hello and welcome to crossfire for all things considered i'm peter lavelle on this unique edition of crossfire we reviewed a new and very important book john mearsheimer the great delusion liberal dreams and international realities it's a real bombshell. across talking the great delusion liberal dreams and international realities i'm joined by my guest here in moscow marc sloboda he's an international affairs and security analyst we also have. a political analyst we spoke nick international and we have wendy's and he is

a professor at the higher school of economics as well as author of the decay of western civilization and resurgence of russia jim across the rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate it ok glenn let me go to you first here i'm really big fan of your summer's work he is a realist what does that mean. well in political theory we have to move to man theory is the political realist i believe. well to explain how states behave this see this essential being dependent on external situations so there's no good state or about state everyone based on the international distribution of power so and this contrast with the liberal theory in which we look at the internal characteristics of states so whether or not they're democratic if they're if they have economic if they're interdependence if the human surprise assertion is a human right. such you have these two theories which competes against each other to explain how the world works in new shimer. as liberal gemini and he says it's

doomed to fail mark you know this is in many ways maritimers magnum opus of what is now been several decades of his fear of critique of u.s. foreign policy basically since the end of the cold war and how it has emerged not only as as the hedge in modern terms of power but has. i would say selectively use that power to try to reshape the world in its own image rather than say the more realist notion of balancing power centers and trying to present another headroom on from a merging regionally it has delved into in ideology of exceptionalism which which mirrors heimer identifies as just another type of of nationalism and he also specifically addresses the way that the liberals have not only you know dominated

you know the foreign policy in in terms of action but the inner circle such that there is a real it's no longer even really accepted now in the discourse it's something that's taught in universities and mediately rejected in favor of you know liberalism and it's. good to see it on the other hand the neocon have exhibited this whole liberal approach to international relations as you mentioned it sounds nice and warm and fuzzy yeah we you know if you have the power why not try to support human rights if you have the power and how fair trading relationships but it never works out that way mearsheimer would argue that makes things even worse because these end up being wars of choice. well i think there. is very soft spoken he stays more or less in the fray you meet him when he would be a medically correct language i mean he germany yes well i think. what he calls

government you know this is from my review of the book by the american conservative . you know. they called it at dagger pointed at the heart of america's guardian feel war syfy progressive liberalism well i think that you should call a spade a spade progressive liberalism or all true liberalism as i call it now it's not even a governing philosophy in the states it's a totally parian ideology which determines not only the state's action but which determines education. arts sports and of course foreign policy and of course military so when for example a writes about the united states or visit the states militaristic behavior is almost certain to end up threatening its own liberal values liberalism abroad leads to illiberal ism at pool and of court well it's not just deliberate as you know put in people like chelsea manning in jail for life you

know organize an award why cheese for for edward snowden this is not the liberals really this is the ideology that mearsheimer is criticizing promotes for example. the war in syria and promotes the illegal regime change in in ukraine in two thousand and fourteen because if you look at the liberal gemini in it's really surprising to me that you when you get into an argument with a counter position to the things i just mentioned they all have this defacto default position of i mean even liberal person because i'm not going to project my values i mean they can't even they're not even self aware of that ok go ahead right now there's nothing democracy human rights are all good things but they have to be based on power foundations otherwise this is essentially from the realist mind at least what drives international politics. mark mentioned that the realists to some

extent been purged out of the discipline from after the cold war and this there were systemic incentives for this of course because during the cold war it made sense to look at things through this bottles of power however if you would still follow this theory after the cold war then you would have to see the west was overwhelmingly powerful the soviet union didn't exist anymore if we didn't follow this there then logic suggest we should start to pull back and essentially dismantle nato which is what the session people are commercial or walt walt and others have argued however this is to make incentives for liberals because they said no actually we create peace by expanding that because we're promoting democracy we're promoting human rights. we should actually go and topple governments around the world because that's a good promoting democracy so i assume mentioned this a nice idea that soon if you go out and promote democracy as a form of security because democracy is a proud logo don't go to war with each other then everyone benefits but at the end

