i. think that hollywood is a free. strictly. business and. how would i define hollywood if they call it a dream manufacturer which i think's true but i think equally it's a problem in the fact. protests in minnesota enter a 4th night following the shooting of a right to ruin traffic stop. for the board and promises to withdraw all u.s. troops from afghanistan by september 11th the 20 year anniversary of the $911.00 attacks pushing back a deal with the taliban that says a made 1st deadline the militant group has already warned this could compound problems. muslims in france accuse the state of trying to control all aspects of

their lives or mentors close to school with their children it centers around a new bill designed to counter so-called separatism in the country. that claims to be the most trusted media but revelations from a c.n.n. director have called the network's loaded question. boom bust heading away in just a few moments time for those of you watching us in the u.s. is dennis miller plus one of the u.k.'s views huge news and huge. next hour to give you whatever speed on the morning headlines to get the. following welcome to crossfire we're all things work. i'm peter lavelle does the

biden foreign policy differ from that of trump's at this point not really however there is one difference trump a challenge the bipartisan consensus in failed biden on the other hand appears happy to oblige the interagency consensus is winning again. cross talking american foreign policy i'm joined by my guess ivan eland in washington he is a senior fellow at the independent institute and author of the book war and the road presidency in del mar we have scott ritter is a former intelligence officer and a united nations weapons inspector and in los angeles we cross the joe collins he is a former california congressional republican candidate and u.s. navy veteran all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate let me go to scott 1st and elmore i want to go offer my introduction here we have a new president we have

a new administration we were told that would be everything different from tom but in terms of foreign policy there's an enormous amount of continuity and i think it's very important to point out too is that as i said is that. the bipartisan consensus any largely lost. with joe biden seems to be really quite willing to embrace that i mean when we look at biden's policy towards russia towards china his administration is going to places really fast i don't think they know how they're getting there and what the outcome is going to be because it's terrifying a lot of people how do you see this scott go ahead. well understand it by do ministration was compelled to reconstitute the mechanisms of national security policy and foreign policy making that the trump administration had done rove for other term in terms of how policy was made many positions were not staffed other positions were just ignored and you know trump and his inner circle were making

policy as opposed to the old fashioned way where you know ideas were put out to different departments they came together and deputies committees in the national security council came together and principals committees where the cabinet members got together and made you know again the president. that's what's his returning to and when you do that you become a prisoner of process and so that's what we see with you know american foreign policy national security policy today is that joe biden has allowed the bureaucracy . of decision making to once again take over and as a result we see a lot of confusion we see a lot of cross talk as they try and get their act together i don't think we have a mature foreign policy 'd that was relevant that was it was evident in the fact that biden released what he called the interim national security sam energy.

normally this document takes months to repair it is a finalized document to provide solid foundation upon which departments and it can formulate policy this was interim guidance it was godly group and it's indicative of the back at the by demonstration is spreading water they're struggling to keep their head afloat they really don't know what they're doing well scott i mean and they didn't have this a normal amount of what i would say bombastic rhetoric without a coherent policy let me that i've been here i mean going back to the on the processes of. foreign policy making but what about the policies themselves as i understand they're going back to the ways of how to formulating it but i seems to me that there are defaulting back on policies that we're not going wring success ivan i mean even in washington going you can i think you can make that argument i would say that biden is certainly more conventional and trump and he's certainly

a scott put it he's going back to the original bureaucratic. motto but of course that allows the agencies to you know fire the process and squelch any new ideas now the problem with trump on the other hand was he himself some of his policies were very new and some of them were actually acceptable and as a problem that he had was he just shot from the hip there were there was nobody. to challenge him when he when he kind of went off the reservation sometimes so i think you know asked me sort of a happy medium but i think joe biden is more conventional certainly but i'm not sure that biden you know for instance i don't think biden is all that enthusiastic about these 4 afterwards being there now of course he's more cautious about getting out of and that's one area that's different and i think you saw. the

russia that biden quickly wanted to remain you the most probably the most important thing in u.s. security is still the axis stanch all threat of russian nuclear weapons and also for russia american nuclear weapons and so i think that that has been a warm and positive aspect of biden's. ministration it was done quickly and also i fully support that and i think it's an i report now you can argue that i thought i would criticize biden for trying to be. opposed to both russia and china at the same time that's not henry kissinger yeah. you're getting what you're getting ahead of me with china you are getting ahead of me that's important you have to do the opposite here you have to make about russia balance against china in this case that i don't see that's being

