people are no more afraid of. you can see something happening he says like i don't. call the cops in. their lives chasing the. trigger you never know better safe than sorry i don't know that someone else is going to pull a gun so yes unfortunately around and around here we end up going off. to.

hello and welcome to cross talk where all things considered i'm peter lavelle from north korea to syria's president donald trump's foreign policy is literally all over the map north korea says it is open to direct talks with washington only to be met with preconditions in syria where the u.s. has no legal right to be in the first place peace is within view but this is not what the trumpet ministration want. cross-cutting missing diplomacy i'm joined by my guest musin in washington he is the executive vice president of the eurasia center in new york we have daniel is our he is an author and freelance journalist who writes frequently about the middle east eastern europe and the us constitution and in fort lauderdale we have ivan eland he's a senior fellow and director of the center on peace and liberty at the independent

institute all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciated daniel let me go to you first you were calling this program missing diplomacy and let's look at two areas where a lot of diplomacy is necessary north korea and syria in both cases there and there have been or still present some kind of diplomatic opening considering the very fierce rhetoric we've heard about a second phase when we look at it from the trauma administration for north korea and then the u.s. sensually obstructing a number of peace processes and designs in syria where is the diplomacy daniel go ahead. it's almost as absent we have a very erratic individual at the top donald trump who has little idea what he's doing but it's very important to emphasize that the u.s. empire is vastly overextended it's gotten soft and in deep trouble in the number of ports the world including korea syria and so there really is no easy way out so

trump's confusion is a reflection of the larger confusion of the u.s. system ok i've been one i didn't that's a point you know and we could put it on the person of donald trump and i would put it on the people he surrounded him insult with my impression and i'm very far away is that he's basically disinterested in these topics and he's delegated it to others and unfortunately a lot of them are neo cons go ahead i've been yeah i think you're right but i hear his campaign pledges were different then than what he's doing now he is pledges was let's stay out of a lot of stuff america first let's do what we need to do here at home etc and get in don't do nation building overseas that cetera but i do agree that the u.s. has been overextended for a long period of time and he's exacerbating the problem and it's very it is very

confusing to him because he had no one ever and his advisors do not. given the option of saying well you know we we deterred radical mouse a tongue when he got nuclear weapons in china so he can probably deter kim jong. un in north korea because dictators they just want to survive that's their main goal is surviving in power and you know why threaten a paranoid guy right but you know that's not what they're doing in syria of course his main objective was to he said was to get isis well isis is at least you know shrunk vastly shrunk in size. as of territory now whether they'll come back elsewhere i don't know but certainly if you have done with the job get out but of course the united states is not doing that because it wants or has forces on the ground it wants to keep control of territories there or that it has a role in the syrian negotiations that's

a much different mission then we started with only you know that's exactly right and you could apply that you know syria staying there to determine political outcomes staying in south korea to do to determine political outcomes that is exactly it and it's a zero sum game that we get what we want to win or there's going to be trouble there could be potentially even war i mean that's not how you run a foreign policy all of that is foreign policy it's an extension of military policy and it precludes or excludes the possibility of peacemaking you can think whatever you want of the north korean regime but if the north korean regime and south korea are talking and both want to talk more and the south wants the u.s. to talk to north korea i don't think there's anything wrong with that because the alternative is far far worse go ahead. and i think peter you're. it's unfortunate but i don't necessarily think people want to direct conflict however we're getting dangerously close to it one could accidentally happening specially

when we've got a radically some place. that want their survival or the looking for the political perspective and they back in their own selves in their corner and sometimes things happen that you don't expect but i think when we look at syria. you know the. the u.s. is concerned about the rising role of iran and russia in the middle east and i think i think there's pressure from both from the u.s. side from one of their close allies in the area as well as some of the gulf states they do not want to see iran raising up so you see these accusations are violating the nuclear accord you see them try and even though they're they're welcome in syria trying to force them to get out of the region. it's a dangerous situation they're in and the u.s. really right now it appears they just want to stay present there and present in

korea as well to really i don't know if that stuff sort of counter north korea more than just as much as perhaps to counter the rising influence of china on record as well of course that's the whole point ok that's why they want to stay there they want to determine well first of all they want to make sure that if there's a unification of of the peninsula they determine what that unification is because that is going right up to china's border would be what the president white house would very much want in tides and the in the chinese don't want that happen no surprise danny let me go to you you know earl is mentioning about u.s. presence in syria and iran well i mean it's the activities of the united states in the region since two thousand and three that is only advance the interests of iran and i how many more do we have to go through how many more failed regimes that we have to go through in that region to show that the more you push for regime change you more you push to determine political outcomes the more you lose i mean it's a losing streak ok for over a decade and a half but nobody realizes that go ahead dan you're absolutely correct i mean the

