in russia and other countries in their place because they are rising and so american must put them back in their place and thus it will be by the exercise of american quote american threats american intimidation we see that at the u.n. today trump is telling the rest of the world you know if you vote that long way today on jerusalem you're going to be punished that's not engage me that's the cost of the and using either military or the threats of military or economic aggression or sanctions as the way of disciplining or policing the new post world war and now post or order i think that's very interesting you know mike when i read the report i found it to be very defensive about defense ok because i what really disturbed me was the lack of using diplomatic tools and i really very much agree with what brian was having to say here i mean particularly china i mean we've seen this in history over and over again a rising power either you you know back off and let it happen you deal with it or

you have a war ok and it seems to me out of the three options here this administration is actually telling us get ready for a confrontation i don't think it's really necessary but that's what it looks like go ahead mike. yeah peter so thank you but let me focus like you just did on china for a minute i thought it was a little too strong the report in terms of how it talked about china i think there should have been a statement to acknowledge just how far china's common how much progress it's made and and the order of the international order that you and brian were talking about did help make it possible so it was american strategy in conjunction with other countries including the soviet union but also our allies that created a un system and then in the west that created an economic system that facilitated china's rise so whatever china's rise has become it was partly our doing and partly our hope now there are problems in the u.s. china economic relationship and i think we do need to take those very seriously but i agree with you that the tone overall is is too negative you know right now we

have security concerns about china but that is to some extent inevitable with a rising power and i think overall i have worries about china too but most of its military activities that we don't like are in the uninhabited islands of the south china sea and they're not attacking other countries they're not doing things that historically you know rising powers that at the beginning of the twentieth century for example you know my letter should have been a little more measured not mike let me say with you here i mean. put yourself in the chinese position in beijing and they read this report here and then they hear from the american white house or the state department why don't you help us more on north korea i mean if i was sitting in beijing i said well what are you talking about these are your words this is your official policy and you come to us for help i mean it's really quite remarkable the same thing actually can be applied to russia i mean bellicose language towards russia but then they say we need your help you're not doing enough to fight terrorism in i mean i do if you're outside that bubble it's really kind of odd rhetoric coming out of this government in thirty

seconds i'll stay with you mike before we go to the break go ahead. well i would treat russia and china very differently and i'm sure we'll come back to russia and we were right it was interesting that in his speech in his speech president trump did not use negative language especially about russia in fact he talked about the phone call he and president putin had thanking each other for recent cooperation and so that was a distinct contrast the speech was a distinct contrast to the written report ok gentlemen to jump in here we to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on trump's view of the world stage with the. twenty eight seen what we'll see are central banks adding coin to their strategic

reserves alongside gold so big gold buyers like china and russia will be adding big point to their strategic reserves some of the banks possibly in venezuela they could completely change their fortunes in the global economy by switching over to crypto switching over to bitcoin and then that will set a precedent for other countries of policy. was running exists in that region already and it became i am. trying to list the. kind you when you get to who knew what it would be it's not but when you don't need you to brush it off totally. yes sir yes. sir christ. don't.

you do something right you just bring your minds you steve. if your business to discuss could. just turn over your. welcome back across the uk where all things are considered i'm peter bell to remind you we're discussing trump's view of the world. ok to continue discussion where michael flanagan he's ago going to join us he's the president of planning and consulting and he's a former congressman michael it's good to have you on the program as we ended the first half year we were talking about the this report that the president has put out and we're talking about russia and china and michaela also in washington he

pointed out something that you know the tone well both negative to both countries is slightly less negative towards russia i know what that's all about and i'm going to say before i ask you a question that train has already left the station i there's always been a suspicion here our hope that you know you could do divide russia in china to have . to slow down their kind of growing alliance strategic alliance and i think that's a pipe dream now i think that is over and i don't think the russians are going to be enticed back they're not enough sticks and they're not enough carrots for that after what's happened over the last few years you know talk about that a little bit there because that's a strategy that people want to have happen but it isn't going to happen go ahead i'm not sure trump wants that to happen i think it is the just of this the stock you meant i think if you have to read it in the main from whether the discussion

that i've heard so far is is is is pursing the exact words and that's a wonderful thing to do it's appropriate but in the main. i think we're seeing a move in strategic views of the world by the united states that a puts america first and it's not about america over japan over russia over europe it's about america we're going to take care of what we need to take care of at home before we give away sovereignty money work or whatever else we need to put ourselves in peril for some other external need and i think that's what's being said here and i just came back from a conference in india where the same confusion kind of reigned among internationals who really didn't understand that america first is a common doctrine in every country what country would not want its own government to put its own people first internally and then xterm only do its work for it so i think i think we had a kind of a base understanding of it to begin with secondly you're seeing a huge emphasis of using trade and using economics as foreign policy and

more so the united states has done it maybe one hundred years and i think that's a lot of what's at work here the tough language with russia china it's in your yes it's in there and and i too i join the panel and wish that it were not so tough but then again you have a nine diplomat in the oval office you've got a guy there who speaks very plainly and also is the art of the deal so there's always there's always a certain given taken what he says does he really mean this does he really mean that well in the main he's being honest with you but the emphasis kind of goes back and forth well and so i wouldn't live and die on particular words or phrases in there you know and i think that's a really extremely good point and i've already mentioned in the program what the report will import addresses very gracious of a migration and trade i'm pretty much all in agreement i mean and that's what he ran on and that's what he's been doing as president here but brian in you know taking on board what we just heard there i think they want it both ways because i do see donald trump's fingerprints on this but i see you know thirty years of neo conservatives their fingerprints all over it as well and that's an eye gannett