a very smart policy ok that's exactly where i wanted to go in this program let me go to joe and los angeles here i mean i find it be kill your very troubling this bombastic rhetoric against russia and china simultaneously and essentially talking you know putting out these statements in public you know we're going to do we will defend ukraine sovereignty will defend taiwan sovereignty i mean have they thought all of this through here because and for the chinese person spoken of and the russian perspective these are fighting words ok and people are preparing for it seems to me very very. immature and bombastic from the outgo i mean what there's not even an attempt to reach out and try to negotiate that we we have a new administration this is an opportunity to do it it's just the opposite of what we're seeing right now go ahead joe. yeah i have absolutely agree you know when it comes to the by an administration foreign policy i think it's one of the worst i've

ever seen and in my entire life i think this is the 1st time we had a president who with some people in this place in order to make deals i think you know we can't for that you know joe biden is using the americans as a personal sauce fine to give funds back over to different countries without taking care of the united states. schurz but i think when it comes to foreign policy you know i can't think of one thing that by the ministration has done that is going to positively affect the united states in the engine of the united states globally ok very good point there scott what is this with ukraine here i mean what is driving this is it is it the jakes elegans victory and newlands and tony blinken says that the president of ukraine's i mean ski i mean why is this such an imperative thing right now you have all these phone calls with nato officials e.u. officials everyone's really wound up here what's going on here what is driving this

what's driving this is russia's asserting itself as not only a regional player but a global player. and the fact that the united states it never forget. that you know by this falling back on a foundation of ideological beliefs in the united states he said be russia russia lost the cold war and we've never forget and forgive and vladimir putin we're trying to rebuild russia in the aftermath if you want to understand what's going on in ukraine today you need to understand that united states in the decade investing in a gentleman named bourse yeltsin who was supposed to subordinate russia to all things western all things united states and this failed. just like the people who promoted this promoted the embrace of course yeltsin had to deal with the reality of latter mere putin under barack obama there was a real. well it wasn't a reset for vladimir putin it was

a reset for dimitri. was prime minister so his hopes that. we could push note of power and have russia rip current to the fold. minutes work so what's happening in ukraine is an extension of a policy that seeks to undermine glenarm or putin's russia by empowering the near abroad we saw that in georgia we see that ukraine we see that with the former republican the baltic. it's a policy that's out of control and not into the ality we're supporting more of the most corrupt governments in the world we're supporting a state and nation that doesn't function properly and we're destabilizing an entire region all out of right yeah. that's all this is is why. yes i mean for me that's not a foreign policy demonization is not a foreign policy and i mean let me come back to what we tell you in washington and what i find so peculiar here the all of the quote unquote help from the obama

administration to help ukraine you know the being part of the overthrow of the legal government in 2014 as a result of crimea left and then you have the donbass that went into revolt and now they want the same b. team from the obama team to come and help ukraine some more i mean they keep talking about its sovereignty but it's because of these people that the sovereignty of ukraine is changed and not to you obviously to the betterment of camp i mean why do they keep trying the same failed policies go ahead in washington well i think they were they were essentially put down this path by george w. bush to promise ukraine to get into nato and i think you know you ukraine it's very important historically to russia and i think there's a big lack of empathy. in the united states for russia and i agree that

vladimir putin has been excessively demonized because then it becomes difficult to work with him on a certain issue right now as i mentioned did they did do that with the strategic arms. treaty and that's very important i think for for the whole world but i think you know this is this demonization biden start that you know. it's been going on ever since 1909 i think when putin turkey over and for some of the reasons that have been stated and i also think that you know i dare i say this fears of influence whether we like to talk about it or not that's the way the world's you know works great powers expect to have security because they have enough power to create a security for and if you run an alliance like nato right up to the border of russia and also try to include a key country like ukraine that has always been very special to russia

you're going to get pushback from russia in crimea in donbass etc and so i think some of these policies go way back all right i have to jump in nice guys biden but also i have to jump in here i have to jump in here we're going to we have to go to what europe we have to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on american foreign policy stay with r.t. . bill. today the industry faces a mystery to me is something you will know the d.-day reconditioned as i will be seen this season are all about making money making profits and some of the corporations and international markets import export do you imagine the number. from the diseases in every community if you do to new viruses or

new microbes that's not true so it is due to environment less so see that look and say you know the momentum to sit with the mayor of this sort of us i was really just accumulate could only come in to see to these leaders that. if the food industry is successful it will create more jobs create more value it will create more growth so i don't see why you shouldn't also fight for the interests of the street except that we have regulation we want regulation i was in the belief we don't behave as if you don't you just might. welcome back to cross talk we're all things are considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing u.s. foreign policy.

