last sunday. a total morning on the beach he cut a hole close to your he said it's. not only shooting against. the utility bills you know snooki included they you know. that i was going to have in the ski. patrol. in the us but to the south this is tell them not to be calm cool and come to. such a british mr worst level is your. fellow

and welcome to cross talk for all things are considered i'm peter lavelle of the washington consensus led by the united states says the liberal world order must be defended at almost all costs said differently the foreign policy blob demands the post cold war you know polar moment be preserved but alas it would seem a multiple of the world has already arrived. cross talking and. polo world i'm joined by my guest james detritus in washington

is a former u.s. diplomat and former advisor to the u.s. senate republican leadership also in washington brian becker he is the director of the answer coalition as well as host of loud and clear daily new show on radio spoken gentleman cross talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate james let me go to you 1st i'm the reason i want to do this program at the end of the year is because we tend to look at events in a micro fashion you know what's going on in this country that country trump administration brags that you know which of course we do in the news media but i sometimes think that we love we miss the very big very big pictures of what's going on and the major changes that are happening around the globe and and the international system and this whole idea of multipolar world which is kind of foreboding to talk about in western media because by default it means the west loses something and somebody else gains something is that one of the reasons they

don't like to talk about the coming of a multi-polar world go ahead james i think it is peter i mean look you're right i think a mole to poll or world is a de facto reality now unfortunately that is the last thing that the establishment in washington wants to admit that they are committed still to this unit polar notion that emerged with the end of the 1st cold war in the early 1990 s. the idea of the united states is the unique power the only really legitimate great power in the other ones have no alternative but to accommodate themselves to the wishes and diktats from washington and even when that policy has visibly failed for example and ukraine or in syria or and in other places that they are committed you know for example nordstrom to we're still trying to sabotage that even though it's quite clear to me that that attempt has and has failed that they cannot let go of this notion that that other powers do not have to ask. mother may i every time they

want to do something that is in their national interest and this is something that the people in charge of these tablets but in washington just cannot admit to themselves you know brian you know francis fukuyama comes to mind you know the the end of history in the last man and that is really what buttresses this is going to tear a page from what went to james has said is that they can't imagine a world differently but it mean if you think historically well this is what the trends are countries go up countries go down countries make accommodations and some countries go to war the cities trap for example but it seems to me that the washington establishment of foreign policy blom they're in a state of stay cis is a they can't imagine the world changing beyond their own expectations and maybe even interest go ahead right. indeed i mean we saw the white paper that was leaked to the new york times shortly after the collapse of the soviet union paul wolfowitz was its real author but that was in fact the de facto sort of new doctrine for

world dominance presented by the united states after the collapse of the soviet union what that white paper made clear was that the u.s. wasn't going to have a peace dividend that because the cold war was over because the warsaw pact had had disintegrated that then nato could be disarmed and the us could use all of the money spent on militarism and war to help human beings like pay for health care or affordable housing indeed what the white paper established was that the u.s. must now seek to carry out unit polar dominance over all other potential rivals in the world and the and the letter says very clearly we will allow no potential rival to challenge us dominance and that's been the operational principle for the last 27 years but in fact it's come apart it's come apart because the u.s. got bogged down in the wars in the middle east while china came up it got bogged

down in the wars in the middle east while russia got back on its feet and so these 2 other major centers of power china and russia big enough big enough economies and strong enough militaries and large enough population wise of those 2 countries have come up now both russia and china said look let's make this when when our growth our development doesn't have to be your include the american government doesn't see it that way you know that's such a fascinating point you know because james with rising powers they could potentially in a way we have to stress the word potentially be a threat to the unit polar moment i mean would it be kind of maybe a better idea to engage them instead of you know turning them into hostile rivals and that's exactly what. we have seen happen. so a rising power by definition is a threat again that is a historical which need you could look at

a number of times through history where rising powers you have to accommodate the international system why because it works for everybody you this what we have now it's in washington is having that the very idea of win win is antithetical to their hedging monic demands go ahead james exactly right and i think as as as brian pointed out of this idea that somehow our dominance was itself the goal not even necessarily what that gets us as a country how does it make our people safer or more prosperous and if you compared to the alternatives in history for example if you look at the the long piece from 815 to 914 where britain was the leading power but it also understood the other powers france germany russia had legitimate aspirations on the world stage and there was a balance among the powers were not willing to accommodate that even though we are here in the western hemisphere we're by nature the most secure of the great powers we could accommodate the russians and the chinese understanding that they have

