so. what. was it he could with. yes i did. welcome to cross talk more all things considered i'm peter lavelle on this unique edition of crosstalk we review a new and very important book john mearsheimer the great delusion liberal dreams

and international realities it's a real bombshell. cross 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 all right gentlemen crosstalk 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. all in political theory we have to move to. the political realist i believe. to explain how states behaves. this see this

essential being dependent on the external situation so there's no good state or about state that everyone based on the international distribution of power so this contrast with the liberal theory in which we look more at the internal characteristics of state so whether or not there are democratic if there is to have economic it there into the pendants if the humans rise to seriousness a human right. such you have these two theories which competes against each other to explain how the world works. as liberal gemini and he says it's doomed to fail or you know this is is in many ways maritimers magnum opus of what is now been several decades of his fear of critique of us 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 it has quite 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 head to mine from emerging regionally it has delved into in ideology of exceptionalism which which mirrors heimer identifies as just another type 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. been a seat on the other hand the neocons have exhibited this whole liberal approach to international relations as you mentioned it sounds nice and one. i mean first the

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 meet him where he would typically i'm literally correct language i mean he germany all yes well i think that what he calls governing you know this is from my review of the book by the american conservative . you know. they called it a dagger pointed at the heart of america's guardian feel also feel progressive for liberalism well i think that you should call a spade a spade progressive liberalism or alter liberalism as i call it now it's not even a governing philosophy in the states it's the parian ideology which determines not

only the states action by 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 pool and of court well it's not just the liberalism 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 a little silly this is the ideology that mearsheimer is criticizing promotes for example. the war in syria and promotes the legal regime change in in ukraine in two thousand and fourteen because if you look at the liberal gemini in its. really surprising to me that you when you get into an

argument you know with a counter position to the things i've 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 these 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 at the realist 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 have to see the west was now 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 section of people like commercial or walt waltz 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 or promoting democracy so i assume mention the some nice idea that you know if you go out and promote democracy as a form of security because democracies apparently go 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 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 mark 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 the mocker sea and human

rights in international relations is it anyway a good thing. i don't but it might not but i think what glenn is saying i mean if that if that can be attained ok without use of violence i mean that i think that sure i should do so defending and promoting ideas it's the actions to promote one mouth or something so i've got a problem first of all it's obvious selectively and hypocrisy you know the u.s. is biggest allies of the middle east are the powerful liberal democracies of saudi arabia qatar and bahrain and you know. the united arab emirates so the us supplies you know i think their successive liberal for regimes of liberal foreign policy the u.s. 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 saw 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 and 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 with the table results in fact that there was two wars in the life of humanity but not for wolf to yours i mean the put it was which destroyed you were in the beginning of the nineteenth century that were all formally a bald spread in republican view. well you will send in

a lie to them and to end human use them and even weiss people like kind of the famous german boy it even they kind of good clued 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 democracies came to them with arms where polls on the war beginning from the ninety s. the initiative thought the crusaders are back with their 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 top in and something terrible demon hits on exactly which is i could get the problem with and 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 if for all your diverse a list of again the crusading impulse the desire to force other people to live your hatred of your savior good life to save them that is what is so terrible about a liberal foreign policy and we are cyber 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 emotion or would agree with me the let's say that you know human rights democracy but if it's from a 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 so everyone becomes part of the same club and we

agree on certain. standards or you know democratic freedoms will go to your well some good no. matter what we're not instead we've developed or maybe even just a few so you don't try to separate sony and but instead it became it became an instrument of power so sensually now we can expand and using democracy as a reason so i guess they're much less new civilizing mission so the new white man's burden is to go out and bring democracy to the poor of the. rest of the world and let's hold that thought we're going to go to a short break and after the break we'll continue our discussion on john mearsheimer new book stay with our team.

after world war two we rule the world we have the most gold we have the sound this currency we head low interest rates and we were american century ready to go and like the lottery winner that blows it all here we are twenty eight having contemplate. joining me every thursday on the alex salmond show and i'll be speaking to guests of the world of politics sports business i'm show business i'll see you then. cracking gave americans a lot of new 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 trucks. so i chose to drive trucks people who rushed to

a small town in north dakota was an unemployment rate of zero percent it was like gold rush is very very similar to. this beautiful story and with pollution and devastation a lot of people have left here i don't know too many people here in the slowdown so much they lost their jobs that laid off the american dream is changing that's not what it used to be. it's a tough reality to deal with. i .