ok let's go back to los angeles joe we had the meeting in anchorage a few weeks ago with china on american soil and. secretary of state got a real dressing down and we had i think a week before that the high commissioner for the the e.u. was in moscow and he got a dressing down from the foreign minister lavrov here i mean what's going on here i think scott kind of alluded to in the 1st part of the program. major countries push back because they have the resources to do it and it looks like the biden ministration and the atlanta system in general have been caught off guard but when when people push back it's called aggression ok from the other side of the fence and saying we're serving our interests here we get this impression from administration after administration that no other country has interests you're not allowed to have interests and if you express it it's called aggression and that's not how diplomacy works and we were told by joe that there would be diplomacy under

his administration i don't see any of it anywhere right now go ahead joe in los angeles. yeah i think you're i mean you're right you know joe biden made a lot of promises throughout his campaign but what we're seeing right now a bunch of nations who or no longer afraid of the united states i think they've lost all respect for united states not being one of the biggest reason why is because dubai has always been soft on countries like china but try to press aggression towards countries like russia i think that you know we have a lot of age politicians who are sitting in a post cold war era nero still trying to or so states policies were at a time where you know the united states need to lead by example not trying to force example one of the countries so when you see other countries taking their interest . and poor countries with smaller economic development you know this becomes a huge problem for the united states and i'm like i said i think it's time for us to be relieved by example instead of leave by fortune or american interests on

other countries you know scott one of the i think think that at the core of the problem of all of this is here is that you know the blinken said this world they still believe for some strange reason maybe they watch too much c.n.n. is that the you know polar moment is still with this well that has is long long gone and countries like russia and china see the world as it is it's it's multi-polar and this is why we keep bumping into heads here is that there's different perceptions of how the world order is and is evolving here what do you say go ahead scott. absolutely look you know the united states missed historic opportunity in 19011902 we had in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the soviet union the end of the cold war your george herbert walker bush spoke of you know a new world order where the united states would have subordinates would not subordinate itself to the world but were worked together with the world through the united

nations to create you know something that was different from the bipolar existence that was that exists during the cold war but the united states was unwilling i would say to an able to rid itself of the mantle of a sole remaining superpower and so the decade of the 1990 s. was wasted opportunity thinking 911 the united states for the next 20 years bleeding itself to death morally and physically through this global war on terror we forgot about europe we forgot about asia and then done truck came along and freed us from you know what this is this rules based international order that everybody speaks of he said no this is america only america goes alone now battles trying to bring it back but you can't undo history the world has moved on it is not a eunuch or a world is not even a bipolar world is in multi-polar world and the united states is totally out of step and we lack any of the tools we lack the economic tools we lack the military

tools we lack the diplomatic tools to deal with this new reality and so we're just floundering and i think that's what we're seeing with the by administration is american policy 'd floundering because we think we're dealing with you know playing off one rule book one game play the world playing up a different rule book a different game playing we therefore what we want it does not mesh with what the world desires and i don't you know i really like what scott had to say because it's so appropriate but what is it going to take to change that mindset is going to have to take a major conflict where. i mean let's look at. over the last so instead of the cold war the united states has just punch down on countries that could not defend themselves very well now they want to take on china and russia simultaneously i mean you need a different mindset because all it does is lead to catastrophe and it's obvious for anyone watching what's going on in the world here but i look at the state department news releases i mean again that they're living in 1902 go ahead i've

been. yes i think that to some extent that's true i think the u.s. has to accept other countries having influence in their regions if you want to call that a sphere of influence or what do you want whatever you want to call it to dress it up with a more modern term i think that political reality has us a still has a pretty good lead in military force but of course china is gaining and so is russia and so canonically china is gaining rapidly so you're right there are other centers of power there's also european germany and these type these countries that are economically. viable in japan etc india and so it is a multi-polar world and the united states going to have to recognize that now of course other empires like the british empire have they didn't they they still fran in france as well they still have a colonial mentality so i think it's going to take

a while to be disabused of that for the u.s. and hopefully asako to be there is not going to be a conflict with russia or china because they both have nuclear weapons and i think that's the major constraint on anything like that but certainly there can be a lots of opportunities for mistakes or miscalculations and you know you have the old problem of the rising power you have. conflicting with the status quo power in that you know in 16 cases since 1500 wars break it broken out you know in 12 out of the 16 cases now nuclear weapons makes a different story now it has. the oceans that separate the united states from both russia and china at least the european part of russia from the united states so i do have some hope that some of these geo political factors and geo strategic factors. the real ism will kick in at some point and i think biden