of the day you see that it essentially undermines and the. itself inside or in the sympathy for anyone else because they get and we're going to look at this little issue and no one can look at his loyal american foreign policy since the end of the cold war it is just been a trail of tears for the people that are on the receiving end of it democracies don't go to war with each other except when they do have a u.s. attack on serbia. no i don't agree that the pursuit of democracy and human rights in international relations is in any way a good thing. but i think what glenn is saying i mean if that if that can be attained ok without use of violence i mean. i think that sure sure so defending and promoting ideas it's the actions to promote your mouth or some of these other problems first of all it's obviously to vittie and hypocrisy you know the u.s. is biggest allies of the middle east are the powerful liberal the. proceeds of

saudi arabia qatar and bahrain and. the united arab emirates so the us supplies successive liberal for regimes of liberal foreign policy the us arms over seventy percent of the world's dictatorships according to u.s. researchers and they're trying to cut russia out of the remaining twenty five percent that russia and china share amongst them so you know it's it's really a case of liberal foreign policy is an exercise in a park or see it's weaponized liberalism as as a basically a means of demonizing propaganda for my enemies and for my dictator friends well we all see the press coverage that mahatma been sob and then i thought it would be it's really interesting because it really is a p.r. trap because even if it fails like iraq afghanistan syria what's going on besides you arabia it's still your intentions were good ok and that's why

no one loses their job and cable t.v. in the u.s. so it's not the first time that the lofty ideas lead to the table results in fact that there was two wars in the life of humanity but not for years i mean the napoleonic wars which destroyed europe in the early the beginning of the nineteenth century that were all formally bald spread you and republican values sending the lie to them and to and humanism and even the weiss people like kind of the famous german boy it even they kind of go dude into this into this trap basically i just love these this called from. impulse is deeply wired into the liberal democracies you specially there are elites and of cold but this is something that a lot of muslims don't understand when the western democracy is came to them with arms where posts on the warsaw. beginning from the ninety s.

the mission of thought the crusade to sow back with christian ideas the course say despite what with christian ideas with something much war superimposed with something very very deep gauged from christianity from tradition something something you told and something terrible demon hits on exactly which is i get the problem with it i just live in a democracy and liberalism it's universalism whether you're talking liberalism today christianity at one time communism at another time it's really all your diverse a list again the crusading impulse the desire to force other people to live your little you'll save you know good life to save them that is what is so terrible about a liberal foreign policy and we're so i'm or even says although he contradicts himself later that he prefers a liberal style of government instead of hope and hope but in the anarchic world of

international politics with no world government competing power centers it is a recipe for militarism and imperialism and disaster and a loss of rights at home just to push back on the one thing mark mentioned and i think him or sharma would agree with me. let's say that you have a you know human rights democracy but if it's found founded on power then it will be fine for example after the cold war let's say we would have created a greater europe based on what a bunch of common european home. becomes part of the same club and we agree on certainly here humanitarian standards or you know democratic freedoms or you are well some good no. matter what we're not instead we developed it may have been for you know for example of that we so slowly and it became it became an instrument of power so century and now we can expand and using democracy as a reason so i get very much a new civilizing mission so the new white man's burden is to go out and bring democracy. to the. rest of the world i don't know what hold that thought we're

going to go to a short break and after that our discussion on john mearsheimer new book stay with r.t. . seems wrong. to shape out this day. and in. the trail. when so many find themselves worlds apart. just to look for common ground.

this is says harlan kentucky. boy says the boardroom is very funny using. a co money since he was almost no coal mines left. the jobs are gone all the coal was just said that there was a lot of to see these people a survivor was disappearing before their eyes. i remember thinking when i was younger that if anything ever happened to the coal mines here that it would become a ghost town but i never thought in a million years i would see that and it's happened it's happened. after world war two we ruled the world we had the most gold we had the sound this current say we had low interest rates and we were american century ready to

go. off to get a lottery winner that blows it all here we are twenty eight say having kind of what . it was good to see say. the us. was. by. god. or law. by. cloak a back across like we're all things are considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing john mearsheimer snoo book.

