for president. , basicallyservative a republican. host: thank you for that comment but back to her comment on president erdogan and that phone call with president trump. guest: it is striking. the reporting indicates there was no major consideration of a withdrawal and then during this call with everyone, basically everyone began to challenge him. trump began to push back because everyone has threatened violence against the kurds. he said he is going to start the violence in the northeast as well. trump began saying i'm going to let you handle this problem and one of the biggest issues was the government's policy was we want turkey to take over the fight against isis. that is like asking the arsonist to deal with the fire.

turkey has long been in bed with islamic extremists. host: john is next in massachusetts. you are on with david adesnik. caller: it goes to show that all crimes are commercial, especially by european descent. especially when this country was taken and basically turned into a plantation because what you guys did, we went from the corporations to the plantation. you got the synagogue of satan rothschild family in israel. bankers andey are this is how the wars have been funded. the money has been laundered through wall street banks, this has been going on since the 17 -- 1700s.

people should look at real history. this is another but whitewashed -- this is nothing but whitewashed imperialistic -- we are going to our independent line. caller: thank you so much. i was wondering if i could call on your guest expertise to describe to the american people possible triggers for a war with iran and what war with iran would look like in the 21st century. basically a technical, analytical fact-based description of what that war would look like. and thank you again for the great service you provide. host: thank you. guest: i guess i would briefly

say with regard to the first call we got, it is saddening to hear that kind of anti-semitic conspiracy theory. it was not long ago that choose were murdered in a synagogue in pittsburgh. something really unthinkable. people i know lost friends and it is that kind of thinking. form ofitism is a racism that is uniquely driven by conspiracy theories. the second point of what would a war with iran look like, i think iran favors asymmetric approach. it would look like a lot of the wars that are building now. shiite militias. eventually, that is how a war iran would launch with israel would be waged. one of the most dangerous things out the conflict in syria is if we reduce our influence, it is

going to help iran buildup syria as a base for aggression. what they have done is effectively control lebanon through hezbollah which controls the country through force but a somewhat -- but also a somewhat legitimate parliament. they have built up a massive rocket arsenal. timescial estimate is 10 what they have. their looking for a chance to open a second front, using syria as a second lebanon. if of the fears i have is syria sees more and more advanced precision weapons coming in, it will go more aggressively against syria and lebanon. if we inflame the region and have multiple countries fighting, we don't know the exact path but it could draw the americans in. host: there was some indication as we were seeing the plan being developed by jared kushner sometime in early 2019. what is your sense of that?

has the involvement of the saudi government, the now pretty much established involvement of the saudi government in the murder of jamal khashoggi, has that slowed down the process of this middle east peace effort? guest: i think it has. the israeli elections are going to cause that to be delayed to some extent. to release something major like that while the israelis are fighting over what their next government is going to be is going to -- host: when do the elections happen? guest:. in march i am fuzzy -- guest: in march. i am fuzzy on the exact date. saudi's, thehe have been some interesting movements in the middle east. the gulf states trying to push a little more into the open in terms of being willing to say that israel has a right to resist iranian aggression.

statements that were once unthinkable from arab governments. host: radio listeners can see some of those discussions at defenddemocracy.org. next we go to larry on our republican line. made a president trump mistake in announcing he was going to remove troops from syria. iran has gained control the middle east. they have i -- they have a shiite sphere. it is waging a proxy war with israel. a tacticalined nuclear arsenal. we are headed towards a nuclear world war iii.

host: thank you for your call. guest: i don't think there was any reason to believe that iran has active nuclear weapons. there were a lot of issues with their program. the israeli heist and intelligence coup has shown that they had a plan to build nuclear weapons that was active and was decelerated likely because of fear of exposure at some point in the 2000s. they likely maintained some of these abilities. the human inspector body has never gone to a ron's military sites -- to iran's military sites. they insisted it was unnecessary. this is a very serious problem with us not looking into what iran has. i disagree strongly with the way the obama administration handled the issue, but they would never give new their weapons to iran -- give nuclear weapons to iran.