legitimate interests and legitimate sphere of influence we would still be the leading power the us and much the way that britain was during the 19th century but that's not good enough we have to have absolute dominance we have to deny legitimacy to those other powers and and ironically we didn't even do that during the 1st cold war with the silver union we were actually much more respectful of the soviet union and its interests even though there were some real ideological differences in those days it was an illegitimate for example to have a neutral powers i mean neutral countries like austria sweden finland that were buffers between the 2 blocs we don't we don't accept that anymore we have to have our writ go right up to the borders and territorial waters of russia and china not to mention iran or venezuela other countries that we simply want to destroy. so i don't think these people have a sense of history and how a balance of interests can be beneficial to our own country exactly you know you

know brian on top of it you know this mantra to get rid of arms control which is terrifying in itself we all remember the cold war and i think we all remember the good reason to have arms control i mean this is willfully creating instability in the international system it's willfully being done because this is what kept the peace and that's what these agreements were people invested in major powers invested in them to make them work now we have this the opposite we don't even want to talk about arms control now i mean this is truly dangerous for the world system go ahead brian indeed you had the nuclear test ban treaty of 1963 that prohibited the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons that was something that was very good we had the 1967 outer space treaty we had the salt treaty then the start treaty start one we had the ballistic missile treaty the antiballistic missile treaty all of those treaties all of them are gone with the exception of the start

treaty which is going to expire in 2021. that's going to expire and there's no negotiations right now as of yet underway there starting to be some talk about negotiations but bush got rid of the antiballistic missile treaty that was in 20022003 putin says that was the beginning of the modern era of the break up of the cold war architecture for arms treaties now trying just got rid of the i.n.f. the intermediate nuclear range treaty and one of these guys is clearly going to. open open skies as well open skies and nato 2 weeks ago declared that the outer space is their new fi wharf i didn't mean in contrast to the outer space treaty where the major powers said no we're not going to fight wars in outer space now that's what we're fighting domain so the reason for it the real and you're talking about big picture peter the real reason is the u.s. now believes now believes that it can actually gain military supremacy and thus

dominance in these different war fighting domains and that's what the u.s. had basically been forced to abandon during the cold war once the soviet union achieved a basic parity with the united states that that idea of mutually assured destruction that's gone now now it's full spectrum dominance and military supremacy as the operational doctrine of the pentagon this sets the stage for global war and the military doctrine of the pentagon recently revamped says we're getting ready for a global war with russia and china that's insanity you know james you know we had over the last few weeks we had the afghan papers released and it was a whole home reaction from the corporate media i mean it wasn't even mentioned actually from what i could see i mean one huge blunder and all 3 of us and many of our viewers knew it all along that we were being lied to so they want to take they want to militarize space and they can even do an operation like that at the at

a huge cost in every. single way and they will end and they won't learn from their mistakes no learning curve one minute before we go to the break go ahead james. well you know that you know we talk a lot about the military industrial complex but obviously it's much broader that i includes finance includes i t many other things but the fact is there's just a huge establishment of power that encompasses a lot of industry a lot of the both the point of the legislative and executive branches of government there are an awful lot of people with very for rice balls over the established policy that way it is and who cares if it's a failure those people are doing quite well for themselves yeah well that's very interesting i'm glad you mention that because no one is ever held accountable i mean we can go through this russia gate hoax you know and people that were charged with process violations going to get it go to prison and people they'd bring in countries like afghanistan in iraq to destruction are never held to account they

just move to another thing tank with more air conditioning that's my opinion are gentlemen we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on the world stage. 36 of course with a little. was a news new york at the sun the internet based on well you should be the cheapest we feel and i've used these for well for you know them or i don't need to get his name down for bush but i will push the so-called issue going to get us know she is going

to. is your media a reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe. isolation community. are you going the right way or are you being. direct. what is true what is faith. in the world corrupted you need to descend. to join us on the death. or i'm

a going to shallow. welcome back to crossfire where all things considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing a multi-polar world. ok let's go back to brian in washington i think the real problem here is i was a trained historian and i love history and i still do it to study history to this day the big problem we face here and understanding in dealing with grappling with the multipolar world which we do have it respected that denial of the blob and the media is that it's american exceptionalism is the biggest problem here because american exceptionalism automatically delegitimizes any kind of challenge ok i'll keep it very neutral ok because if you look at great britain i mean

a one point it covered one 4th of the world's. in land ok and it for the most part gracefully more more or less relinquish that because it was in its interests to do that but it didn't have this exceptionalism in the way it does in the united states is that that's really the biggest barrier it's more of a psychological barrier and that's because of exceptionalism they're blinded to geo political facts and i want to talk about actually a multipolar world is best for everyone at the end of the big go ahead brian. certainly we what we have in the united states i would say is the toxic entered tangling of this kind of american exceptionalism ideology which has basically the united states has the right to interfere in every country interfere in every region use military power to get its way that's kind of an ideological premise that there's a sort of righteousness a divine mandate to do just that and at the same time as jim was mentioning in the

