10/03/22 10/03/22 [captiing made possie by democracy now!] amy: from new york, this is democracy now! >> i have never won an election in the first round. i have won all of that i did the second around. >> we're going to form good alliances to win the election. amy: jair bolsonaro threatened a

coup if he did not win the election against luiz inácio lula da silva. while lula won the per lot -- orality, he did not when the majority so now they had ta runoff. we will look at what this could mean for brazil and the rest of the world with vijay prashad, just back from brazil, professor noam chomsky in brazil right now. >> what happens inrazil, lae-scale mildly left social, democratic tendency will continue to develop and evolve. that is very important on the internationanal scene as well. amy: professor noam chomsky has co-authored a new book with vijay prashad, "the withdrawal: iraq, libya, afghanistan, and the fragility of u.s. power." we will also talk with them about ukraine. >> there's got to be pressure on

the biden administration, not only to back off and allow zelenskyy and putin to talk and allow them to have some kind of peace agreement, but also the united states needs to go back to the stables with the russians and talk to them. amy: vijay prashad and noam chomsky for the hour. all that and more, coming up. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. brazil's presidential election is headed to a runoff. in the first round of voting sunday, brazil's former president luiz inácio lula da silva of the leftist workers party won 40%, beating brazil's far right president jair bolsonaro who received 43% of the vote. it was a closer result than many projected and bolsonaro-backed candidates also performed well in other races. lula spoke to supporters sunday night.

>> i have never won an election and in the first round. i have won all of them and it the second round. what is important is a chance to think thoroughly on what proposed versus side and build a network of alliances and supporters before winning. show to the people what will happen and who will win. amy: there is widespread fear in brazil that bolsonaro could tempt a coup to ay in power. this already has been the most violent election campaign brazil has seen in years. bolsonaro spoke on sunday. >> we are going to form alliances for us to win the election. i can't talk about them at the moment. amy: we'll have more on brazil after headlines. ukraine has recaptured the city of lyman, a key railway hub in eastern ukraine. russian troops withdrew from the city on saturday, when day after russian president vladimir putin held a signing ceremony to mark

the annexation of the area. according to press accounts, many residents did not know russia had annexed the area. at the unitenations, russia vetoed a resolution condemning moscow's annexation of four regions in ukraine. 10 nations of the u.n. security council supported the resolution. four nations abstained -- china, gabon, india, and brazil. ukraine responded to the annexation by accelerating its bid to join nato. this comes as president biden has signed a spending bill that includes $12 billion in new u.s. military aid for ukraine, this is on top of $54 billion already approved by congress. in more news on the war, ukrainian authorities say at least 25 civilians have died in a russian missile strike on a civilian humanitarian convoy attempting to leave the city of zaporizhzhia. 88 people were reportedly injured. on friday, russian president vladimir putin gave a major address where he painted the war

in ukraine as an existential conflict for russia. he accused the united states and its allies of waging a hybrid war against russia and of attacking the nord stream gas pipelines connecting russia to germany. the pipelines were ruptured last week in what is widely viewed as an act of sabotage. >> if the sanctions were not enough of the anglo-saxons, they moved into sabotage. it is hard to believe it is the fact they organized the blast on the nord stream international pipeline, which run along the bottom of the baltic sea. they began to destroy the european infrastructure. it is clear to everyone who benefits from this. of course, those who benefit did it. amy: the united states has denied any involvement in the pipeline attack, but on friday secretary of state tony blinken acknowledged the development presents a "tremendous opportunity" for the united states. >> and ultimately, this is also

a tremendous opportunity. it is a tremendous opportunity for one side for all remove the dependence on russian energy and thus to take away from vladimir putin the weaponization of energy as a ans of advancing his imperial designs. amy: the death toll from hurricane ian has reached 87 and is continuing to grow amid a massive search and rescue effort in florida. about half of the deaths occurred in lee county, which waited until a day before the storm to issue a mandatory evacuation order. president biden is expected to visit florida on wnesday. today he will be in puerto rico whe hurricane fiona killed 25 people and knocked out power to the entire island. about 14% of the island is still without power two weeks after the storm. sunday marked the 16th day of consecutive protests in iran following the death of mahsa amini, a 22-year-old kurdish