that's what makes the kind of difficult read to try to figure out to glean through what's really happening. because i mean look at the emphasis on israel and saudi arabia and of course you know we ran his mention is iran is described as the scourge of the world i mean what kind of serious document that scourge of the world i mean i we all pretty much know where that came from go ahead brian. yes i consider this document while still representing a lot of continuity in u.s. foreign policy and of course it's partly drafted by national security council and the joint chiefs in the cia they all get a first image the first drafts. there is continuity but i think this represents a sharp shift especially given the fact that the joint comprehensive plan of action the so-called iran nuclear arms deal for instance could have been the precursor to a new sort of thaw in relations between the united states in iran in the middle

east i mean they're cooperating in iraq they have the same enemy in some ways in syria or at least they say they do but this is a sharp reversal of any sort of possibility for that the confrontational language with china or and with russia which goes against would trump was sort of suggesting which during the campaign and afterwards like why not have good relations with russia doesn't it make sense this document adopt a strategic orientation that goes in a different direction the america first of a sort of a sort of a combination of campaign sloganeering and still you know some differentials and trade policy and immigration but in terms of foreign policy orientations towards russia china major players it doesn't it's not the same and i think that we're going down this is the embrace of the new cold war in providing the logic for the new cold war and if anything it means trump is not only just

a capitulated not just surrendered to the cold war years in the neo cons but he's enthusiastically embracing it he wanted to do it he's the first president to actually articulate what's in the document at the time of its publication bush didn't do that obama didn't do that he wasn't required to do it he wanted to do it and that's where trump is heading ok you know mike one of the things that's interesting to me is that i mean we. we still have and i have already invoked. the attack on iraq where you know it's all about american hegemony and i know people don't like that word but i mean this document is basically saying to assure american agenda me where there is no rival power that has many in one of the great regions of the world here in this is a strategy to make sure that doesn't happen here ok i can and i can understand that but i don't understand how that makes america great again i mean look at all of the catastrophes or us foreign policies experienced oh it's since the end of the cold

war particularly in this century here and i did and and i give a hat tip to brian i say i understand what he was saying about some of the differences but at the core it is still making sure that no other country in the world can rival the united states but that the unit poland moment is coming to an end why doesn't the united states articulate a policy where it works in unison with other powers we're not in the we're not always going to agree on things rivalry is not always a bad word competition is good but i don't see foreign policy elites in washington understand this you know polar moment is coming to an end go ahead mike well peter let me hold on one specific issue that your broad point raises which is nato expansion and i'm going to make a hopeful comment here i did not see the national security strategy reiterate our longstanding commitment to further nato expansion you may recall that i wrote a short book this summer in which i advocated that we no longer expand nato provided that president putin would agree to resolve the territorial disputes to mutual satisfaction with ukraine and georgia and also allow those countries sunday

to join the european union if they're invited and so wish that would be the new security architecture i propose nothing in this document rules that kind of idea out there is not the traditional commitment to further expand nato to the east which i don't think is directed at russia's expense but if i were a russian i realize i would look at it perhaps quite differently i realize most russians do look at it differently and i think we've gone far enough. that logic luckily than the national security strategy does not endorse further nato expansion at least not explicitly and i hope that creates some room for maneuver on that issue so your big broad points that raises a lot of stuff well you know little mike i know in history yeah but yeah i know i know the thesis of your book here and you know it's worth a conversation i agree ok we were very far apart on this here but you know we just had in the last news cycle the trump administration is going to sell lethal arms to ukraine great you know that's that's just plain stupid or just plain stupid ok and

that's the but that's a topic for another program let me go back to michael here with you because i want to make sure you get a little bit more time on this program here i mean michael how does the how does terms of foreign policy make america great again. that's a great question and i would i wish this were a three hour program because i packed with your your guests have said i mean this is this is a great program peter you're not wrong but let me let me maybe focus your emphasis just a little bit aside again it's a non-diplomatic president it's a man who doesn't have a career in public office and it's also a man who believes that personally interpersonally he is going to be able to deal with foreign leaders on a one on one basis he enjoys a terrific relationship at least on the surface with the premier of japan with or with the prime minister of japan with the premier of china with mr modi in india and other places as well and in the in the in the recent past they've had very

positive personal conversations with mr putin about things of interest to both countries even after this documentary or while this document was being being promulgated. so the document this national policy yes of course it's there's nothing in here that's a lie certainly but there's nothing in here that you need if you have to take to the bank and nail to the wall and say this is absolutely going to be how it's going to be because it says so here that's diplomat talk it's government talk i think you've got a guy who's going to work it in a way that he sees it in the x. and she of the moment in the larger period but you know this doc and michael michael let me go to brian here rapidly running out of time here i mean you know again you know where is the diplomacy all this and let's look at actions i mean you have nikki haley i mean what she said disgrace gentleman she's a disgrace that kind of behavior and.