1st segment the a.b.c.'s of the whole project is making lots of money for the people who are making weapons and who have created this ad of this and it's not just the war manufacturers it's wall street banks it's corporate tycoons it's hedge funds i mean they're all of their feeding at the public trough they have to constantly create enemies of the united states has as we've also said in the 1st segment an ocean to the east an ocean to the west it's protected the last time the country was invaded was the war of 1812 and yet here we are 207 years later with a 1000 military bases around the world a military budget that's more than a trillion the house of representatives which is dominated by the democrats the so-called resistance i'm just passed the n.d.a. a with the military budget greater than what trump asked for and greater than what the pentagon asked for i mean this is a society that saturated with militarism because it is good business and the

politicians know that and they don't defy it and that's this interchangeably ideology and the business of war mixing so that the united states reinforces the notion that it must use military power above all else to ensure that it's a unit polar world where they have full spectrum global dominance that's a recipe for disaster but brian let me if i can stay with you i mean would if you ever imagined it would be the left liberals that would be the champions of cold war 2.0 i mean because you can throw in the well i think they go in ideological. respectability to it that is irrational go ahead finish up go ahead it's what makes this even more dangerous than the cold war because at least the liberals were demanding band of peace with the soviet union let's not have world war 3 now you have the liberals so-called liberals maybe that word has no meaning then you will agree liberals agree have become part and part and parcel of the of the military industrial complex you know james you know it is that there's

a lot of time i wish i had a good laugh i guess it was about 2 months ago the new york times in an editorial kind of no trump maybe you should have better relations with russia which was quite laughable coming from the old gray lady after all this russia gate ukraine gate nonsense here my point is here is that you know china and russia now one of the great boogie men ok state still mostly russia because that's what they know they like to peddle that ok and there's a lot and there's a lot of people that have business interests in china and they're a little worried about that but none the less here but is china in russia truly a threat to the washington consensus i would argue not it's their hostility towards russia and china that motivates them ok it's not aggression they certainly don't want to export any ideology for sure and particularly in china they just want to get rich that's what their primary interest in go ahead james yeah i think that

well it depends how you define threat if we're going to end a threat to us here in our own country that some kind of aggression is going to be directed against us no of course they're not a threat if you mean threat to global domination yes i guess by definition any country that doesn't want to be dominated is a threat to their program i'm glad that you and brian mentioned this idea of the left having been against the cold war backward i guess one wonders where russia was run by a godless communists but now that they're not in they're building 3 churches a day and i guess the left hates them all the more it's you have a very odd paradox that. seems to be this imperative now from the left for this you know to the soviet union had an ideology of peace progress and socialism we've got one democracy human rights and free markets and will shove it down your throats with the sanctions and bombs if you don't want it you know this kind of messianic vision a messianic world and you know what it comes to the question of the well it is i mean the idea we are the savior of the world that way and it is and it's when we

talk about exceptionalism i don't think we realize how deeply un-american this is i mean you look at george washington's ad admonition against having these these per these permanent antipathies or attachments to foreign countries or john quincy adams saying don't go abroad searching for monsters roy we want to stay out of the politics of europe suddenly now we're we're supposed to remake the entire globe but our old image where is this coming from it's not from a traditional notion of american identity it's something we've really seen only in the last few decades or you know where everybody talks about neo conservatives paul wolfowitz was a bench and i think of bob kagan and bill kristol in their piece toward neo reaganite foreign policy in 1906 where they also talk about this this program for a global domination i think this is deeply un-american. madeleine albright and we see farther because we stand taller which is ridiculous ok brian i guess what but

yeah it's me and most of our viewers is that we have a track record which is go from the end of the cold war ok that's a good benchmark where does it work out i just don't see it it's one catastrophic failure after another but they keep pushing this ideology i mean there's no learning curve here and that i think that's what really frustrates me they want to go on one adventure after another and of course you know every 6 months or so we have you know iran's iran's getting you know the threat to the biggest global threat in the world an exporter of terrorism these are all sound bites all of the time. and they just keep get repeated over and over again instead of as i started this program watching how the world truly is changing go ahead brian well i think the united states intends to reverse their fortune where they would intend to reverse the trajectory of multiple polarity and the way they were thinking about it i think there is actually a plan here i think the us go by dennis fine china and russia as global power

