hello and welcome to cross talk we're all things are considered i'm peter a well there are already strong signs the biking ministration is we turning to the foreign policy of the obama years is this why obama's foreign policies were hardly a success indeed this was the time of endless wars will the biting ministration repeat the mistakes committed under obama.

discuss these issues and more i'm joined by my guest mark allman in oxford he is the director of the crisis research institute and in budapest we have george 7 well he's a podcast or at the gavel which can be found on you tube and gentlemen crossed up rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate it ok let's go to markers in an ox for continuity in change that's what we always look at when a new administration comes in and we see a lot of continuity and change. only on the rhetorical side of things we hear we hear that the biden mr ation is 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 are on the 1st day of the 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 it's. troop level training level in iraq of course we have be dealing with your rarely administration doesn't seem. i don't know which direction it wants to go but certainly it is with anti russia and china and that is just the top bullet points go ahead. 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 lost 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 although 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 up in 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 is in a 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 he gave a speech in cairo university and in a sense signaled that the united states was no one with totally behind mubarak and what happened to him and i think the issue may be that as we are sitting through

the months of the of us for the 10th anniversary of the so-called arab spring back in 2011 not states may now be the sense saying we need to see big changes in saudi arabia. but you dismiss me kind of begs the question your to me marc. absolutely right in the beginning 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 see seabirds mazie journalists and lazy policy makers saying we're not going to new the prince but you're still dealing with the radio ok at the end are they going to jump in or. 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 clearly prevented most 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. it's a much more or much softer approach you know china is a competitor. and why yes he does talk about hong kong and the ins on the past he identifies china as just a competitor of the moon and georgia you don't think it's really interesting here is that it seems to me and you and i have known about this many times and it has russia this is this is russia gate absent 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 he has comments about china where i mean not this was the it was muddled i mean i really didn't know what kind you. want to make let me go back to mark your. this is an administration that is makes listen wait time russia and china gather as competitors abizaid even enemies in the case of russia this is something and 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 into linkage despite the preservation of the trump paracel 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 because races with national interests remaining the same even if people in charge change but the crocus the who interprets these things 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 can attack it or cause 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 home and future ones too that said. as you say the seepage into the political culture of the belief that not only is russia or malign fools but the russia has in some sense some deep demonic powers able to influence develop a sense of it 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 in. structure and then just between russian and mature in 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 new high status is in a sense the promoter of it because most of these 2 states together it is a mutual sense the better under pressure from the americans of the of those in our states feels itself in the relative decline in terms of 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 french century but in

many ways as for the great american historian said he would fear that our states was more like the homesickness germany than again rivals. you know you know george and i'm the thing is the human eye on a good over the years you know make me. sometimes there's by shifting one of warm policy was you know you know we have to meet we have to avoid this growing alliance and home between russia and china and have done everything in their policy to push them together and then we then we know that at the barre 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 to munich and you know or speaks to munich to zoom in a we're back in once people say what is that means you because it means something different to us because as you and i had said many times that you know europe must decide but now it is going to be a player on the world scale will not or it's going to happen. yes i guess that's

exactly right. when you get the sort of the europeans to say ok. we want that we don't like trouble trump was very rude to a. great us. you know he. is very rude you know he just was very dismissive and that wasn't the soothing flattering words that you get in these transatlantic conflict so when they get a bite i'm back and he said well i am america's back but what is biden 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 it 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 different issue 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 biden hasn't identify anything of that nature when it me talks about 2 america's national interest he keeps talking about values rather use had nothing to do with national interest i mean they just. becomes of the justification for all pointless interventionist wars you know or it or it's

a budget line for diversity but again that's still addressing the do domestic audience here you know when more when one of the things that i find very interesting is that i'm. look at the obama administration's foreign policy with the exception of iran which we'll talk in a 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 there doesn't seem to be any kind of critical analysis of 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 said bird talk about about used in policy go ahead but yeah i think it's worth mentioning afghanistan as well as iraq because george mentioned that it was seeing the sensed just a 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 the europeans i think it's worth mentioning that as 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 we haven't mentioned. so why the battle was brief 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 was the tube of both views the russia was not really want of the european allies wanted they want to see the civil war and terror continue if they see any withdrawal of nato fluff denniston any because of the nato support for iraq and also involvement in syria as being a danger in tom so they don't they're going to get it was not recommending that or break we'll continue our discussion by one they would not.

