Skip to main content

tv   Worlds Apart  RT  July 19, 2018 10:30am-11:01am EDT

10:30 am
at harvard university and former u.s. assistant secretary of defense professor alison it's a great honor talking to you thank you very much for your time to be here well professor allison as i was following the news out of helsinki i thought that the united states ought to declare june sixteenth as the national outrage day because i honestly don't remember so much spite and venom over in policy terms at least nothing they were annoyed agreement signed in helsinki didn't hand the keys from the white house to putin and yet the coverage of this meeting was as if he sold he's entire country to an enemy where do you stand on this do you think trump indeed committed treason by engaging putin. asli that's an exaggeration but in the world of trope most everything is exaggerated so you are correct in saying that. his antics. think he has driven his critics up the wall or led them to you know excesses of all sorts so they saw
10:31 am
almost as if they deserve each other so trump is the most unusual idiosyncratic leader that we've seen he's in the midst of a very serious struggle at home with people who are hoping to impeach him and this is for trying to interpret it from moscow you've got to realize this is a reflection of a fundamental struggle that's going on within the u.s. as you listen to the noises well we certainly understand that but i think that the domestic struggle also has major implications for the rest of the world including russia and i heard you say in an earlier interview that the reason why the soviet union and the united states in gazed in a dialogue wasn't because they liked each other it was for the exact opposite reason they disliked each other they saw our chances of conflict as high and they
10:32 am
sought to diminish those chances by reducing a possibility for misunderstanding and the up trumps critics whom you mentioned apparently what don't want him to engage in any sort of a dialogue or a perhaps they want him to be extremely rude to put ten is that because they don't believe a war with russia is possible do they consider that as a as a concern at all. very good your two three good questions right there and i almost agree with all of them so first the extent to which the trump disorder so a lot of trouble critics are so. if. there's something p.t.s.d. post-traumatic stress disorder which people come back from the battlefield with the for a lot of americans there's troop. disorder. by trump whatever he does and he does a lot of it raising things so that's part of the confusion of what's going on and
10:33 am
in being enraged about him even when putin when trump has a good idea which is communicating with your adversaries even your enemies even your diddly is for the mix is a good idea because what you don't want to do is have two parties that are competitors or adversaries or even enemies stumbling into a war they don't want i often say the two russian friends and two american friends at the defense department we should understand both americans and russians in. either president decides to kill everybody in the other country he can do it that's a hard fact so mr putin if he decides can erase the u.s. from the map of course in doing that he'll be committing suicide for russia so if somebody was to choose that that's a sad fact but they can do it but what they shouldn't do is stumble into
10:34 am
a war and i think a lot of americans misunderstand the extent to which the ways in which failures to communicate for example where there are military operations in syria or even about the baltics could lead as they did in one nine hundred fourteen to a bunch of misunderstandings at the end of which you could be in a catastrophic war which would be crazy for russia would be crazy for the us well absolutely and i think on that exact point both britain and trump agree they both stress that it would be wrong to make the us russia relationship hostage to domestic politics in the united states but i think the argument could also be made by having such a core deal meeting that they actually add it up making it even worse given the very negative coverage in the united states isn't it going to be even more difficult for the trumpet ministration to do anything remotely constructive on the issue of russia. it's a very very good point and i think unfortunately the issue of russia and russia
10:35 am
gate and russia interference in the american election and allegations of russia. trump collusion which is a separate point have all got so in ten gold in the imagery that they're handicapping a relationship which is vital for both parties so the two separate issues one is did the russian government interfere in the twenty sixteen presidential election the answer to that is yes almost certainly i've talked to jim clapper who was the head of national intelligence at the time he said ninety nine percent plus yes and that's this indictment is separate issue whether there's any evidence of collusion between putin and trump or the russian government and trump and that there's no evidence of that to date that's what miller is investigating but unfortunately these two issues get tangled up together and trump has not been very good at
10:36 am
separating him and the consequence is just what you said that they believe they leave a relationship which is vital for our survival hostage to a domestic political debate well professor ellison let's assume that what. you're saying is correct that those russian military intelligence officers are guilty as charged they had big clinton campaign they released these compromising though truthful information about one of the candidates to the public i understand that that would be unpleasant but does it rise to you to the level of a capital offense in the day and age when everybody is spying on everybody let me remind everybody that it was the obama administration that was bugging go america's phones you know everybody both in the obama administration and i see him in the trump ministration is leaking confidential information for political effect so is that really be. dad a big of a deal well it's a it's a very good question and