threats and that the us military doctrine is to prepare for a major power conflict the goal really isn't to go to war with russia and china although that may be the consequence the real goal is to overthrow the government in china the us military is they they look at what happened with the soviet union the u.s. was slipping in the world at that time there were revolutions all over the world that was when iran happened in afghanistan in nicaragua and vietnam cambodia laos in goa mozambique guinea-bissau out ethiopia you name it but the united but the reagan administration using the club of militarism they doubled the military budget they put enormous pressure on the soviet union and ultimately the soviet union for a lot of reasons cracked apart and the us became sort of the ruler of the roost again and i think the u.s. intends to overthrow the government in china and they hope that in the post putin era russia will come apart and that would be the way they're used to polarity would

be reassembled and i think that's the real plan here ok well i think it's an interesting plan but i think it's really really far fetched ok if you look at the the end band i mean it's a far fetched you know but i think that i thinking you know because we're all the stuff we've seen in the last 2 decades i think you're right ok unfortunately i think you're absolutely right and that's what makes it really insane look at you know that we go to james here i mean 40 years of relative success in china i mean hundreds of millions of people being pulled out. out of poverty russia's turnaround in the last 20 years is quite remarkable people that come and visit notice it is well i mean thinking that they can undermine these legitimate governments through their shenanigans they haven't been very successful leg and venezuela wow they think it's going to work and china go ahead james. i remind me of some 19th century french statement said the statesman said that the opposition says our policy has

failed i ask you is that any reason to abandon it that that's the kind of thinking we have here in washington that i don't think we can underestimate the extent to which the establishment was spooked in 2016 when trump said he wanted better relations with russia when we look at all this impeachment stuff and all this loony tunes stuff about russia and ukraine that not only the democrats throw at him and basically accused him of treason but even the republicans don't dispute they say well well but he gave them the javelin missiles he's even more militant that obama is what more do you want that they cannot that both sides of the aisle cannot understand a policy toward russia especially i think also toward china that doesn't essentially recapitulate the maximum pressure policy against north korea or venezuela if we just keep the heat on we keep the pressure on sooner or later they will collapse sooner or later we'll get the regime change we want and maybe a dismemberment of russia which i think is their real goal with respect to that country well this is going to go to you and kind of end on an irony ironic point

here is that after all of these force regime changes attempts and successful ones here and now we have the foreign policy attempting it on donald trump the blob has taken their playbook to washington against him and irrespective of how you feel about trump they're the blob and they're pliant friends in the media or undermining institutions so add that layer to the onion go ahead brian well i think the american elites have become more and more factionalized you know we always talk about there's only been 3 impeachments. u.s. presidents in the entire history of the american republic but 2 of the last 4 presidents have been impeached i mean clinton on minor charges and now trump on this ridiculous charge about a phone call that 100 people were listening to openly when he talked as alinsky i mean there is a factional sort of warfare in washington but there's no warfare when it comes to the military industrial complex and that they are all united and that they they

they all genuflect at the altar of militarism and that's what the real problem with american politics is whether you like republicans or like democrats the fact is both are addicted to war and militarism in the military industrial complex therein lies the danger to world peace is that on that point we end the program and it was perfectly said here many thanks to my guests in washington and thanks to our viewers for watching us here darkie see you next time and remember crosstalk rules . blushes and they teach you the cica total more than the beach because most true team you'll be set it's better to chance the steadily shooting you just. let them

into. the utopia because you know it's ok you get it occasionally you'll get a use of it have no school or become competent in the scheme to show. that you can use these. gifts but to do the such police are still to be come forward in time to. the mummy approachable british mr bush cuts imo sure because. banks geysers financial survival they say money to develop. a plan to take it easy

this is a central plank support diagram is on the carbon right now so you stop the madness . you are no offense but you no longer a young woman in fact you are one of the last living survivors of the nazi else asked i'm aware of it. all you like. you can never forget the other guy no auschwitz was really like to be inhaled because he would never believe it wasn't a human can do to as a hobby horse for 32 years and open the cupboard it it all seems so locked off by the side ways to make it right when i get out on the farm saw you don't want to take my song to their next meal so he can listen in hopefully bless my heart hurts.

russia starts cope with 19 vaccine trials promising to get results by the end of the good countries also rolled out a number of measures to curb the spread of the virus we visit a moscow airport to see what's being put into place. there are 3 layers of thermal control that all arriving passengers have to pass through there's these. infrared camera there's a thermal camera and the passengers temperatures they could a brewery played britain's national health service starts recruiting medical students and retired stuff in the drive to build an n.h.s. army staff face increasing pressure and also abuse the coronavirus. there's a lot of. questions left on and on.