u.s. policy in the that part of the world has been just amazingly wrong headed the invasion of iraq provided a huge opening to a red america america is allegedly our number one enemy in the region you said before that you know the america wants things you know and career. and syria but it's not really clear that america even knows what it wants. limiting russian iranian or chinese. influence but otherwise it has no idea does no positive program you know and so therefore the us is trying you know is acting at the behest of saudi arabia and israel saudi arabia is maybe forming a part very rapidly israel be facing regime change also. who struggles to maintain its grip so things are crumbling really fast the us has no idea how to stay on top of these things and of course as you say everything had seems to

make things worse yes i mean you know it's pushing these pushing for political outcomes there's an impatience going on right here i mean the united states in all this give my opinion is scared to death that peace could break out on the korean peninsula they're terrified of that they're terrified that peace could break out in syria because the very fact that they stayed there were nobody wants them to be there it makes it a political outcome a peaceful outcome impossible i mean why are they so afraid of peace go ahead ivan . well i think you're absolutely correct they seem to want to maintain overseas president presence in south korea and japan that's where our major forces are right now and that gives us. you know an anchor in east asia and i think they do feel that china is rising and you know just like when saddam invaded kuwait that was a way to stay in saudi arabia for

a long time and so i think these types of conflicts are useful in a certain sense for the has your mind to stay and whatever region they want to stay in you know earl if we if we look at the south korean peninsula look at that let's look at the region we've got japan. we've got south korea we've got north korea we've got china we've got russia those countries can solve this tension on the peninsula all by themselves but the us will not let that happen the us will not allow south korea full sovereignty over its defense planning and this is the real problem here i think it could be solved with regional players go ahead. i would agree in fact i just made a made a comment on our blog recently they were talking about there was some type of conference in vancouver that canada was hosting of course the us was there and and other players but two players to discuss the resolution what direction to go

forward on korea and of course the two players that probably should most importantly be there russia and china were not invited and so i think it's. it i agree that i think and i also think the new president south korea is open to dialogue with north korea i think you saw that during the olympics a potential you know mel maybe a slight melting of some ice there but. i do not think the u.s. sees it is in their interest to actually have a dialogue unless it's under their terms and unfortunate i think personally i agree the regional i think the regional powers there could come to a very good settlement could be general for everyone. but the us wants to the us wants to play the role as far as determining what the conditions are and i don't think that's very healthy for the future of korea and for the region and it very dangerous and in the current environment let me go to daniel before we go to the

break here one of the things i find very problematic troubling is that diplomacy is equated with a peace mint these days that is that is terrifying go ahead daniel. yes it is that the u.s. is in a very militant mood it's not interested in diplomacy or talking. look the america wants to prolong its you know the polar moment which broke out in ninety nine but now it's faced with challenges by china iran and russia trying to hold them off trying very hard. i don't see how that strategy will be successful but that's what the u.s. is trying to do ok i'm going to jump in here's our chance i got to jump in here we're going to go to a large outbreak and after that hard break we'll continue our discussion on missing diplomacy stay with our team.

when you don't. see the. dead o'clock. in the north through only ten spaces. maybe. let alone. said. claiming to know. that. if you speak french. the same. could. stand to. join me every thursday on the alex i'm i'm sure and i'll be speaking to guests of the world of politics sports business i'm show business i'll see you then.

everybody steven both. hollywood guy suspects every proud american first of all i'm just george bush in our view this is my buddy max bemis financial guru just a little bit different. no one knows with all the drama happening in our country i'm rude. every day americans. and hopefully start to bridge the gap this is the great american. russia's been reaching out for decades for years down under putin saying look we've got to trade more this more trade and america is like no no you're an existential crisis because we have to give these deadbeats in congress a lot more money if you're going to create

a fake enemy called them with demand three hundred million dollars meanwhile you go to trade with china and on the east and create the new grow to become much more join a five trillion dollars economy all america shrinks. welcome back to crossfire all things considered i'm peter meltzer mind you we're discussing missing diplomacy. ok let's go back to new york with then you aren't any when you finish up your point the one that you were a lab rating on before the break yeah yeah my point simply is the u.s. is trying to fend off a triple threat from iran russia and china. and there is complete unanimity i've seen no dissent whatsoever among any of the mainstream commentators or political politicians liberal conservative or what have you they all agree that

