essentially going to back away from saudi arabia's genocidal war against yemen but he says it will continue to support the sovereignty of saudi arabia and we we on the 1st day of the biden ministration we have troop movements from iraq into syria so that tells us what's going on here just a couple days ago nato has made it very clear that it's going to up its. troop level training level in iraq of course we have the dealing with iran if ministration doesn't seem to know which direction it wants to go but certainly it is anti russia and china and that is just the top bullet points go ahead mark. i think the interesting thing is that during the trump years. former biden officials for obama officials often accused him on spending all his time simply trying to wipe out the legacy obama as it was the trump foreign policy and maybe today we're seeing the most sense by this trying to undo everything that trump did so that for instance all the it's as you say true to say that in the. in

the saudi question he is pursuing a rather ambivalent course because yes he's saying we would like to warn them and stop yes we're going to stop providing certain types of support for the war effort but on the other hand we support the saudi state but he also explicitly allowed his spokesman to say i'll only be dealing with the king of saudi arabia he's my counterpart not the crown prince and similarly he waited a month before he spoke to benjamin netanyahu in israel both the crown prince of saudi arabia and the promise of israel were very close interlocutors with don't trump so what we might be seeing is also a discredited in the electoral terms because elections coming from israel of netanyahu the americans by the new american especially hoping this a different coalition will be called without netanyahu but also perhaps more strikingly in the way by began his period as president and some of the boma did with regard to mubarak in egypt remember shortly after because president obama very demonstrably met members of the. muslim brotherhood when going to speak in the car

university and in a sense the united states was no one with totally behind mubarak and what happened to him and i think we should maybe but. as we are sitting through the months of the with us from the temple of us through the so-called arab spring back in 2011 and our states may now be the sense saying we need to see big changes in saudi arabia. you know with the business more kind of begs the question george i mean markets absolutely right now between you said but i think i'm very weary of just personalizing boerum policy ok because the country's interests don't change very rarely change dramatically with a different leader and and he seabird naisi journalist and made policy makers a rocket and you can the prince but you're still dealing with the radio ok the end of the day going to be. well you're absolutely right i think mark is on to something that there is an attempt on the part of the biden people to us every

single thing that the trump of been astray should did and i think that that's a good point about saudi arabia 1. you see the same thing in the case though russia and china if you look at. biden's speech at the. munich security conference as well as the speech at the state department he is really really venomous towards russia. you know they would say it's just one condemnation of for another i mean he's pretty much labeling russia as and then we have the united states that it is determined to destroy the power and influence of the united states and its allies and when it comes to china 1 it's a much more much softer approach you know china is a competitor. and why yes he does talk about hong kong in the endzone the best he identifies china as just a competitor of the north and georgia the. i think it's really interesting here is

that it seems to me and you know this many times and has russia this is this is russia gate actually leading into boerum policy because he's and this is a domestic issue in the united states now and then with china will you have the n.b.a. and you have disney and it's so much more complicated because his comments about china where i mean not just buzzy it was muddled i mean i really didn't know what kind you. want to make me go back to market but this is an administration that is 6 listed lead time russia and china to gather as competitors adversaries even enemies in the case of russia this is something an incoming administration has never done before go ahead yes i mean the certainly big contrast with the time of obama is of course there is no cause for a reset so there's nothing offered on the contrary the so-called new cold war seems to be getting much cooler all the time. it's true to say that for instance with china because of all the economic including kids despite the preservation of the

trump power since also fall it's very difficult devices really to decouple from china without actually having to think about spending a huge amount of money domestically. on reviving the production of finding other sources but the the real question is who is this point national interests remaining the same even if people in charge change but the congress new who interprets the savings and i think one of the issues perhaps in washington more than say in other states is the degree to which national interest in international relations is perceived through the domestic rivalries and resentments because partly our system is very fortunate in the sense that it hasn't really faced the problem of having neighbors that kind of package or calls it trouble so to a great extent foreign policy has been much more a matter of internal rivalries and often scoring points over your domestic. ones too that said. as you say the. c.p.h.