at least as. he's an experienced foreign policy and but on the other hand as been saying that can be a wag meyer being captive to you know old thinking and the bureaucracy and that's what he's going to have to fight trump had to fight the opposite that he was he didn't really follow any of that and sometimes he got himself into trouble by just going doing whatever he wanted so you know it's one there's advantages and disadvantages to both approach but i think the united states really needs to get attention to that the world has changed and needs to. be rid of some of these alliances i'm pretty radical on that point i think they're outdated and you know they can drag us into wars that we don't want to be in both in east asia and in europe i absolutely do but on many times on cross talk and you and i completely

agree on that point here joe one of the things that's happening and it's something that again part of the bipartisan consensus they will really say it out loud but what they're doing is they want to create a global nato ok i mean it's really amazing how you know these nato officials say china is an opportunity for nato i mean they actually say that kind of stuff here because they're looking for a mission and what they do what they can do is what they want to do is they really want to create a global nato because you then they don't need the united nations they are the legitimate power deciders in the world here and instead of learning from past mistakes because nato should be dismantled completely should have been a long time ago what they want to do is expand it and they're the major targets russia and china go ahead joe. yeah i think the global nato concept. is a far statement i don't think that's something that's ever going to happen i think we have to look at a new way of being able to expand our region of the country and i think that's true

i'm best at the same thing that scientists do in the united states have been doing a very long time ago and we've been quick question gresham tours of the countries i think more of an investment type of opportunity to be able to expand our reach in in certain countries our salute help the united states when it comes to foreign policy when it comes to global policy as well those are those are just my thoughts i think it's on the turn away from the aggression start looking at more diplomatic . interests in different countries you know scott we're rapidly running out of time here one of the things that it's really curious i mean that all of this it has bled from the russia gate hoax this and to the towards russia but if we you know look at north stream to i mean what the by the administration is doing a continuation from the trump one is willing to punish russia and germany a nato ally all at the same time and you know kind of thinking about what did joe

just said here i mean yeah i think trade is a good thing that tends to cut down on conflict here but what about when you dictate to your partners who your other trading partners can be i mean that that is such a chauvinist stick way of dealing with your foreign policy nato is very important germany's very important but you have to have the energy policy that we decide in washington and what is not decided in europe it is really ridiculous go ahead scott . first of all it's not about energy policy because if you if you take a look at what north stream too does it actually bring stability to europe to provide cheap gas to germany which then can disseminate it throughout europe and it links russia's long term economic viability to european stability you know russia you would get to play the gas weapon one time yeah one time he or she would turn out the gas to europe and they'll be the last time they sold any gas to europe now would destroy the russian economy so this is ludicrous for the united states to to

play this game this is about american domestic politics that's what all russia policy is it's not about real geopolitics it's not about the old global real politic it's about american domestic politics where we have been minimized russia vladimir putin in our political leaders don't have the intellectual curiosity or the moral courage to stand up and say hey enough of this let's deal with the world as it is and as as we tend to it washington well i've been one of the things i worry and i worried about during this russia gate hoax is that it would bleed into policy and it is done in a exactly that ok and that that is very destabilizing and everyone everyone on this side of the pond is reading and listening to what they or western leaders are saying about this and they're preparing and for good reason here i'm sorry guys we've run out of time many thanks to my guests in washington delmar and in-laws that a lot angeles and thanks to our viewers for watching us here our d.c. a next time remember crosstalk.

like freeze dried water just add water. and then. it's hard just. here's a confer $100000.00 all you need is the ark to go with it but you got the temp and just you don't have the artist at heart it's freeze dried are. bought it's freeze dried productivity history started money it's been sold as if it's something in a can and. what it is of the says it. so if someone wants to authorize a product in europe let's say a plan protection product this person because this person or this company the applicant has to provide data that allows us as the risk assessors to judge whether this product is safe or not and this information comes from the applicant and the

studies that are commissioned by the applicant to allow us to assess the safety are paid by the applicant obviously so it's the intellectual property of the applicant and we can properly parts of the studies in the current legal framework but we also have to respect the pieces confidentiality claims of the applicants so there's a balance to be found between transparency as much as possible but also to protect the investment of companies into their product innovations. that is that companies have to submit studies to european commission they do the studies themselves. they have to submit it to the european commission and to f c so the european food safety is.