10:37 am
a fair question to ask from a russian perspective because from a russian perspective it looks like americans meddle in other elections maybe even in russia elections but certainly in the case of ukraine i think president putin who believes that the americans participated in the overthrow of yannick over each democratically elected government and participated in the election of the government that's there now and there's some evidence for that so i think. that the unfortunately from the american perspective the idea of anybody meddling in our election is absolutely unacceptable even if we should do things similar to that in other elections and i think what would have been a good outcome which was not achieved and helpful he but what would have been a good outcome would have been to have the beginning of a very candid conversation about what each of us will do to each other and what we
10:38 am
will do that's what we used to do enormous control with president reagan president reagan whom i worked for apple he thought the soviet union was the evil empire so he had no doubt this was his enemy but at the same time he was happy to reach arms control agreements to constrain things americans would otherwise do in order to get the soviet union to constrain itself in ways that would be dangerous so i think there's an opportunity in this space for the two countries to try to do that professor allison i'm sure president putin would totally agree with you on one because he was the one who is has been talking about the cyber security treaty and i think it's the united states that he's not really eager to add to those negotiations bits russia but do you think that would actually satisfy outruns critics because they keep telling that. didn't stand up forcefully enough to put in a. and i cannot help wondering what the what they actually like trying to do to put
10:39 am
it to speed in his space to beat him up i mean what kind of position would constitute strong enough response for the. part of the political class in the united states about is so hateful of both putin and trump. the trump critics or the stream from critics are not going to be satisfied by anything but the impeachment and humiliation of trump that's their agenda and every day when they get up in the morning that's what they try to advance and whatever happens in the world they tell that story from that point of view so this is essentially like traditional propaganda and i think there's a lot of it in what's going on that actually because these two issues have got tangled up together if it were the case that trump actually colluded with putin or the russian government and they helped him and it was a coordinated effort he would that would be an impeachable offense and if that were
10:40 am
discovered to be the fact by mueller has not been discovered and i think it's not likely to be but if it were that would be a huge if it in american there were supposed acts there's a separate question which is of russian meddling in the election those two things get tangled together sometimes deliberately by the critics but unfortunately they get too tangled in trump's mind so he defends one when he's really meaning to defend the other and i think makes his own situation more difficult now a lot of their merican have lines in the aftermath of this meeting man siding with putin over the intelligent assessment of russian interference and to me that's hardly news because champ has been arguing that the miller prole has been partisan driven for quiet some time but he has long been complaining that he and hillary clinton are not being given the same. so i wonder if accusing champ of siding with
10:41 am
putin is just another way of expressing an outrage at trump simply being trump with the extreme critics won't trump impeached whatever and whatever happens that's their agenda and trump gets up every day worrying about them and he's got a very substantial number of so-called resisters who is objective is to have him impeached and it's possible to happen if you go to lead brooke the betting site they would bet it's about a fifty fifty chance before the end of his term so it could happen and so that's very agenda what i think the the what we're trying made a big mistake i believe in this healthy comet's inciting with putin or giving him the benefit of the doubt we have the intelligence community is on russian participation in the election not one claims about. collusion so that's a be a separate matter but the two things have gotten tangled as i say in trouble spying
10:42 am
and in the public so that in appearing to side with trump so i would side with putin or over the intelligence analysts who came to the conclusion that there was collusion and said that there was interference and that was the basis for this indictment he managed to. sort of basically tore himself well professor allison we have to take a short break now but we will be back in just a few moments states. tomorrow there may not be any kind of i mean and maybe bacterial life may not be
10:43 am
anything but if you think it's probably there's some intelligent life out there and certainly from now we can we can send off a robot to interact with some other species out there. in a world of big partners through a lot of things and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the bath and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now we're watching closely watching the hawks. it's hard to imagine the decades after the war a nazi don't tell was still active and rich in the nineteen seventies crittle had
10:44 am
