like it was more about a massive grip than about nation building and smart strategic thinking. joe biden says to us is done with we making foreign countries through the use of force. there is no reason to take the american president at his word after delays and sanction russia finally completes construction of the controversial north stream to pipeline. it's set to deliver low cost natural gas from siberia to central europe that a britain's m. i. 5 intelligence agency warned that extreme it started looking to fill the void left by the pentagon, pull out from afghanistan. and moscow says it has irrefutable proof that big tech helped washington illegally interfere and russia's upcoming election loss. gal summons the us envoy for an explanation.

that's all for this our on behalf of our international thanks a lot for watching and we hope to see you again soon the ah ah ah hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle for many of us, the end of the american war enough can stand was inevitable. in the end, the conflict was more about a massive griff than about nation building and smart strategic thinking. joe biden says the us is done with we making foreign countries through the use of force. there is no reason to take the american president at his word, the cross talking, what comes after afghan and i'm joined by my guess. joshua land is in oklahoma city

. he is the director of the center of middle east studies at the university of oklahoma in rancho mirage. we have scott ritter. he is a former intelligence officer in the nation's weapons inspector. and here in moscow we have maxine to talk. he is director of the center for advanced american studies at moscow state university of international relations. i gentleman cross talk rules and effects. that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate joshua, let me go to you 1st in oklahoma city. i mean, in the aftermath of this fiasco and leaving afghanistan, which i fully supported, i've been saying that for 19 years. but, you know, you see all this finger pointing who is at fault here. but my question is, and no one really in the mainstream wants to talk about it, is that how did we get into such a mess in the 1st place? nobody wants to be talk about who is responsible. so i want to ask all 3 of you about, will anyone be held account to account? and then i want to talk about moving forward because i'm sick and tired of finger pointing go ahead in oklahoma city. well, you know, the finger pointing is important here because many people are blaming by and,

and i think that biden has done the right thing. this is really george bush's fault . ok. he got us in to the situation and said we were going to build a liberal democracy in afghanistan, which was an impossible errand. and it, and it's set us up on a course which we could not. america could not win. and every president, since then has said he's going to get out. and america needed to get out of afghanistan, but didn't have the courage to pull the plug because it was going to be messy. it was going to be a defeat. and it was going to be on their watch, and so they kicked the can down the road. and, and president biden has finally pulled the plug. and yes, it was messy. it's been embarrassing. but i think it will make america stronger in the end because our real commit minutes and i real interest or not in afghanistan, there in places like europe and era, particularly in places like asia. and we will be able to concentrate and be

a better ally to the people who really count. okay, good. okay, scott. but if we can, if people aren't held account for this fiasco, how can we trust the same people to look at areas that we just heard from joshua, i mean, again, i mean, no one really wants to look at the d n a of the foreign. busy policy, they just want to look at policy errors. ok, when which many of us knew in real time were being over occurring. go ahead, scott. i would add another name to the list. yes, george w bush started the conflict, but the man most responsible for continued is brock obama. brock obama campaigned on a pledge of getting out of afghanistan. and you know, he didn't have the political courage to confront the very people whom we should be holding to account the diplomat despise the people who lied about the situation. there was in afghanistan who gave us hope that we could prevail, that we could win, that there was a, an off ramp to victory in obama knew there wasn't, he knew,

he knew that we weren't gonna win, but he had the courage to pull the trigger. so he, he, he surged and he continued, he stayed, he remained, he also did things that are even worse. he pretended to be out of combat. we'll keep an american special forces in combat or heretic situation. the result of the death of many americans because they weren't adequately supported in many afghans to i mean this is the reason why the government collapse because we created a situation where that do the african military services to, to defeat so. and the reason why i bring up the obama administration is that many of the people making policy today for the by the ministration tony blank and jake, jake sullivan, our graduates of the obama school. so, you know, these are the same people that couldn't get it right now,

can stand back when obama was president or people were supposed to press to day to get it right and other complex situations. these are people who are unwilling to confront the establishment adequately. unwilling to tell the american people the truth about the complexities of a situation where they can stand, whether it's china, whether it's russia, whether it's europe, josh, got just jump in and defend, defend some of these by people because by, i mean, the defense, some of the obama, people, because obama did want to get out of afghanistan. the generals really pulled a and run around him, and they managed to and the press went along with it and allowed allowed the generals to get away with the surge and obama, who was trying to do health care and domestic issues did not want to get trapped in a foreign policy issue, which he didn't understand well and which would make him look weak. and already people were saying this guy is competent, he's a black, a president,