-iranian woman who died after she was detained by the so-called morality police for allegedly violating iran's hijab law. according to the norway-based group iran human rights, 133 people have been killed since the protests began. on sunday, police fired tear gas and paintballs at student protesters in tehran. meanwhile, the committee to protect journalists reports at least 28 journalists and photographers have been arrested covering the protests. in news from the occupied west bank, hundreds of mourners gathered friday for the funeral of a seven-year-old palestinian boy named rian suleiman who suffered a heart attack after being chased by israeli soldiers. his father yasser suleiman spoke friday. >> my son was walking back from school with other pupils. the soldiers were in the area but there were no clashes. they were chasing students until they reached my home. when they reached my home, they

wanted to detain rian's brothers. when rian heard about the detaining process, he went to another entrance, scared. then i found him dead on the spot. amy: in indonesia at least 125 people, including 17 children, were trampled to death or suffocated on saturday at a soccer game in east java after riot police fired tear gas to prevent fans from reaching the field. it was o of the deadliest incidents the history of soccer. for the second time this year, a military coup has occurred in the african nation of burkina faso. a group of army officers led by captaiibrahim trre seized power friday ousting another military officer, lt. col. paul-henriamiba, who had led the country since a coup in january. on saturday, protesters attacked the french embassy where some had believed the ousted president was hiding. some supporters of friday's coup flew russian flags in the streets while calling for moscow to help burkina faso confront

its security crisis. venezuela has released seven u.s. citizens, including five oil executives, as part of prisoner swap that saw the united states release two relatives of venezuelan leader nicolás maduro who had been jailed on drug charges. it was the largest prisoner swap since joe biden took office. a pair of twin brothers in texas have been charged with manslaughter for shooting at a group of migrants who had stopped to get water near the u.s.-mexico border. one of the migrants died and another was injured. one of the brothers, michael sheppard, was the warden at a privately run immigration jail, the west texas detention facility, which has been accused of abuse. he was fired after the attack. british prime minister liz truss has scrapped a plan to lower taxes for britain's highest earners.

the proposal, which was announced just 10 days ago, sparked protests and a warning from the international monetary fund. on sunday, hundreds of thousands of people in britain took to the streets in a protest organized by the enough is enough campaign. >> a lot of workers have had enough, enough of not working full-time and navigable to pay their energy bills not being able to put food on the table. amy: the u.s. supreme court begins its new term today with a historic first as justice ketanji brown jackson will become the first black female justice to ever hear a supreme court case. key issues before the court this term include affirmative action and voting rights. and indigenous activist and actress sacheen littlefeather has died at the age of 75. in 1973, she took the stage at the oscars on behalf of marlon brando, who boycotted the ceremony to protest hollywood's portrayal of native americans. some members of the audience booed and mocked littlefeather

as she addressed the awards ceremony wearing traditional apache clothing. >> very regretfully cannot accept this very generous award. and the reason for this being our the treatment of american indians today by the film industry -- excuse me. and on television, in movie reruns, and also recent happenings at wounded knee. amy: the actor john wayne reportedly attempted to remove sacheen littlefeathefrom the stage but was restrained by six security guards. clt eastwood mocked littlefeather later in the ceremony. she died on sunday. in august, the academy museum of motion pictures finally issued

an apology forer treatment nearly 50 years ago. and those are some of the headlines. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. when we come back, brazil's far right president jair bolsonaro has threatened a coup if he did not win sunday's election againsnst former president luiz inácio lula da silva. while lula 18 plurality, he did not get 50% of the vote. now they had to a runoff. we will speak with noam chomsky and vijay prashad about the significance of this election as well as what is happening in ukraine. stay with us. ♪♪ [music break]

amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. brazil's election is headed to a runoff in the first round of voting sunday, the former president luiz inácio lula da silva won 40% of the vote.