into the political culture of the belief that not only is russia malign fools but the russia has in some sense some deep demonic powers able to influence develop since i think is such a profound cultural shift that it's going to be very difficult to us to escape from a lot of course pushes russia and try to together we see in all sorts of areas now military cooperation much more quickly cooperation economic factors infrastructure and then could just between russian energy and china and so one of these things are going to be very difficult to reverse the americans complain all the time about the north stream pipeline between russia and germany bypassing the central european states and how that creates a long term strategic shift well of course in the far east and because the change in a sense is taking place and is in a sense the promoter of it because most of these 2 states together it is a mutual sense the ban on the pressure from the americans of the other guys in our states feels itself in the relative decline in risk flushing out and this is of

great interest to in american intellectual circles a big discussion of is china of the new imperial germany is it like the homes job the challenge in britain at the end of the licensing of the 5 century but in many ways as the great american historian said he would fear that our states was more like the homesickness germany than it rivals. you know you know george and i'm the thing is that you and i honor going over the years you know maybe. sometimes there's by shifting but not warm policy was you know you know we have to we have to avoid this roaming alliance home between russia and china and have done everything in their policy to push them together and then we then we not at the bury in the waning days of the trumpet ministration the european union with great haste i would say a sign of a huge investment deal with china and so you know when by goes you want to get you know or speak the meetings you do is a we're back in. people say what does that mean do you because it means something

different to us because as united said many times it's you know you're of no society but no it's going to be a player on the world scale not or it's going to happen. yes yes that's exactly right and when you get the this of the europeans to say ok we want that we don't like trump trump was very rude to us. emigrated us he. is very rude you know you know he just was very dismissive and that wasn't the soothing flattering way that you get of these transatlantic conflict so when they get a bite i'm back and he said well i am america's back 6 but what is by offering your is simply offering yet more of these interventionist wars and they look at what he's doing in the middle east in particular in syria where he is now. massively

increased american military presence of syria now he's building a 2nd base in syria now nato is increasing its presence in iraq so they what they europe is getting from america is back is you know military escapades in the middle east which as we saw back in the obama years has a blowback effect on europe through the massive migration flows but just going back to the interest of the national interest what what trump please did is he identified a specific american national interest which was to rebuild the american industrial economy i mean whether it's feasible or not is a definition but that was nonetheless his agenda that america should become once again an industrial powerhouse as it was back in the 1950 s. and sixty's and for that he wanted to shift. america's manufacturing industry back into the united states by. as i didn't find anything of that nature when will it be

talks about america's national interest to teach the eba values and use had nothing to do with national interest i mean they just. becomes of the justification for pointless interventionist wars you know or it or it's a budget line print diversity but again that still addressing the domestic audience here you know mark one of one of the things that i find very interesting is that i look at the obama administration's foreign policy with the exception of iran which we'll talk in the 2nd part of the program is basically a failure or a failing grade ok but even seems to me that they just want to put it back in super charge again i mean they just don't seem to be any kind of critical analysis some of the mistakes made during the obama administration and weaknesses and coming to terms with the consequences about foreign policy joe biden just like george sent her to talk about about the use them policy go ahead but yeah i think it's worth mentioning afghanistan as well as iraq because george mentioned that we're seeing

the sense to just to return to what was going before and in a sense saying that there's a kind of attrition we can sustain relatively trivial losses for western saw i mean he's also been supported by their appearance i think it's worth mentioning that there's the macro made the most extraordinary statement in his speech to the munich security conference when he congratulated joe biden on discussing things in his speech which you have mentioned. so why the back home was briefed so that biden was going to talk in great detail about the middle east about iraq and afghanistan or he was trying to make a point that the emphasis applied on russia and china as the 2 big boat views who are for was not pretty what the european allies wanted they want to see as the war on terror continued they see any withdrawal of nato fluff and a stunt and he would cool of the nato support for iraq and also involvement in syria as being a danger in tom so. they're going to get it was not recommending that your break we'll continue our discussion by.

the world is driven by shaped by.

the dares thinks. we dare to ask. the british and american governments have often been accused of destroying lives in their own interests while you see in this these techniques is the state devising methods to end to essentially destroy the personality of an individual. by scientific means this is how one doctor's theories were allegedly used in psychological warfare against prisoners deemed a danger to the state that was the foundation for the method of psychological interrogation psychological court for the cia disseminated from within the us intelligence community and worldwide among our allies for the next 30 years. then

to other victims say they still live with the consequences today. welcome to cross up we're all things are considered i'm here alone for a month we're discussing biden's foreign policy. ok let's go back to mark in oxford you were trying to make a point before we went to the break go ahead mark its history the president calling the or criminal laws of nato and all access to continue the involvements in afghanistan and iraq and the middle east in general because they see these areas of instability is causing for instance the terrorist threat in your course well my think we say that there are also some reasons for terrorist lesson or one for the house and out there being the involvement of your pin nato allies in these places in the muslim world meaning you know i think sometimes we get much about why when