. they must rebut the russia and china and the rainy and threat madness. and i can see have that strategy can possibly prevail well you know ivan i'm i'm. don't agree that there are threats whatsoever i mean china is a regional power russia is certainly and. not a global power its reach is actually quite small and if you look at russian foreign policy and defense policy it's very most concerned about their sovereignty more than anything else and the near abroad i know some people don't like that term but it's it's real ok i mean these these threats here in a rant iran it's surrounded by. nato or neutral related countries bases i mean this is all a fiction here but it certainly is very good for the arms industry i mean donald trump has been such a sugar daddy to them this year and next year for sure go ahead. yes i think that's

absolutely right and we can also add that our south korean japanese and european allies are all very wealthy country absolutely and this is not one nine hundred fifty anymore and they can start taking over the their own defenses what about a deal and korea that north korea denuclearize if the u.s. withdraws all forces from south korea and south korea defends itself you know we wouldn't have to be immediately over time that's a possibility you know if you want to do something dramatic but that's of course that's not going to happen that's wishful thinking because there's a military industrial complex in many countries but the one here in the united states we tend to build up threats larger than they are and i think your assessment of the various threats was pretty accurate china may rise but of course all the countries in asia could band together and they have fairly good internal security japan's an island that's very safe you just have to run

a port. the prime strategy is that her european allies have more combined economy g.d.p. than the united states so and have course in the middle east it's sort of it's sort of a canard that we need to defend or all the market is much better of providing more oil at the cheapest prices exactly you know one of the things that if you look at the client states in the in the alliances that the united states has created around the globe these client states do like the status quo for the most part south korea in this moment maybe a little bit different because they might see it some kind of diplomatic opening and want to take it and washington say no but like look at japan you know look at saudi arabia look at israel i mean they're all fat and happy i mean the american taxpayer pays for it. they don't even have to be particularly loyal allies thinking there's a wide avenue of maneuver for them in many cases and the united states if you look at like in the pacific here you know they could easily be pulled into

a conflict that it was not there but it's one thing but because of all of its alliances here i mean this these all these entangling alliances are very dangerous for the united states but for a country that voted for a man that wanted america first go ahead. it's interesting it's i mean we have like seven hundred bases around the world. be sickly ringing around surrounding iran surrounding russia surrounding china. but yeah absolutely i think essentially we're we're we're providing the military side of the foreign policy for a lot of these countries that are quite well off. and the thing is it would piece really and would diplomacy really take hold of if we did draw back you know and diplomacy would not be an interest literally you would have to kick in it would it would have to automatically kick in a little to say washington said well washington's no no you guys have to sit down

and work this out here i mean earl isn't it remarkable how many borders around the world the united states protects and it doesn't protect its own border ahead earl finish up. yeah it's. interesting. we have more concern over other. countries security than we do our own sometimes but. you know there's other political regions in that because there's both lobbying groups on the military side lobbying groups for for other countries that have a significant influence on what's going on and it's not necessarily for america first unfortunately i think would be better handled maybe facilitating regional discussions and actual talking to people would be much more beneficial i think for global peace but i don't necessarily think global peace is is the major objective i think it's almost a disruption you know what is the objective well it's a gemini is the goal ok i mean that's that's the goal in washington you know dan

you know if i could just go astray just a little bit here you know i'm sure you've been following the ups and downs in the smoky rooms and mirrors of brushy gate in the seventeen hackers in the st petersburg which took about a week of the news cycles. but there's no real concern in the mainstream to talk about the countries that actually really do influence american foreign policy in washington d.c. they call it lobbying in the united states here but you know there is this kind of influence is that saudi arabia has israel has turkey has japan south korea we could go all we could make many many programs about that but that's almost kind of a taboo subject to talk about you can go after macedonia teenagers fine on twitter but you know a real serious discussion i'd like to know how many congressmen and senators meet with foreign lobbyists they don't have to record it they don't have to tell anyone but if you accidentally bump into the russian ambassador well you get