beating brazil's far right president jair bolsonaro, who received 43% of the vote. it was a closer result that many have rejected and bolsonaro-backed candidates also performed well. lula addressed supporters sunday night. >> to the disgrace of some, i have 30 more days to campaign. i love campaigning. i love going out on the street. i love getting on a truck. i love discussing with brazilian society. this will be a first chance for us to have a face-to-face debate with the president of the republic to find out if you will continue to tell lies or if you will at least once in his life speak truth to the brazilian people. amy: there is widespread fear that bolsonaro could stage a coup to stay in power. already this has been a violent -- most violent election campaign brazil has seen in years. bolsonaro spoke sunday.

>> we're going to form an alliance pressed to win the election. i can't talk aut it at the moment. y: while lula one april orality, he did not when 50% and at the 11 person ray so he now faces a runoff against bolsonaro october 30. lula is running on a platform to reduce inequality, preserve the amazon rain forest, and protect brazil's indigenous communities after bolsonaro dismantled environmental and indigenous protections. on friday, democracy now!'s juan gonzalez and i spoke with vijay prashad and noam chomsky, authors of "the withdrawal: iraq, libya, afghanistan, and the fragility of u.s. power." they both have been following the race in brazil closely. vijay prashad joined us in europe was just back from brazil.

and in brazil, noam chomsky spoke to us. he is a world-renowned political dissident, linguist, and author. professor emeritus at massachusetts institute of technology, where he taught for more than half a century. i began by asking professor chomsky what the election between results far right president bolsonaro and the former president luiz inácio lula da silva means not just for brazil, but for the world. >> it is very significant -- not only for brazil, but for the world -- in brazil, in many respects, but one of them is wh you mentioned, the fate of the amazon. most of the amazon region is in brazil. of the two candidates, one of them, the current president, bolsonaro, is basically

committed to destroying the amazon. under his years in office, there's been sharp acceleration with his approval of illegal logging, mining, agribusiness, tax on the indigenous reserves. it's been known for some time that sooner or later if destruction of the forest continues, there won't be enough moisture produced to reproduce the amazon. it will turn to savanna. regrettably, that's beginning to happen. satellitand other studies have shown that in corners of the amazon in brazil, it's already happening. tipping points may be coming soon, which would be

irreversible. it's a catastrophe for brazil, but in fact, for the entire world. the amazon forests are one of the major carbon sinks, and it will be -- soon become a carbon producer. that's devastating for the world. and those are bolsonaro's policies. so for that reason alone, if he manages somehow to maintain power, perhaps by a military coup, it will be a disaster for the world. now, you might point out that there's a counterpart coming in the united states. the republican party, of course, is a 100% denialist party committed to maximizing the use of fossil fuels, eliminating the regulations that somehow

mitigate their effects. if they come back into power again, hurtling towards disaster. so for those reasons alone, the next couple of months are of extreme significance. there are many other factors. the business community in brazil doesn't like bolsonaro. he's too vulgar and corrupt. but they like lula even less, because of his social democratic policies. so where they'll stand is not so clear. also unclear is the nature of the military, the police, the various branches of the police. they tend to be quite supportive of bolsonaro.

the military is split. there's been a heavy military component in his government, unprecedented, in fact -- but other elements of the top military command have been ambiguous about their status. so that's naturally a reason for concern. bolsonaro has said openly and clearly that -- basically following trump's line, probably with trump's advisers at his elbow, saying that either he will win the election, or the election was fraudulent, that he won't accept it. in fact, he called all of the ambassadors to a special meeting to tell them that, which shocked the diplomatic community and did lead to negative responses. whether he'll keep to that or

not, nobody really knows. so there is a kind of background tension in the atmosphere. but i should say that from the little that we can see on the streets, in the community, it looks pretty normal. so if there are concerns, they're not very openly expressed. there are -- last night, there was a major debate, went on for hours. there's demonstrations and so on. so the whole matter is very much in people's minds, clearly. but if the polls are anywhere near accurate, lula might win on the first rou but almost certainly would on the second. but then there's the open question of how bolsonaro and the forces behind him would react to this.