it's it seems to mean that they are there it is very there are very strong best. interest in these a nato member countries the red lanterns it's ok i mean there again this is what they do ok in an eyewitness i would make the argument that they do you know if you're going to be going to focus on terrorism in these countries you know you get them before they come to us not mentality we're just giving them oxygen to exist you get you eventually it seems to me that that's one of the lessons that was have been learned on the so-called war on terror and you know if nato were to bocas that separates on the border into the whole immigration control and nightmare as in that sense i think that's a good mission in actually it is in the national entrance so get your to the c.e.o. not if you're going to go that's exactly right because that should be. primary mission which is securing the borders all its member states. sure

security for the european people living in europe but that's not what nato does i mean they do justifies its existence by. threats and getting involved in a variety of conflicts over all nobody asked nato to get involved in libya but that was all there was a war of choice nato decided to get involved in libya nato got itself involved 'd in iraq it got its of involved in syria got involved 'd in afghanistan none of these things has brought has brought any kind of security to europe which is the again real stance of what justification for nature. and now with its you with its constant drumbeat of hostility toward russia again it is not bringing any kind of security to europe because it only leads to confrontations

a very you know which could get quite gnostic. 1 in the baltics and in the in the black sea so because of the whole nato boondoggle it's actually creating security threats that it claims to be the solution to war but of course it isn't so so that when you're saying is that the they're doubling down on a mistake ok instead of realizing it was them then you have their new policies justified to alleviate the mistake that was originally made. that's exactly right so you know their way their way they justify their existence is by exacerbating threats and then 'd they say well a things are worse we need nato bad because otherwise you know horrific things will happen you know we have to fight them over there that before they come over here you know mark in with much fans. there the it's the national security council but

the by mr asian it kind of rolled it out is that if he is going to the asian desk and bureaus have a much more higher profile much more many more resources and all this but you know again i think that they're trying they're looking at and this is not just a biden but i mean ever since the end of the cold is that you know is that they somehow can replicate a nato elsewhere which they haven't had much success in doing and and i can see that you know apart nato germany and france one of the great reconciliations of our time that's when wonderful but i don't i don't see the same thing being replicated in asia i can't see how the the the south koreans in the chappie knees in the australians libya mini's look dilip you know are going to act in the quite same way nature we did during its heart in original creation all the way up to the present go ahead mark. we can see point with that for instance japan and south korea are allies of the united states but they are deeply suspicious of each other and we

could see for instance over issues like me on mall today japan is not a little anxious to get involved in the intel it has a mammal rightly or wrongly that's just a huge difference and so we're kind of cohesion that the grades that you had in the . appliances of old over 70 years you have a very powerful a glance a state like britain that's one of the key members and so you don't really have a tool that i'm trying to do both for instance india and japan as other countries in a alliance raises all sorts of questions because if you have the classic just took a while since it was to stop the tap but there is a world the danger that you get involved with states that do territorial disputes over one quarter of a joining nato was supposed to have any territorial disputes so that you couldn't have a councils by the just waiting to be true that suddenly we can see concrete that on the korean peninsula between india and china there are all sorts of potential for conflict and you then say woodward needs all the states necessary. to sign up to be

dragged into a conflict which to them is a long way away and it's very meaningless and also would unfold with china which is also such an economically important so even though countries like the philippines want to protect themselves from the sea they don't necessarily want to get involved in a prolonged cold war with china because and so you can only conclude. you know you know georgia the the the real issue here is it's really i always find the kind of curious to the point of being hilarious about you know america protecting american national interest well there's no there's no real country in the world who seriously threatens the united states i mean if you want to talk about nuclear power china russia well then they would be destroyed ok the whole issue of met with would be in play here so but really what's the issue and going back to your original comment about munich as you know biden says were bad but we want you to back our kid gemini and maintain our good gemini and that's what they're saying to their allies in asia do we want you to come on board to maintain i want our gemini

ok and not everybody wants to be part of that deal anymore but particularly in asia where you know people are you know all these fanatics like my decoupling from china well that's going to be american business is going to have to decide that are in less the government wants to get involved in that which i doubt very seriously as that's why joe joe doesn't speak very clearly about these issues but that there is decoupling going on a lot of companies are moving away from the united states or moving to china because that's where they see the future being played out here so it seems to me it's a fool's errand you know to say although we're back we're going to be nice we're going to be courteous but we want you to get in line to protect what we define as our interests the international system is far more complex now the cold war is over a long long time ago and that was ideological this isn't yes that's exactly right. and this box set i mean there was the original rationale. for nato there was