-- one of their weak points we are going after. put intoer, the u.s. place very tough sanctions that had been in place before the nuclear deal. even just the anticipation that sanctions were coming back lead to a collapse of the iranian currency. from what we can understand, a major bout of inflation. people have been protesting for over a year, the government's conduct -- corruption and mismanagement. they need to do what they can to push back and show strength. they want to launch satellite launch vehicles which are essentially cloaked ballistic missile tests. missiles were not limited by the nuclear deal, so they have a bit more breathing room. they need to show something where they have strength because they are under pressure. host: let's hear from michael in new york, democrats line. caller: i want to ask you a

question basically about the trump administration's foreign policy. this is the problem i have. this man is a full. -- is a fool. i cannot figure out where he is coming up with this policy. was michaeld me bloomberg actually backing trump on the fact that he was saying that pulling troops from syria was a good idea. i don't understand why he would say such a thing. can you elaborate on why he would say that? guest: one of the most interesting things is that while you see so many experts like jim mattis saying a withdrawal is a mistake, there is a -- there is something of a bipartisan stance in favor of it. i have been scrolling through elizabeth warren's and bernie feeds and theyr have been in favor of pulling troops out of iraq and there is not been much resistance on

syria. there is this desire because of the heavy cost of the war in iraq up until 2011. the continuing cost in afghanistan. the american people for good reason feel like we are tired of fighting in the middle east and there is a desire to show we can pull troops out. if we can bring some home, it is a victory. the problem is what actually happened in syria is we have achieved a tremendous victory by having others do most of the fighting. we only put in 2000 troops. there has been a total of four american fatalities. two of them were an accident. this is what a responsible model of counterterrorism should look like. a small number of americans supporting tens of thousands of local fighters who, themselves are taking thousands of casualties in fighting. they continue to do this since we announced the withdrawal. that is the vision people would

have wanted to put in place. rather than say this is how it should be done, this is what a sustainable victory looks like, you see this desire to pull the troops so you can say you are bringing some home. host: china, another topic area this past week. --sident xi calling up wrapping up a call for reunification with taiwan. the plan finds few takers in taiwan. his first major speak -- major speech. and economist cartoon shows president xi as a dragon. you will be granted the same freedom that hong kong currently enjoys. that is from the economist. patrick shanahan, the new acting isense secretary says china at the top of his list in terms of potential military threats. how do you see this? guest: i think he is right. in terms of who has the most

military capacity, the obvious answer is china. they're the only country that is spending and growing by leaps and bounds and getting to the same ballpark we are. there economy is growing rapidly -- their economy is growing rapidly. -- that china is a long-term competitor. i don't think the president took ownership of it but it is an expression of what secretary mattis and -- secretary mattis and secretary tillerson believed at the time. host: let's hear from virginia. caller: i've got two very quick questions. i wanted to ask if you could comment on the fact that trump has now met with putin and kim jong-un and have a telephone call with erdogan and we don't

have any transcripts of these conversations. could you comment on that? also, trump gave a very inaccurate description of the soviet invasion of afghanistan. could you comment on that? your lastrting with point, i think a lot of people across the spectrum were shocked that trump describe the 1979 invasion of afghanistan as a legitimate response to terrorism . it was something more like their invasion of the czech republic and other places during the cold there was an unpopular communist government allied with moscow provoking resistance amongst its own people, so they invaded to say that. the wall street journal was announcing that history and everyone else is in agreement on that point. host: michael weighs in on twitter, saying that china is the larger threat. syria is a sideshow.

the u.s. presence there is not established beyond defeating isis. we hear from chris in boston on our democrats line. guest: a quick -- caller: a quick question. -- on israeli interference in united states affairs, domestic and foreign. in this documentary, the foundation for the defense of is marked as an unregistered agent for israel. i'm wondering whether your guest becauseent on this apparently the fdd does not wish to comment on it. guest: we have not been shy about commenting on that.