the 1st black president, he's going to make a mess of the world. so he went along with his generals and yes, it shows the blob in a sense. the foreign policy elite is extremely powerful in washington. but many of the people around him wanted to get out to. they didn't have the courage of their convictions as you say, and here he deserves a lot of blame for this. but i think that many of those people parts were in the right place. they understood, we were in a terrible situation that we couldn't vietnam situation which could not be won. and they kicked the can down the road, which was a big mistake, but they're trying to make up for it now. and that's, that's at least worth something. yeah, well at the end of the day the both for you, i mean, it was a did one of the definitions of being a leader is to have courage and saying that, you know, you couldn't do it because of that or that that comes up short for me, but i see where you're coming from. maxine, let me go to you because, you know, afghanistan, it's a whole lot closer to russia than it is to the united states here. i mean,

says what, what's going on in the neighborhood right now, because, you know, again, you know, we just had our 1st discussion about, you know, how we got here, but now we're here. okay? and so how do you see the lay of the land of the neighborhood and what is rushes role in this? because there's a lot of really propagandistic claims being made in western media about how russia assessment. the situation. as the interim government was announced, go ahead. maxime, right. of course we have to see how, how, how it was in the near future, but from where we are sitting now. it appears that what happened is a disaster for i've gone through for part just on thread to india, challenge for russia opportunity for china. and obviously as, as my colleagues mentioned, that the strategically, even though the tactically, this was like a mass, strategically, not necessarily the terrible thing for the united states, as it prefers to focus now on more and coming for resources to winning the so

called great rivalry. and not think about counter terrorism and all this as long as the service is around the region. russia can not afford this luxury, given the geography and approximately, of all these threats to its neighbors. so it has to focus on a lot of these issues and have to do a lot more regional coordination with the players who are not necessarily like each other, like on an india, on the wash hands and india and china on the other. so they'll be a lot of congregation within the strong, high security operation community. and also within c, a c o. but russia is also doing a lot of fishing exercises for all of that happen in parallel to russia. diplomatic efforts to do some type of normalization with a telephone, right? we're not talking about their religion, which is ation or removing them from the least of designated chairs or where they

are in russia in early 2, thousands. but it's a whole new policy from sort for moscow for a long yeah. well, for better or worse, and i think a lot of people would say worse, that's how bad is there and you have to deal with them here. josh, would let me go back to you. i agree with the thrust of what you said in your 1st answer here that, you know, there's, you know, you're talking basically about a pivot. but, you know, one of the things that we've seen with, quote unquote war on terror is inflation threat. ok. and we've already seen, we saw it as the, the airport was being evacuated. what about ice is said, and what about al qaeda and you know, you see these people trying again to take another bite at the apple here. how much traction do you have that? because one thing we've known for the last 20 years, it's really easy to scare people, particularly how the media goes out and scare mongering path. are we how should we do? should we be about that? go ahead. well, you know, i think that biden has done his big, heavy left here in afghanistan,

and he's going to be very loath to pull us out really, of syria and other places that we should really draw down our troops in. because he'll be accused, he's already been accused of being weak and screwing us up. but so i think he will be very, he'll be very reticent to, to get us out of some other places which we should get out of. particularly syria, because we're doing the identical thing in syria that we did in afghanistan. we're promising we're using the kurds as a and inflating their desire for kurdish independence and nationalism in northern syria in order to keep them on our side. swat is on to fight isis. the best way to fight isis in the region is to allow the syrian government to, to consolidate and to work with its neighbors, turkey, and iraq in order to destroy isis. by keeping an independent quasi state where we're disrupting and weakening the entire state system in that region,

which is helping isis more than anything else. and on top of that, the united states is building up a whole bunch of people of kurds and our errands, who are dependent on the us who are hoping the us is going to create an independent nation in northern syria. so that when we do eventually call out which we will, they're going to be defenseless and they're going to be hanging on. the end of the helicopters are going to be asking us to take them to america. hundreds of thousands of them the same way they afghans are because they become completely dependent on us and they will, they will be thrown into prison either by the turks or by the syrian government as traders. let me, let me go to scott before we go to the break here. scott, reflect about what we just heard from joshua, because i completely agree we should get out of syria too, but we won't go ahead. scott: well, i mean, we should get out of syria the, the idea that we won't, i'll say is up for debate. yes. by. it look weak,

but i think, you know, joe biden is somebody who is a realist and the same calculations that he put into getting out of dam stand, apply to syria. you know, it's just going to devolve the writing already on the wall. biden has the strength that the, i think the resume to look at his advisors in the establishment said, hey, i warn you about this. back when i was vice president award against the surge warning against doubling down on a field proposition. scott, all that thought hold that, that we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion. what comes after afghanistan today with our team? the i i have often said transparency for the powerful pharmacy,