that's pretty much the current situation. juan: well, noam chomsky, following up on that, the significance politically for latin america and the world of a lula victory, given the fact that we've seen now latin america go from the early pink tide of the early 2000's, then there was a resurgence of right-wing government and lawfare actions throughout the region, and now we're seeing almost every major country in latin america voting in left-wing governments -- mexico, colombia, venezuela, argentina, peru? and brazil, of course, is the largest country. this is a region with nouclear weapons, with no major armed conflicts in the region right now. what would lula coming to victory mean for the consolididation of this left-wig

trend in latin america? >> yes, you can add chile to the list. brazil is, of course, the largest, most important country in south and latin america. and the direction in which brazil goes is sure to have a major impact on these tendencies that you describe. of course, they're bitterly opposed by most of the business world, by the international investment community. what happens in brazil could be certain to have a large-scale effect on whether this mildly left social democratic tendency will continue to develop and evolve. that's very important on the international scene as well.

it will, for example, affect the character of brics -- brazil, russia, india, china, south africa, now indonesia -- developing independent, possibly independent, force in global affairs. during the early years of the century when lula was in power, he managed to give the brics alignment a significant role in world affairs. in fact, brazil became perhaps the most respected country internationally under lula and his foreign minister celso amorim. and if he returns to office, that could give anmpetus to the development -- the further development of brics as a quite significant element in international affairs.

that's connected with much broader tendencies, much broader issues about multipolarity and unipolarity in international affairs. the united states, of course, is working hard to maintain what's called a unilateral world order. other elements in the world, other components in the world are not going along with that. ukraine is a central part of that issue. about 90% of the countries of the world are not going along with the u.s.-u.k. position on ukraine, which is basically to continue the war to weaken russia and no negotiations. even in europe, like in germany, that's not accepted.

abouover three-quarters of the german population wants to move to negotiations now. all of these things are taking place in the background, and what's happening in brazil will have a significant impact on the direction in which they go. so there are many large issues at stake also just domestically in brazil. brazil has extraordinary inuality, kind of like the united states in that respect. an enormous amount -- it's potentially a very rich country. a century ago, it was called the "colossus of the south." it's never been realized, partly because of the avarice of the wealthy sector, which has basically no commitment to the country. and that will move in one or the

other direction depending on the outcome of this election. so there is quite a lot at stake locally in brazil, in latin america altogether, as you mentioned, and even globally, because of the role of the latin american countries traditionally in the lead in setting the stage for the next phase of global order. amy: noam chomsky, on the issue of bolsonaro perhaps not accepting election results -- and he is in charge of the elections now as president -- earlier in the campaign, he said, "only god will remove me from power. the army is on our side. it's an army that doesn't accept corruption, doesn't accept fraud." are you concerned that he will not accept the election? and also, how much has trump and his rejection of the elections

and spreading the big lie influenced bolsonaro, empowered him? >> well, trump is his ideal. and there's good reason to suppose that trump's circle of advisers is playing a role in bolsonaro's current decision making, as they pretty clearly did in the 2018 election which he managed to win, but on reasons we don't have time to go through. so he might try to follow the trump model. his statement about "only god can remove him" is a trump-like appeal to a large sector of his voting base. a large sector of his voting

base is evangelicals, right-wing christian groups, much as in the united states and trump. so references to god are obligatory. and charges that the pt, lula's party, will undermine the church, all of these charges which we're familiar with in the united states, are part of the bolsonaro campaigning. what he'll do, we don't know. now, a large majority of the population in brazil according to the polls is concerned, seriously concerned, that there might be violence at the time of the elections or in the aftermath. to this concern, there's reason for it. the alliance with the republican party, the trump-owned