really the beginning of the changing of the guard in our now handing the baton off to china as the number one economy in the 21st century the numbers are there the statistics are there their relationships in your here or there the relationship with russia and iran is there you know their and their relationship all over africa is awful there. were more politicized than ever or more polarized than ever the 21st century when speed is measured in megabytes per 2nd. electronic mail electronic money electronic media infinite possibilities for exchanging information i mean the. freedom of speech and social media

censorship and double standards who should judge what can be said online. the internet audience know totals almost 4500000000 almost all of them are active social network users but one wrong move on the page is deleted digital annihilation don't exist anymore. it's not who runs the show on the web how can anyone stand up to the tech giants if he from the heads of state face the threat of being banned is there any limits to hold. but i will have reasonable way. welcome to cross not where all things are considered 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 it seems through the president formally or criminal laws of nato are all anxious to continue the involvements in afghanistan and iraq and the middle east in general because they see these areas of instability as causing for instance the terrorists are actually your goals will might increase a bit of the real solutions for the terrorists lessen your one factor he's about to being be involved until you were pin nato allies in these places in the muslim world it seems to me that you know i think sometimes we get to know much about why hospital it seems to mean that they there is very very strong best. interest in these a nato member countries are atlantans 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 get nigeria or is them in these countries you know

you get them before they come to us night mentality we're just giving them oxygen to exist to get you mentioned 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 separate zone 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 to get going north and you're not you're going to go that's exactly right because that should be nato's primary mission which is securing the borders of its member states to show up security for the healer paean people living in europe but that's not what nato does i mean they do justifies its existence but. stoking up threats and getting involved in the riot the conflicts are all nobody.

made so to get involved is. libya about that was a that was a war of choice nato decided to get involved in libya nato got itself involved 'd in iraq it got itself 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 sensible justification for nature. and now with its 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 who log all it's actually creating. security threats that it. claims to be the solution to war but of course it isn't

so so that what you're saying is that they 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 iraq that's exactly right so. they way they 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 fanfare in the in the in the national security council but the by mr ation it kind of rolled it out is that in the 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 then this is not just a bite but i mean ever since the end of the cold war is that you know is that they

some. can replicate a nato elsewhere which they haven't had much success in doing it and i can see that you know it from 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 and the australians libya mini's look look you know we're going to act in the quite the 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 and while today japan is not a little anxious to get involved in the intel it has of am i right no wrong it doesn't a huge difference. the kind of cohesion that the grades that you had in nato were appliances of old over 70 years you had a very powerful a glance

a state like britain as one of the key members and so you don't really have a tool that i'm trying to involve for instance india and japan of us other countries in a alliance raises all sorts of questions because if you have the classic just occasionally to was that it was to stop being attacked 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 would wall these other states necessarily want to sign up to be dragged into a conflict which to them is a long way away and is very meaningless and also wouldn't hold with china which is also such an economically important partner so even though countries like the philippines want to protect. privacy they don't necessarily want to get involved in a prolonged cold war with china because it's so you can only conclude and you know

you know george the the the real issue here. it's really i always find a 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 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 men would be in play here so but really what's the issue and going back to your original comment about munich as you know binds us were bad but we want you to back our kid gemini and maintain our 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 even less the government wants to get involved in that which i doubt very seriously as good

that's why joe joe doesn't speak very clearly about these issues but there is decoupling going on a lot of companies are moving away from the united states and 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 oh 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 is 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 is yes that's exactly right. and that's not said i mean there was the original rationale for nato there was supposedly a. soviet threat that people could get nato actually predates the warsaw pact of the west there was at least the rationale that you know the russians were going to do your army there were early on there on the other but it became you know after

the end of the cold war it became much harder to. 1 netas existence of level nato's purpose was to exert us hedge of money 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 a cold war a duck's russia is this. huge threat so it's always a matter of trying to justify the existence of this entity for which there's

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 danger of inertia but in asia they would have to started 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 between philippines and china so. if there are few takers for an asian they know where george already mentioned it but i think it's really important here in a live look at how mainstream media the main broadsheets how they describe one bowls the under ball and ministrations you know over the last few decades that it's

all it's very him bone it's all 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 me and my 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 non-theism a very different players involved in the middle and they had one goal and they they achieved it history would turned out differently on that but you know he's constantly playing on his bow you know meeting you know hiding for gay rights in thailand recently when we're going to war or that we're going to go to war city you know when. it doesn't you don't top point 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 as rightly or wrongly there was a perception of a big ideological threat that communism had as it were great some touring in support base that if you didn't challenge it will so by the way he didn't improve the economic conditions of all of her complete well they interaction there isn't an ideological cult and i don't see any sign that it's anywhere 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 of home climate change and environment which have 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 bowl sonora base in brazil is the sense that brazilians are being told that

they should do things which would affect the global climate it may be the cutting down the amazon is having a disastrous effect on the global climate but you can see how all around the world there is a sense that the rich west is trying to save its own skin by forcing poor countries southern hemisphere countries into line over the poles and will it actually use force because we revoke rhetoric we want to. bring up but it's a very interesting how a separate program i would guess in oxford and but it doesn't want to take our viewers now watching as you know are easy and it's not a member. world is driven by a dream shaped by. the

dares thinks. we dared to ask. the british and american governments have often been accused of destroying lives in their own interests or you see in this these techniques is the state devising methods to him 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 courtroom the cia disseminated within the us intelligence community and worldwide among our allies for the next 30 years and

other victims say they still live with the consequences today. this is i'll say breaking news the e.u. announces a new sanctions against russia over the case of opposition leader alexina. infiltrating russian language media leaks documents suggest think u.k. government sort of boosts negative coverage and weaken russia. renowned italian opera singer gets the sputnik v. jab while on tour in moscow about as a 3rd russian kind of attacks each registered in the country. and as a broad as a coca-cola worker leeks its online training course that tells its employees to quote be less white.