as the chair of its board a man convicted of mass murder and slavery at auschwitz a german company going until it develops in the denied a drug that was promoted as completely safe even during pregnancy if it turned out to have terrible side effects what has happened to my baby is anything but. you know she said she's just cut short arms minix and had a mind victims i have to this day received no compensation then never apologized for the suffering that. not only want the money i want the revenge. welcome back to world the part of graham allison professor had there john of can they beat school of government at harvard professor ellis and out. just before the break we talked about what you see as mistakes on trump's part let's. shift our
10:45 am
attention to moves by president putin and many analysts noted that he for the first time probably a rhetorical inserted himself in the midst of the domestic american politics on this side of trump. i mean i understand that for some of our american viewers that you know that supposedly was the case before with all those collusion allegations but up until monday the kremlin's line official line was that of neutrality and nonpartizanship we cast changed and the reach some say may be associated with certain risks for russia do you agree with that well i think i probably do that i think that it is a better for presidents of countries. not to vote quote or to favor one or another of candidates in a democratic election in fact that's not the first person to do that in
10:46 am
the brics that the president obama offered his view in the debate even between the conservatives. and labor president obama offered a view there's no question that president clinton voted for us with. the communists so there's a history of that but i would say in this case it was unnecessary and i found it surprising that much liberty in the situation i was it was having dealt with even like hillary. even though initially he had a very you know good relationship but i don't know why he took it upon himself to say that and i don't think it helped him well i don't think it's i don't think it's a huge issue. well you don't think it's a huge issue but some believe that there are potential risks there is
10:47 am
a concern for example that voicing his support for trump more vocally will exacerbate the tensions between the american president and his intelligence community which would make this kind of coverage tug of war between the two even more pronounced and which can spill over into a potential war theatres for example in ukraine or in syria is that to exaggerate it. especially because because the reactions to the summit. because of the subject was. so many surprises and because the reactions have been so exaggerated there's a temptation to. think up to too high a level of exaggeration so i would say that's overly exaggerated but i personally don't think that was just a random statement on the part of britain because he also took an aim at hillary clinton and he specifically sad that her campaign may have benefited from funds
10:48 am
that have been transferred to the united states illegally with the help of some intelligence officer said he was actually you know how being the point that trump was making all along that the intelligence community is biased against him pursuing he's angle of investigation while not pursuing any investigation against hillary said they too did seem to a play a little bit in concert don't you think. it's a good it's a fair point but if if he has evidence that some russian actor transferred money to an american of whatever sort and intelligence officer or anybody else and that that money with campaign he should be talking about this he should simply provide the evidence and that would be subject to an investigation because the mueller investigation is investigating all of this and it would include
10:49 am
that and it will i think put in may the exactly that all for in response to be indictment of twelve russian military intelligence officers he said that miller investigators would be welcome to come to russia in charge gave those suspects but in greece in return he would expect a certain accommodation from the american officials from the american prosecution with regard to that charge do you think the american side is like. to take up on that all for a because i'm sure try to trump actually said that it was a good idea but do you think the bureaucracy is likely to welcome something like that well i'm sure the bureaucracy won't welcome it and i think from an american point of view the temptation is to say well we'll go investigate your. folks but you cannot come here and investigate ours so i suspect it'll bogged down over reciprocity with whether in fact. such an investigation would likely produce anything i'm i'm not so sure i think that from what i can gather i've seen
10:50 am
the indictment but i haven't seen in the material that underpins it but i have talked to some of the people who are involved in the process and i think they have evidence that's pretty conclusive you know so if you had a tape of a phone conversation between a and b. who say we have got the e-mails from the d.n.c. headquarters and we are proposing to release them on this schedule and then somebody else says no don't use that schedule here's a different schedule then there's not a lot of investigation for that's required that's pretty conclusive evidence i don't know and i have no idea about what the evidence basis is but it could be that but that's it that's exactly the point because so far this case how these case has been adjudicated in the court of public opinion and everybody refers to the end to
10:51 am