republican party, is pretty clear. it's not hidden. so there are similarities in the united states and brazil that are certainly worth -- merit attention. juan: vijay prashad, i'd like to bring you into the discussion here on brazil. you were there recently. your assessment of the importance of this election? and also, to what degree is the electorate voting for lula and the workers' party, or predominantly for lula? there have been some reports that his popularity is much greater than that of the workers' party because of all of the years of corruption scandals that occurred while the party was in power. i'm wondering your views on those two things. >> it's great to be with you. and it's great to have noam from são paulo -- from minas gerais. the first thing i'd like to say is lulu is an extraordinary

person, an extraordinary campaigner, an extraordinary politician. you know, these things matter. i covered lula's first election campaign when he first won in the 2000's, was in brazil during his second presidency, and covered this year some of his rallies and public appearances and also had the opportunity to briefly speak with him. he is an extraordinary person. he's extraordinarily charismatic, touches the hearts of people. this is what i suppose in the united states is called retail politics. also, lula is this time running to the left of lula the president. he's made it very clear that questions of social justice will be at the forefront of his presidency. he's made it clear that he once again wants to have brazil be an important player in the process of south american integration and in the revival of the brics.

now, it's really important that we concentrate on the attempts to undermine lula. it's the military, of course, but got to pay attention to the fact, as juan said earlier, this issue of lawfare is on the table. one of the things i learned in talking to fernando haddad, who ran for president in 2018 and is now running to be the governor of são paulo state -- what haddad told me is that the key issue in this election is, yes, to elect lula, but also to get an impeachment-proof majority in the legislature, because what happened to president dilma rousseff is on the minds of everybody. you can win an election, you can push an agenda, but you will get removed by a legislature which is committed to a very right-wing politics. and to somehow drive a impeachment-proof legislature is important.

and that's where the assessment about the workers' party comes in. is the party going to be strong enough to elect its candidates across the country? or will it again rely merely on winning the presidency? so that first issue of winning in the legislature is key. you know, when lula comes to office this time, he has already pledged to start a conversation about, for instance, a latin american currency called the sur. this was tried previously under hugo chávez, called the sucre. but the sur, if brazil puts its considerable resourceses behind it, it's going to be a really important development for latin america. and, you know, we need to understand that, as noam said, the mood in the world is contrary to being pushed around by the united states or its allies. peoplere looking for some other kind of leadership. and the respect that lula has,

which the other leaders, let's say, in the brics countries don't have, that respect that lula has -- lula is the first brazilian president whose name is known in other countries in the global south. he's going to leverage that respect to drive a multilateral agenda in world affairs. i think that's going to be of great significance and importance. again, when he came to power in the 2000's, the md was not like that around the world. now we see the mood in south africa, even in india, governed by a right-wing government. the government has said, "look, we are not going to involve ourself in europe's wars. we have our own problems. we have our own conflicts." and i believe that a presidency from lula, a revival of the brics will allow some of that mood to be captured by somebody who comes to world affairs with a great deal of legitimacy and love and, in a sense, respect.

juan: and, vijay, following up on that, the issue of a greater, more multilateral world that you mentioned, one of the things that's happened in latin america in the recent decades is the increasing visibility and investment of china throughout latin america, allowing many of these governments, whether of the right or the left, to be more independent of financing and loans aninvestment from the u.s. and europe. i'm wondering your sense of, again, if a lula victory, what would happen in terms of this trend of china getting more involved in latin america's economies. >> well, it's important to say that even during the presidency of jair bolsonaro, china continued to be a major trading partner with brazil. and mr. bolsonaro was ve careful not to come out with any kind of frontal attack on china. let's be quite clear that the