welcome back to crossfire for all things considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing john mearsheimer new book. let me go back to glenn 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 liberal ideology this less scope for compromise because if you have if 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 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 for the summer and that's the fantasy point because a compromise means evil you can't compromise with with evil with evil with with but with the tanks we cannot provide us with saudi arabia just not russia and china. will explain that ok 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 really that's why you know these things hangs didn't want to cause realism describes the real world and liberalism describes made up world and a made up set of conditions of human nature real ism and maritime era labyrinths on this you know real ism views the world that we are all social animals that we are born into a culture society and we naturally interact with each other liberalism views that we are all this atomized in the vidual who fink about and signs social contracts with each other and this. eroni assumptions about human nature at the fault of liberalism to be a theory for foreign policy in the world real world and that fill year too. to act

on the real world and real human nature leads to the disastrous consequences of 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 a lot of russian leaders are asking if so would you arabia can be an ally why can't we do well the answer i think is the fall in saudi arabia will never be a truly independent sovereign state with their elite with the kind of morals that they have made although it's not a state that's a family they will always depend in the same way the united states could allied with the mileage china in the seventy's but it cannot allow itself with more or less normal china or to be. 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 more dealing them in its own image the united states wants and here i think gives that accident called from george w. bush exactly before the invasion of iraq how would george bush saw iraq and liberated iraq can show poll 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 that were really of a lot of on it one of those occurrences here another famous but i think flawed because a bit of francis fukuyama we still have this the last man in the end if 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 teeth this is awful that's all he like 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 sacred 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 old ideologies works also there was only one left that was liberal democracy and every country if they want to meddle in the world would have to embrace it and everyone would fall on the u.s. leadership and them as you try to emulate it's model again this is i think it's important to point a book out because it's been a 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 if he did 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 are they hate our values. and so smug by allowing russia to essentially balance us this is the biggest threat to peace and we have to. defeat them us is the logic so there that liberalism is this peaceful ideology or theory it's it's it's you know

this is so it is literally in his 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 leighton's russia is a modernist ok because they believe in borders ok the west says they believe in the values ok with you and well 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 the time on the after where the hell of good intentions america's foreign policy elite at 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 ad from harvard's belfer center the liberal world disorder reflects on grand strategy and not so great assumptions this is why marriage simer together discussing both of those 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 you got it that 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 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 your largest pair of you go walk to school with the ninety s.

as a translator for a wall street correspondent here she said that the first thing she heard from her boss us 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 defend it he basically divides liberals seem to the so-called more dose revenge of the brawls you know from the times o'donnell all the ones that have nothing against then 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 was to tear it tearing is when basically you have an ideological monopoly in there and you end

up having monopolies in economy all these transnational company as you know high tech companies you have a monopoly in science which is detrimental to science and basically you have government interfering everywhere if i can fake mules we've run out of time to do everything you just said. when it ends up being in toto is intolerance exactly and that's 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.

ran out of the book uploaded the first out of georgia. to the concepts of preparing to perform i had actually prepared myself to die. he had one of the most eight when it. was not such. a slow. step her clown. discontinuous. but he had a good. soul. what. was it he could with. yes care deeply she. had to go in

there a couple toilet b.s. get. up. with this manufactured consent to stick to public will. when the ruling class is how to protect themselves. with the crime. to ignore middle room see. the real news is. if all to seventeen years of war in afghanistan the country this. in a vicious circle of violence elections assassinations and reconciliation talks with

the world around afghanistan changing will the country be able to escape its bloody cycle. packages containing suspected explosive devices are sent to hillary clinton barack obama a number of other prominent democrats as well as c.n.n. and what's described as an act of terror the former u.s. secretary of state has expressed her concerns over the incident. it is a troubling time isn't. it and it's a time of. deep. division is europe and its transatlantic allies canada and the u.s. appear unwilling to reconsider weapons.