for the last bit cares about privacy. what people care about is power. julian, a son just become a symbol of the battles. breathlessly information is power. that's what's going on . and a huge struggle with governments and corporations who want to keep information secret and others who think democratic rights should be pushed forward. and people have a right to know what to do. watch houses to help shift the conversation around transparency and see what that battle has done to him. i feel like julian's life might be coming to an end. we are in a conflict situation with the largest and most powerful employer. in such a situation. it's remarkable. rather driven by adrenal shapes. by those

in me, i think we dare to ask me ah, the the welcome x across side where all things are considered. i'm peter bell, to remind you we're discussing what happens after afghanistan. ah

okay, scott, i want to go back to you before we went to the break you were talking about, you know, we, we will get out, we should get out of syria, but i mean, you see what's going on. there's a lot of pushback against fighting for his decision. of course, it's the optics of how we got out. i agree with joshua, these things are always messy, always will be towards the end. but i mean, this is an opportunity, but there are, there seems to be a bipartisan effort against him right now when he has an opening. i mean, what's good to give here? i mean, it's like stepping on the brake and the accelerator at the same time. go ahead. scott, just point out the fact that the people who are articulate enough for us to stay in syria or the same group of people with same elk, so to speak, who articulated the necessity for us to remain in afghanistan. and so the debate is not an unfamiliar debate, and the people that are populated around biden, over advising them, are people who were there when obama received the same pressure, the same push back about that dentist and they understand what

a policy disaster that was. so i do think that, you know, there, there will be a, a peep, a group of people surrounding by and who will push back against those who are pushing back on serial. meaning that i, i don't think the debates over yet. and i do think that joe biden knows what the right decision is in syria and understands that what the cost to america will be or continuing fail policy and in syria israel policy. so i, i think there will be a lot of push within the bi ministration to get out of syria sooner rather than later. maxime, one of the things in looking at the media coverage of it, again, this kind of scare mongering is that al qaeda is coming back. isis is coming back here, but it's never really reflected upon is that the, the us and its allies actually coddle isis in syria here. i mean, there's such a disconnect here and there. and it's so it's so propagandized here because i agree with joshua and with scott here. i mean, this is an opportunity right now,

but there are plenty of vested interest the don't. i mean, as i said in my introduction, for 20 years, there was a griffin. i mean, a lot of people made a lot of money, and when the spigot was turned off, it all fell apart like a house of cards here. but there are still vested interest to keep the conflict going on in syria. and l t are supporting saudi arabia and yemen. we could go on and on and on. go ahead. maxine, well, i think there was a lot of skepticism in moscow over, you know, gonna continuation of these policies. so drilling down in places where america, perhaps the drawing down from been difference between syria and i'm going to use that one by withdrawal from august on the united states has not left vacuum for another great power to fill in. there was a vacuum of order that is now being filled up by the taller man and we'll have to see what type of order they'll, they'll be constructing. and china maybe jumping on a few of the opportunities for one,

both long road initiatives. but if the united states withdraws from syria, it make later the look and lack of victory for russia. and that's definitely not something that many people in to see would like to see. i think there's a lot of skepticism and moscow over the continuation of this policy also because there is a sense that the only things that american politicians truly care about is the domestic elections. and the, you know, the, what we're seeing right now, all these packs and fights between the republicans and democrats and within his credit party is really about the 2022 election. and those were criticizing by his party are just trying to save their own sasha more representative c. so it does not have to necessarily, you know, acco and other places where the united states is now present. no, joshua, when, when gerald ford was president, he witnessed the evacuation of saigon. he,

his poll numbers dropped to me as a result, but months later, they lifted up again. i just have to wonder how much it's baked in here. you know, there's a big debate about how the u. s. should proceed and interact with the taliban. how. what would be a realist way of doing it? okay. not a partisan one, not to score points again. this guy or that party. what would be a real list policy in dealing with the present status quo in afghanistan? go ahead. well, it's quite clear that this new government wants to engage with america. they do not want the enmity of america. america still has leverage. we are holding that $10000000000.00 are there. they're there. there are an exchange account with a lot of aid is america can turn offer on much of the foreign aid and the attitude of europe towards afghanistan. so we hold some cards,

but we have to do that realistically. we're not going to overturn this government. we're not going to shape the government in the future. this is going to be a taliban government. it's been very clear. but we do have some ships to trade with and our big interest is that the policy on not caudal al qaeda as it did in its 1st round. and we know that the, the present head of state mala hunt was a foreign minister in the previous government leading up to 2001. and, and he defended al qaeda and, and we have to make sure that he does not defend archive this time. and all of our efforts should be really focused on making sure that he understands that and he does not do it. and then we will have, you know, if we can accomplish that single fact we will have accomplished our primary mission originally, which was to stop this al qaeda and the terrorism against the west. and that's,