i would like to rebut the false information you have provided to the audience on air. our policy from day one, we do not take money from foreign sources including foreign governments or any other kind. we take only from american donors and foundations. other people continuously try to smear us. that have a position supports strong american policy in the middle east, the best way to undermine that is to accuse them of taking foreign money. we are not happy with it. we are never going to do it. we are glad to have act based based -- fact based debates. host: when did the foundation begin? guest: 2001. host: let's hear from jasmine in alabama. go ahead. , how they question is portray -- how they break down

the understanding of not only how this will but impact us in the south. host: did you pick up on that? guest: i was not clear on what that was. host: do you want to clarify that? how will foreign policy affect us in the south? .e have family and friends host: i am going to let you go there. we have been talking about the president's foreign policy. you mentioned china in terms of the impact of chinese trade. is trade becoming more of a foreign policy to will in the trump -- policy tool in the trump -- guest: it is a means of exerting

pressure. trade deficits are a major weakness. if we import more than a country than we export to it, that is a would guess we have to address. he is definitely at odds with the economic mainstream on that one. deficit -- our trade when we are prosperous, we buy more from abroad. will we are doing poorly, we have lower trade deficits. the most proven way is to have a recession at home. in terms of real conflicts, i don't think previous and ministrations have faced up to the extent that china is waiting to sustained economic warfare to undermine our technology base to create cyber threats that both steal our intellectual property, undermine our technology and create long-term strategic threats. that is essential. host: we have not touched on this but looking to central and south america, the new president

of brazil, much more in line with president trump's solid -- philosophy. the u.s.u see relations with brazil and other south american nations changing during the trump administration? guest: in a way, it has been somewhat of a secondary theater. venezuela has been a prominent issue. we continue to see a socialistic dictatorship imploding. people are starving and they are sending millions of refugees to other countries. brazil's domestic corruption has been driving it more than anything else. the former president in jail, half of their congress indicted. it is a level we have concerns about. host: next on our republican line, welcome. caller: good morning.

i am going to say something and i hope you listen. president obama when he came president after president after president cap russia out of crimea. -- kept russia out of crimea. president obama said there it is, take it if you want it. he pulled the troops out of iraq way to sin. -- way too soon. president trump is standing up for the god of the holy bible. real -- i -- is israel, god's chosen people. host: let's let you go there. guest: we don't know if it is more of an intimidation move. there was a major naval incident where the russians fired on ukrainian ships. the historical record, obama did

not invite an invasion of crimea. we were trying to support the ukraine moving in a democratic direction. what happened was russia marched in and took it. there was a lot of talk about trump and russia and i think the paradox to callout on trumps russia policy is that some of the actual moves have been tougher than what obama did on sanctions another fronts but the rhetoric has been quite disturbing. to see republicans speaking out across the board over what trump said at the meeting in helsinki. host: c-span's washington journal live everyday with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, "washington post" national political reporter and pbs host

robert kosta previews the week ahead in washington and then e new federal role requiring hospitals to post prices online. be sure to watch crmp span's "washington journal" live at 7:00 eastern this morning. join the discussion. >> live coverage coming up today. former diplomats and defense officials on mad earnizing arms control policy. and a discussion with steevep townsend on recruiting for the u.s. army. watch both events live on c-span 2. >> tonight on the communicators. we'll discuss the race between the u.s. and china to develop artificial twedges chinese technology leader and former head of google china. >> i think the u.s. companies,

the best of them tend to be ph d driven. looking for applications. the best of the chinese at least the emerging chinese a.i. companies are those looking for ways to make money and build a great product, reach the greatest number of people. either save a lot of costs or increase the margin or by increasing the clear efficiency n productivity with a.i. and robotics, reducing tasks that humans have to do. the chinese approach is practical, focused on immediate usage and modernizeation. i think those approaches are more business-driven. >> watch tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2.