a warrant against you go ahead dan. you say it's like to have some serious discussion i've got some serious discussion about just about anything in this group that you have to. so debate has. fallen so far about about everything everything. and so so it's farcical really farcical but yes influencing american politics first or politics or internationalize for trees number one number two i mean countries like saudi arabia kuwait the u.a.e. is real maintain huge lobbies the united states that are extremely effective the gulf states for example the lavish money every virtually every major think tank in washington is funded by the gulf states and they use that money to essentially shape or control debate so and so in washington one rarely gets he gets

the opposing non saudi non israeli point of view it's completely outrageous and the people who are just served by this are the american people who you who you know there are very important issues that need to be thrashed out but what you're being you know buried you don't know you know swept under the rug it's just it says a symptomatic of a of a political system in deep crisis i mean you know there's in it long ago there was the it was a long time ago when there was public debate about foreign policy you never hear anything about that if you just as dan you were saying as i tell people here in american media don't say much about israel don't say anything about saudi arabia ok those are just two examples go ahead i've been. yeah i think the other participants or are right on here. our whole policy is on autopilot and what we have is

a military that set up the power project overseas so we should call the department of defense department of often through the department of defense of other countries because in the in the few times during our history that the military has been asked to defend the country it doesn't fit hasn't done a very good job in a war of eight hundred twelve we got the capital burned before they managed to fight the british to a drive to declaring war on the superpower at the time in world war two they didn't think the japanese were capable of attacking pro harbor so the military failed there and of course on nine eleven the fighter jets went out to sea so we need to increase our defenses and quit you know meddling in other countries business you know you know early that through the thing that i find again i think daniel really hit it here because i'm very disappointed to and that's why i have my own program because i can talk about things that i think are interesting because when i look at the literal of corporate media there's almost nothing of interest to me whatsoever it's tragic stories it's sad stories it's political posturing but there's no debate

really about policy and foreign policy is never ever debated right now except for china's bad russia is bad in iran's bad ok that's it that's all you hear twenty four seven and you never hear the other side of the argument well why are they so bad you hardly ever hear it go ahead irl. now i mean daniels correctly absolutely correct i mean if you look at the funding goes to some of the think tanks that are very influential where they're coming from you really don't have a real dialogue on foreign policy and and it should from the hip sometimes it's autopilot it's unfortunate i think and even look at our diplomats i really some of the verb jews didn't public in public forum so i'm i'm kind of appalled by and it doesn't really set a fine example of where we should be as a country and should be leading into

a diplomatic efforts and i really we're kind of lagging in that area for the most part you know daniel you know well i know the person that girls talk you know this talk about nikki haley you know for she got her job at the u.n. the only foreign experience she had was going to the internet international house of pancakes that's what we have in the united nations you get the last word daniel . well you know. peter five days if i may correct you on one thing there is serious debate in this country for example a very lively serious debate has broken out over jennifer lawrence's low cut dress . for her latest movie. and that was a very wide ranging debate very serious across a lot of important subjects so we should dad you know what side of the art one sided argument you want discuss daniel what side of the argument you are on that one there are. no head no comment as much as much to for out it's much too fraught for me i would never have the courage

a little bit could do you think that would be totally destroyed on facebook and twitter if you made your opinion ok god help us god help us all are a gentleman that's all the time we really thank them i guess in washington new york and in port lot of there and thanks to our viewers for watching us here see you next time and remember. fifty years ago britain and within to come together as a sleeping pill the justices would only because up to the justice would say just on the side of things were terrible but not on.

you know. across europe victims astonishing legal battles demanding at least some compensation. in two ways first will the physical damage itself as well that the concert mind that the people who actually perpetrated this crime has never been the justice and there's been a couple. please. fill in the hyundai in a union label bottle sorry china six oir get. an estimated eighty four cents under each refugees are now living in greece. you know still more. to do at home in their euro food drink and. many sell their bodies just to make ends meet. with them for the on the

second on the all the sins in there that. says and i don't let things get. others turned to dealing drugs to make a living. just doesn't look like. a within. me. that.

tara shell of the new nonagenarian corridor in a syrian region of eastern preventing civilians from relieving the war torn district. israeli soldiers arrest ten people in a raid on a palestinian. village including a fifteen year old boy who severe head injury was allegedly in fiction by the idea two months ago. and the computer recycling expert in the u.s. faces jail and a hefty fine for piloting microsoft software but he says he was only trying to refurbish old p.c.'s. i think it was helping people extend the life cycle of their electronics to combat planned obsolescence and to make sure that we keep as much working product out of landfills as possible.