arrival of chinese commercial, economic ties with most countries in latin america is inevitable. it's clear. you know, there's a reason why a country like argentina joined china's belt and road initiative. that's because the chinese have investment capital available. the chinese have a large market for the commodities produced in latin america. in a way, china is offering much more to these countries in terms of trade, development, investment and so on than the united states. that's just a fact. the question is that in the last period, from trump onward, the united states has attempted to tell countries in latin america that they should stop trading with china. this is what happened th el salvador, for instance, over a deal for a pacific port. the united states tried to impose on the government of el salvador -- and, in fact, succeeded -- to break a deal with the chinese.

interesting thing is china is not telling anybody to break deals with the united states. in fact, argenna, a belt and road partner, went back to the imf this year a very poor deal, by the way, and it's a deal that requires far more scrutiny, once more austerity on the argentinian people. but lula has made it clear they're going to continue, in that sense, bolsonaro's policy of trading with china, but there will be a kind of friendlier attitude to china. and i'm very much hopeful that if there's a revitalization of the brics, this attempt to demonize countries in eurasia, particularly china, will find less of an audience than it finds even now. it's quite unfortunate that the united states has ramped up a kind of demonization policy, suggesting that the chinese are out there to steal people's privacy and so on. this is not a credible line of argument in countries where the chinese have come, put money on the table through the people's

bank of china, done currency swaps and so on, and said, "you don't need to do austerity. here's investment money." it's not credible when the united states comes there and says, you know, "china is here to steal your house." that's not a credible argument. but it does create a lot of instability. it creates a lot of tension for countries. and i think if lula comes to power -- o, not st la. -- or not just lula. we see this already with gustavo petro in colombia. you know, when people come to power of that ilk, who want an independent foreign policy for their country, they understand that next year, 2023, is the 200th anniversary of the monroe doctrine. they want to go beyond the monroe doctrine. you'll remember joe biden said that latin america is not the united states' backyard. it's the united states' front yard. for god's sake, president biden, latin america is nobody's yard. these are sovereign countries that must be permitted to produce their own relations,

whether it's for trade or political relations. the united states cannot continue to essentially, as noam says, be the godfather and tell countries what to do. amy: vijay prashad and professor noam chomsky, co-authors of the book "the withdrawal: iraq, libya, afghanistan, and the fragility of u.s. power." next up, we will talk with them about ukraine.

amy: continue our conversation with vijay prashad and professor noam chomsky who have co-authored the book "the withdrawal: iraq, libya, afghanistan, and the fragility of u.s. power." we spoke to them friday just as the russian president of vladimir putin was holding a signing ceremony to mark the annexation of four areas of occupied ukraine. later that take him ukraine would apply for nato membership. i asked professor chomsky about u.s. media coverage of ukraine war and how it is getting it wrong. >> it suggests considerable measure of caution with the way things are being recded in the united states to take one significant case. i large amount of you coulday euphoria over th claim that major countries in the world or

in the global south, of course, claim modi censured putin at a meeting where he told putin india does not support the russian position. i to the trouble of looking this up on the indian government official website. what happened is quite different than the western media has seized upon words in which modi said war w not the answer, that was taken to be a big way with russia. if you read the rest of the text , about how wonderful the relations are and how supportive we areand someone.

that part was left out of, frankly, the whole message was left out of western reporting were the u.s. reporting. just one example of many considerable care that has to be taken. the fact is, internationally at least, the united states and britain are very isolated on this. europe is sort of going along but the population is not supportive of that position, as i mentioned, germany, more than one third is in favor of negotiations right away. presidentmacron by france, who has been the most dedicated to seeking to find a negotiated settlement recently ritter rated

his belief the prospects diminish as the war continues are still openings. the united states has written -- pretty much isolated in their commitment to continuing war the war, whatever the effects, in order to severely weaken russia. there are still negotiation possibilities. there's onlone way -- no possibilities so little reporting about this in the united dates that one can say with confidence but we do have credible information that there were russia-ukraine