that seems to me where we should put our chips, not on changing the, the human rights nature of the hollow bond of changing the government. yes, got the same question to you. i mean, recognizing them doesn't necessarily give complete legitimacy as a lot of people make claim. i, i don't think that's necessarily true here. i get again, you know, i, i take the position of joshua and i get attacked, but i said, but what, that's the situation on the ground. ok. and that's the situation really as a result of 20 years of the last war. ok. what it would be a realistic approach to deal with the situation there because as i pointed out, talking with maxine, it's a regional problem right now. the taliban annoyed everybody. this is television to have to be careful with my language and know it. everybody between 96 and a one. i don't think they want to repeat that again. go ahead. scott. well, 1st of all, i think we need to reflect that there's, there's reality and then there's perception. the perception is that the telephone,

telephone 2 point, oh, can we trust them? are they just an extension of one point? oh and that's just stuff that plays well on tv. the reality is, every nation has been dealing with the for several years. the united states, under brock obama engaged in detail negotiations with the taliban for the release of oberg, all that had the 5 senior child on release from incarceration. and these people ever become part of the doha negotiations. we've been negotiating with the taliban on the highest levels for many, many years to manage what has occurred here to manage the withdrawal of the us and the takeover of power and half can stand by the chat about this hasn't taken anybody by surprise. it's what we have wanted. russia has been working with alabama for years. there were the whole moscow, a negotiation take place. china has been working with taliban for years. iran has

been working with the taliban. everybody has been working with taliban. nobody is being honest about this. the reality is to knows what needs to happen. what needs to happen is we need to recognize reality and we need to work with the taliban so they can do what they say they want to do. this interim government is designed to create a buffer between an organization has been engaged in 20 years of non stop war and help it transition to an organization capable of governing. nobody can do this overnight. that's what the interim government is designed to do. and we need to let them do that, and we need to be honest about what we have done with the taliban. the promises we made to the taliban, the assurances we received from the taliban and lead a natural course of events proceed without its artificial perception. that somehow we believe that $2.00 is really just one point. oh the same people back and it's not. we know that we need to be honest,

but politics is about optics. and as people pointed out, america's got an election coming up in 2020 to a critical midterm election. and when you're explaining your illusion. and the last thing a politician wants to be doing right now is explaining the american people were suddenly buddy buddy to tell him, you know, that same a number of a number of people. again, realists believe that russia could play a very interesting, important intermediary role in dealing with afghanistan in the outside world. how, how engaged, as you think moscow wants to be in this very, very new moment that we have here an interim government here. would russia provide diplomatic services, you know, introduction, things like that, or is it basically hands off and wait and see what the, what the rest of the region wants to deal with? because russia knows the region? well, i've, what i interviewed president is archive in. in kabul i was astounded about how much so we had architecture was still there. i mean,

his presidential palace was the central committee of the communist party of afghanistan. ok. my point is russian knows a lot about dan, it's then what does what, what kind of role does want to play? and as it watches the events develop their, you know, the resurrection race. it's not wise to the car before the force and meaning. you don't really want to jump to before something important before everyone else. so i think right now really as adopted the rather we can see approach, but it does not mean it will be a lead by whatever other hours are doing is just wants to see whether the telephone are committed to delivering upon their own promises to moscow, which were given to their rational leadership back in july, and those are included in capsule, deliberately colleagues, to central asia and that's area to russia,

hosting isis and allocate and other terrorist groups also provide security open to diplomatic missions and not stealing all the instability to neighboring central asia right now, all of the 4 elements of all of the 4 commitments only one has been service, which is the security of the rushing embassy. this is the primary channel. the moscow is now working with the taller boss, or we'll have to see whether they are the 3 are honored. obviously, you know, the, the, the envoy you spoke with, mentioned there is no need to formally recognize or 4 digits of my stamp in order to be able to work around. some of the important can jump in here. so it's early days. but there's a lot of that we've run out of time many thanks to my guess in oklahoma city rancho mirage. and here in moscow and thanks to be worth for watching us here are to see

you next time. remember, cross talk roles the ah, ah, the civic lag around the world. expedition by 1000 ocean mile round the clock in the dead calm miss wilson in every country close by like the crew. gavin's food and warner forgot to go to chat. louis, also the little i know i said it's got

everybody locked down or home or no food? no. what about that? only? i'm not sure somebody, either species in the coven, you're living like the female of own. but in the 21st century, i want to make sure, you know, board is blind to tease as emerge. we don't have authority, we don't actually the whole world leads to take action and be ready. people who judge governors crisis, we can do better. we should be better. everyone is contributing each in their own

way, but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever. the challenge is paid for the response has been massive. so many good people are helping us. it makes it feel very proud that we are in it together now. oh i in the year before the september 11th attacks when the taliban were in power.