let me go back to glen here was getting a bit heated there and everyone's trying to grab space here to continue your point my friend well i was just going to make the point that according to this new liberal theory and even liberal ideology there's less scope for compromise because if you have if this realistic you know you can always agree that you should have a balance and you can reach a compromise but for the liberals if you think that you know spreading your empire your liberal empire will bring perpetual peace then any any compromise with the other serious ascension of peace meant and so instead you have this incentive to pursue a perpetual war in order to achieve perpetual peace and i think that's what makes them so dangerous that you can't you can't compromise you can't negotiate the this essentially goes against the whole idea that we can actually reach this point where the world becomes this peaceful democratic utopia so. i guess that's my main but i

don't and that's the saddest thing because compromise means evil you can't compromise with evil with evil with with but with sir you can't provide us with saudi arabia just not russia and china. will explain that ok if it's simply because saudi arabia other countries go to our border and long ago geo politically aligned themselves with us foreign policy interests it's it's not the principle that matters when you're considering whether to ally yourself with illegal countries whether you're considering saudi arabia or russia or china or you know any turkey or any number of countries it's not principle that actually determines it it's just rank hypocrisy it's a it's a lie they tell and believe themselves to be really that's why you know these things hangs it was really just because realism describes the real world and liberalism describes. made up world and

a made up set of conditions of human nature real ism liberates on this you know real is of views the world that we are all social animals that we are born into a culture a society and we naturally interact with each other liberalism views that we are all this atomized in the vigils hoof think about and sign social contracts with each other and this. eroni us assumptions about human nature at the fault of liberalism to be a theory for foreign policy in the world real world and that fill your two to act the real world in real human nature leads to the disaster of consequences war inevitable violence and tensions that arise with a liberal foreign policy. mark raised an important issue why did the united states

. ally themselves with saudi arabia this is the question that a lot of russian establishment figures so well the russian elite is asking if so would you arabia can be an ally why can't we. i think is the fall in saudi arabia will never be a truly independent sovereign state with a elite with the kind of morals that they have to do it all it's not a state that's a family they will always depend in the same way the united states called allied with the mileage china in the seven just but it can last a light self with more or less normal china of twenty. so basically what happens is their. russian elite will have to make a choice you know they wanted to have good relations with the united states they tried to accord with the united states for many years the whole idea was that if they want to give money if they want territory to develop all oil and gas we can do

do it together why aren't you doing that well because these people don't want all your money they want to change you they want your soul they want your soul they want to change you profoundly and then that sounds you know when. you know that we do so many an idea to make the wall safe for democracy there is all it is that the world is not safe first for other countries and then in the end it becomes unsafe for democracy too so when for example even some russian diplomats say we have no idea what differences with the united states or with the west know we do because the whole difference is methods george of can say that it was the most important thing about ideology methods russia does not want to change are the countries moral in there with its own image the united states wants and here i think gives that accident call from george w. bush exactly before the invasion of iraq how would george bush saw iraq and liberated iraq can show power freedom to transform that vital region by bringing

hope and progress into the waves of millions america's interests and security and america's belief in liberty borscht lead in the same direction to a free and peaceful iraq and of course he forgot to add with isis. a lot of other things where you have a lot of on it one of those occurrences in another famous but i think flawed a bit of francis fukuyama we still have this the last man in the end of history i mean people dismissed the book as they should but that's still kind of the g. net. code of liberalism we actually it was heralded by the liberal i know i thought it was a. little piece this is awful that's all he like jump legally wrong lately mission of it's right he keeps revising it well he just made a lot of money off of been trashing his own book it but what that's one point here it's messianic is that when you have

a missing link view of the world you can tweak it because it's perfect it's secret it's a deity in and of itself and any doubting of it it collapsed completely go ahead kind of a beautiful theory for liberal lead to money because what it really said this last man and that history the thesis was that no all ideologies works also there was only one left i was a liberal democracy and every country if they want to meddle in the world would have to embrace it and everyone would follow on the u.s. leadership as you try to emulate its model and again this is i think it's important to point a book out because it's been the foundation of this liberal delusion which points to and i think therefore one of the main issues that emerged on looks at this is the western relationship with russia because this is probably been the most toxic of this liberal hedge amount to be because from a realist perspective every realist even ken and especially ken and george kennan