negotiations in april which may have been getting somewhere. as soon as they were announced, boris johnson and the primee minister of england and ukraine, informed ukraine the west, meaning united states and britain, favored negotiations. he was followed directly by defense secretary lloyd austin, who presumably gave the message that is repeated over and over and is now officiay s. policy that the war must continue to weaken the russians and fellows there's no time for negotiations. well, none of this can be said with certainty because there is so little

reporting and what there is this quite often highly distorted, as in the important example that i just gave. but the fact is, sooner or later, there will have to be some kind of negiated settlement uess one side or the other just capitulates. that is virtually -- the longer the war goes on, the more prospects for a diplomatic settlement dinish. so before th invasion, there seemed to bpretty good prospects for a settlement or more or less in the framework -- under the auspices of france and

germany to which russia and ukraine theoretically accepted and implemented the u.s. role was, to put it mildly, not constructive in that respect. that is an understatement. as the war continued, prospects diminished but they are still the. late march, president zelenskyy have proposals not very far from the macron proposals for settlement. did not get anywhere. the longer the war persists, the more destruction, annexation they will be. the more what is called collateral damage elsewhere. massive starvation because of the closing off of th exports.

relaxation at that. threat onuclear wa increas. and perhaps most significantly of all, least discussed, is the fact as the war continues, the efforts to deal with the overwhelmi crisis of climate destruction, those reverse instead of moving to limit fossil fuels. what is happening is expansion of fossil fuel production, exuberance and of the offices of exxon mobil, chevron, and the rest opening new fields for development. expansion of the reduction of

restrictions, search for new sources of oil. some of what is happening -- this means basical the end of organized human life on earth. we're not talking about something minor. we have a narrow window in which the severe problems of aiding -- the climate can be dealwith. as you close that window more and more, less are the chances of survival of organized human life on earth. that is what we are facin as i say, sometimes what is happening is simply surreal. you can hardly find words to describe it. the last couple of weeks, new scientific reports appeared with regard to the eastern mediterranean -- not very far from ukraine. they found what was going happen

and in the region were wayff. much too conservative. now new studies indicate by the end of that century, heating and eastern training region will be -- in the eastern mediterranean region will be twice as much is that before. five degrees celsius, 10 degrees fahrenheit. of course it does not stop there. meanwhile, israeli climatologists, who are quite good, discover their own projections rise in sea level were way off.

it will be much worse than predicted by midcentury will be a meter of sea level rise by the end of the century, maybe 2.5 meters. the effects are indescribable. israel, lebanon. can't even describe it. what is haing, israel and lebanon are squabbling over who will have the right to administer the coup de grace, literally. they are squabbling over who will control the fossil fuel resources on the maritime border. who will have the opportunity to destroy the two countries while they sink underwater.

the loer the w in ukraine continues, the more the window closes, we move toward increasing fossil fuel production when we must be minimizing, ending it quickly. that is the situation that we are facing. meanwhile, going back to ukraine, the united states following ong obediently, the principle that the war must continue to severely weaken russia -- negotiated settlements with all the consequences that follow. that should be uppermost in our mind not only because of its significance, but because of all the factors invved in this complex affair. that is the one we have a

possibility of influence. we can't influence what happens in ukraine. we can't influence what happens in the united states. that should be uppermost in our minds. juan: vijay prashad, in terms of not only the war in ukraine, but your book deals with interventions of the u.s. -- intervention of u.s. route the world, afghanistan, syria. here we have a situation where about six months after the u.s. exits from afghanistan and supposedly the end of our forever wars, we are embroiled now and the funding and financing of yet another conflict that is shaking the world. most americans don't realize most of this aid money is only going to buy weapons from the