supposedly a. a soviet threat that people forget nato actually predates the warsaw pact but the less there was at least the rationale that you know the russians were going to do were army there were early on there on the other but it became you know out of the end of the cold war it became much harder to justify 1 nature's existence of that one nato's purpose was to exert us hegemony over europe some say well and death for you had to continually escalate the various threats that europe faced and why need it was necessary so we originally have the instant the threat from instability and instability will lead to humanitarian crisis that will lead to refugee flows therefore nato has to be there to stop instability then we have the global war on terror again well we have

terrorists we have to fight them over there on the other before they come over here so. you know it was back to russia so we know we have to sort of the cold war ducks russia is this. huge threat so it's always a matter of trying to justify the existence of this entity which has absolutely no justification. and somehow talking up some non existence threat and they they're doing this. with in asia and they're really nobody is because they're you you have here you have to start from scratch with with nato the united states was lucky because it was already there in existence you could just sort of keep it going through the demons of inertia but in asia they would have to start it from scratch and nobody's going to want to do it and then nobody in the united states wanted to precisely because we don't want to get involved in a war between india and china. he made philippines in china so. there are

a few take this relation they know where george already mentioned it but i think it's really important here it wouldn't let him look at mainstream media in the main broadsheets how he described under paul and ministrations you know over the last few decades that it's all it's marry him bone to it so it's very value driven i mean we just have a few days ago in the new york times to low octane writers talking about they have the west now it's the great. alliance against the end democratic forces them china and russia and all that which all you know it sounds all nice and fine but that doesn't again go back to what no interest might not always point out to people the great alliance the defeated nazi ism the very different players involved in the middle and they had one goal and they they achieved history when turned out differently on that but you know he's constantly playing on his bow you know i mean

you know about fighting for gay rights in thailand recently when we're going to war or that we're going to go to war to mercy you know when. it does that then top line makes a lot of sense of what people when you get really down to you and you didn't want to have military spending a possible conflict over trying to change the ballot use and someone else somewhere else or had i think so he won again big contrast with the other cold war is rightly or wrongly there was a perception of a big audio trickle threat that communism had as it were great some touring in support base that if you didn't challenge it mostly by the way who didn't improve the economic conditions of all her complete well thanks actually there isn't an ideological cult and i don't see any sign that it's anywhere in in europe with our states where people are saying if only we could be like china. it's gone. the other side is however the same values can be aggressive those us as well as moralistic values of supporting. us to do so i think a more likely source of conflict is the emphasis upon climate change and

environment which are bigger issues but most of us how to persuade people or to force people to adult. environmental policies and you can see for instance part of the bolsa. base in brazil is the sense the brazilians are being told that they should do things which would affect the global climate it may be that cutting down the amazon is having a disastrous effect on the global climate but you can see how around the world there's a sense that the rich west is trying to save its own skin by forcing poor countries southern hemisphere countries into line over the forces and would actually use force because we revoke the rhetoric what we bring up it's a very interesting topic for a separate program i would guess you know and doesn't want to make our viewers watching as you know are easy and it's not a member. of

the. same wrong. just don't call. me. yet to. be active. and engaged with equal trail. find themselves while the party. she still look for common ground. 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

led. direct. what is true what is faith. in the world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the depths. or remain in the shallows. were more politicized than ever or more polarized than ever the 21st century when speed is measured in megabytes per 2nd. listed on the. seeds in him electronic mail electronic money electronic media infinite possibilities for exchanging information i mean me and my misery whilst freedom of speech and social media bends censorship and double standards who should judge what can be said online. but i want. the

internet audience now totals almost 4500000000 almost all of them are active social network users put one wrong move on their pages deleted digital annihilation don't exist anymore. not who runs the show on the web how can anyone stand up to the tech giants if even heads of state face the threat of being banned is there any limits to hold that virtual. machine. but i was reasonable when. the beginning of the changing of the guard. handing the baton off to china as the number one economy in the 21st century the numbers are there the statistics are there the relationships in your here. are there the relationship with russia and

iran is there you know there are. shipped all over africa is also there. in the headlines from moscow this monday trying to infiltrate russian language media leap don't suggest the u.k. government to boost negative coverage and weaken russia. elsewhere as the texas family sues power companies for their son's death from hypothermia one resident tells us how they're having to turn off heating in the extreme cold snap right now providers of hike their prices 180 fold. back to the point where some people have told me turned up their power because they cannot play i may not be paid you can appoint a. role as a coca-cola worker leagues own line training course that tells the employees to be quote.