that i see they recognize that if you expand the world's largest military alliance up to russia's borders russia will be very anxious it will start to push back and when it pushes back it's a mutual security best thing is to get a settlement in place and try to recognize ok let's not cross this border let's find a mutually beneficial solution but this liberal delusion what we're seeing is well we're just promoting democracy russia it's democracy it's afraid of them our baby hate our values our values and so by allowing russia to essentially balance us this is the biggest threat to peace and we have to. defeat them that's just the logic so that liberalism is this peaceful ideology or theory it's it's you know this is so it is a little in her head you only if it's you couldn't you can recast it in in a different way the united states in its imperium they are post modernist when it comes internationally lation russia is a modernist ok because they believe in borders ok the west says they believe in the

values ok with you and will and then the method is the method right it's ok this is really interesting let's talk about another book that dovetails on with this well there's a lot of love this stephen walt who is a political ally of john mayer's i remember his book came out of the same just after where the hell of good intentions america's foreign policy elite and the client of u.s. primacy and that he has previously cooperated with john mearsheimer on a piece critiquing the corrosive influence of israeli influence in washington right now and they were pretty much exiled from the sea you know from after that because of its reception and. if you go on you tube you can find there's a video at the from harvard's belfer center the liberal world disorder reflects on

grand strategy and not so great assumptions this is what ault and maritime are together discussing both of the model steroids on steroids right now you have a liberal voice to challenge them there as well i strongly suggest you watch that video and we have this zinger in there from walt liberal the gemini is a full employment strategy for the us as foreign policy elite and i think it's really great he also develops the idea what you're talking about how liberalism it actually rode the foundations of what a state. it's because the liberal elite their cosmopolitan nature they don't believe in borders that you know their free flow of people of of of value spread across the world they don't actually care for the idea of a nation they're at the end that they opposed to it and because of that that

this mirrors timer analyzes in his book he focuses on this trifecta and how they interact with each other real ism liberalism and national that's got it down there the thing is there's these little liberal. hema you don't have to know anything about culture you don't have to know anything about me sions you don't know to know anything about foreign languages nothing and nothing because you your values are your guiding light ok and you were absolutely right and you must defeat the heathen and convert everyone using the sword of innocence inside every black brown and yellow person and that little white liberal consumer just waiting to be freed with the good ole truth when he remarked just. go walk to school with a good ninety s. as a translator for a wall street correspondent here she said that the first thing she heard from her boss s. when she went to moscow she asked if she had to learn russian they said let's not make it a language club very soon all the world will be speaking english you know what we

what i what i'm afraid off in this libral hegemony is one of the it is it is it's a tendency to have a monopoly and tendency to have a government intervention because this is exactly what michelle writes in his books he basically defended it he basically divides liberals seem to the so-called morris revenge. you know from the times over the ones that have nothing against and the so-called progressive liberals who say that a government action is required to promote positive rights meaning gender rights all these things that we know about so. this is what this is the way to wants to put it tearing is when basically you have a monopoly in there and you end up having monopolies in economy all these transnational companies so you know high tech companies you have a monopoly in science which is detrimental to science and basically you have

government interfering. going out of everything you just said. when it ends up being in toto is intolerance exactly what it becomes and monopoly gentlemen that's all the time we have here many thanks to my guest here in moscow and thanks to our viewers for watching us here are to see you next time and remember. the best out of georgia. the high says it's a pain to perform i actually prepare myself to. heed what. has most of.

the time that was. this country was. so. what. was it you could would. yes get more education education. ah. you know world a big part of the movie lot 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 past 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 for watching closely watching the hawks. cranking gave americans a lot of job opportunities i needed to come up here to make some money i could make twenty five thousand dollars as a teacher or i could make fifty thousand dollars a year good truck so i chose to drive a truck people rush to a small town in north dakota was an unemployment rate of zero percent like the gold rush is very very similar to a gold rush but this beautiful story ended with pollution and devastation a lot of people have left here i don't know too many people here anymore just slow down so much they lost their jobs that laid off the american dream is changing

that's not what it used to be. and it's a tough reality to deal with. subscribing to roughly pawson get recchi comes in for just twelve euros fifty per month. a series of bomb scares time. top political figures in the u.s. the specious device devices have reportedly been sent to the white house as well as the homes of former presidents bill clinton and barack obama also to come europe and the transatlantic allies canada and the u.s. appear unwilling to reconsider weapon sales to saudi arabia in the wake of the killing of the kingdom's distant june.