u.s. war industry. of course on the horizon, we have the next conflict with china. talk about this forever war mentality of the united states and the influence of the pentagon on how the media portrays many of these conflicts. >> let's just look at some numbers first. last year, the calculation was the worst powers spend $2 trillion on weapons. the united states by itself spent nearly $1 trillion if you add the money in the department of energy budget for nuclear weapons and so on. $1 trillion. $2 trillion globally. meanwhile, the total budget for the united nations is $3 billion. we spend trillions of dollars on weapons and only low billions on

peacebuilding. it is extraordinary. i want more people to know about these numbers. there is a habit of warmaking. look, you cannot take out ukraine, lifted out of the earth and put it in iowa. ukraine is going to have to live next to russia. it is going to have to live there. that is where it is. the ukrainians on the russians have to come to some kind of agreement. the kind of way in which the rhetoric in this war has accelerated going back to 2014, that is rhetorical acceleration. something even the ukrainians rejected when the low to zelenskyy came before them in the election. mr. zelenskyy came to office vowing to make a peace agreement with the russians because even he recognizes ukraine has to live next to russia. at that united states saw ukraine as a kind of loose nail

under which they placed their weapons. billions of dollars of weapons, much more than the annual budget of united nations, in order to egg russia on. by the way, it is not just a matter of ukraine and russia coming to some understanding becausthey do have to live next to each other and as noam was saying, in april, they had an agreement which looked a lot like minsk 2, but the west said no. defense secretary lloyd austin said to weaken russia. the question isn't ukraine and russia by itself. it is also the united states and russia. when the united states withdrew from the intermediate nuclear forms range treaty in 2019, that was the end basically of most of the arms control treaties between the united states and russia. in fact, since 2019, we are

living without a security guarantee arrangement between these major nuclear powers. the united states and russia. no wonder there's a bulletin of atomic scientists has brought the doomsday clock to it than 100 seconds of midnight. it began at seven minutes to midnight. we are now at 100 seconds. the reason the bulletin of atomic scientists gives for this is the unilateral withdrawal by the united states from basically the entire architecture of arms control with russia in particular. so there has got to be pressure on the biden administration, not only to back off and allow zelenskyy and putin to talk, to allow them to have some kind of peace agreement that is filled with dignity for all sides, but also the united states needs to go back to the table with the russians and talk to them. if united states can talk to the saudis, why can't they talk to

the russians? it is ridiculous to say the russians are not a good partner, they're not going to standby agreements. look who is talking. the united states is the country that unilaterally walked away from the iran nuclear deal. it was stop the iranians, it was the united states. to say the russians are not relying negotiating partner, at least try. for god sake, the sake of humanity, we need these major powers with a lot of firepower in their pockets to talk to each other most of you can't turn to the united states and say, you do something. as i said, the u.n. budget is $3 billion. you have to strengthen peacebuilding in the world and weaken war making. that has to be part of the commitment around the planet, whether it is in russia, ukraine, united states, certainly in the united kingdom. amy: you both talk about allowing russia and ukraine to

negotiate, but how does one do that? talk about exactly what the u.s. can do now, professor chomsky. >> well, the u.s. can stop acting to prevent negotiations. for a long time, the position of the united states has been to undermine possibilities its negotiations. amy: professor noam chomsky and vijay prashad, co-authored the new book "the withdrawal: iraq, libya, afghanistan, and the fragility of u.s. power." noam chomsky was speaking to us from brazil. we will play more of their interview later this week. that does it for our show. on wednesday, i will be speaking at penn state harrisburg at 7:00

p.m. and on thursday, october 6, at brown university in providence, but alan come at 4:00 p.m. democracy now! is currently accepting applications for an associate digital editor and a people and culture manager. learn more and apply at democracynow.org. democracy now! is looking for feedback from people who appreciate the closed captioning. e-mail your comments to outreach@democracynow.org or mail them to ■x■x

that is what has been expect ed. the numbers could be explained rationally. this is a ballistic missile. that was over 4000 kilometers. now we have new information from the government official that the ballistic missile, the highest altitude was