the evidence that he or she did actually have firsthand access to said do you think it would actually benefit the relationship between both countries to preserve all those evidence into court of law where there will well will now happen after the indictment in the american legal process will be then a trial so an indictment only means that there's enough evidence. that a jury agrees this person deserves to be indicted then they have to be tried and many people who are indicted are found innocent so it's not for sure just because you're indicted doesn't mean you're guilty so i think there should be a process for a trial and at the trial the evidence has to be a douche you can't simply say you heard or you saw or you think you have to show what is the evidence and then a jury. this. year i don't agree
10:52 am
so i think we're several steps away from that but i think we should do that now professor allison we talked before about how a dialogue with russia is becoming an anathema in its own right and i think president trump seems to understand that otherwise he would have been so much time on monday making the case talking to russia is ok other presidents did that too and that's interesting to me because as you said he's like no other president before him and yet he now tries to do exactly what many of his predecessors did how do you conceptualize president trump what i ask you stand in this long line of american leaders. unfortunately would just have to say he's a puzzle so he's a huge part. there's no question that in that as you say in the recycle of others who have had communications with russia he was trying to demonstrate that
10:53 am
the problem that the claims that says simply by sitting and down and talking to the russian leader he was doing something unusual is a false claim so there's a lot of that noise he was trying to address noise but if you ask about the way in which he approached this meeting as similarly to the way that he approached the meeting with the north korean leader kim jong un is very different than any of his predecessors so i remember when ronald reagan and mikhail gorbachev sat down and the process for that now regular was also a very strange and unusual president who thought he had a feeling for what was going on the russia better than the intelligence community did and this had turned out he did it turned out to be more successful in understanding gorbachev than the consensus you know among among the talking heads so i think that in the in the trump case. there's a there's
10:54 am
a v.c. here in the u.s. who says the problem with the press is that they take trump literally and not seriously and that's just backwards you should take him seriously and not literally i know that trump likes to compare himself to reagan a lot and you obviously advised the president the reagan we can confidently say change the course of history for the better i had a chance to talk to many people russian people here yesterday who had an experience of seeing reagan engage with gorbachev for example and many of them noted that he was a very very likable man regardless of what you thought about policy issues what he thought about the united states you can relate to that person just on the human level do you think it's too late for president trump to try to be a little bit more like legan of reagan in this regard. well i think he would wish that he could care where you know as you say they had this natural ability to
10:55 am
both the appear to be relating to people and actually to relate to them and i think unfortunately for the american russian relationship i think this is something we'll both suffer with the certain set of circumstances that have trumped the how trying to even when he's trying to do something that's absolutely right with respect to russia all caught up in so much domestic opposition. means that the relationship will continue to be very uneven. and troubled and i think that. that's just something that we have to survive so i think it's very important for example that now we have better military to military communications and i think trumps willingness to understand that obama's decision to quote punish russia by not talking to it and by stopping communication at
10:56 am
multiple levels was a mistake so to so trump is changing that that's a good thing but still when he's the agent for the conversation everything that he does will to a large part of the american population and especially to his well said very avid critics look suspicious. alison we have to leave it there i really appreciate your time today and i encourage our viewers to keep this conversation going in our social media pages and hope to syria same place same time here on the part. of. our.
10:57 am
to gain this national camera. roughly once they showed some movie you for them. uncool videos and someone with the broccoli string abs. going down more on string i don't roughly don't t.v. . seventy four designs. seven thousand pilings. to join judges. hundred sixty nonstop days of. a russian w.b. . under russian mob stuff to show you how. long the crimea bridge was built.
10:58 am
witnessed the construction willing you need to transport. that will help the crimea be close to most of those you won't go for more snow you're quite a bit but it's clear.
10:59 am
what politicians do something to. put themselves on the line to get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president bush. or somehow want to be preached. to the right to be press it's like the fourth tree in the morning can't be good that i'm interested always in the water using my power. suit.
11:00 am
ill informed of wild speculation britain security minister dismisses media reports the police have identified the perpetrators of the poisoning attack. on the headlines a us court refuses to russian citizen. she was charged with being with conspiracy to defraud the united states and claimed she offered sex in a bid to forge influential connections with americans. i. took huge pressure off his aides caught between a protester to the ground. and.

25 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on