in the country, we did say a little earlier on the was damage in the streets and the number of those police vans at the moment. of course, the netherlands is subject to a partial lockdown to begin the 1st western country to introduce a partial lockdown. since the summer and that's for 3 weeks. so just over a week into that right now, there's also the chance that that evidence could further restrict cove it passes at the moment. they have what's called a 3 g, as in which means that a 3 qualifying criteria to get a coping pass be in vaccination antibodies and having recovered from a task. the main idea is that our strict that to what's called a to g system, that by making it more difficult to get those passes. but there certainly seems to been some trouble in the center of rotterdam on friday night as a result of the restrictions that have been imposed in the netherlands and arrests now being made by riot police. the trouble, the little earlier on the pay is to have now dissipated, but we will keep those cameras tray. we'll keep our eye on those cameras for you. should anything change? explain a bit more for you in our next bulletin, which is in less than half an hour life from moscow. this is our

t ah ah ah ah ah. hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . there is no shortage of growing tensions in eastern europe. there is a growing e u barrier stand off over illegal migration. there are western reports. russia is amassing troops within its own borders. and of course, there is the self inflicted crisis of european energy supplies. it is no coincidence, some recalling this hybrid war, but whose hybrid war again,

so with some sucking rising tensions, i'm joined by my guess, peter cousin, akin washington. he's professor of history and director of the nuclear studies institute at american university as well as co author with oliver stone of the untold history of the united states. also in washington, we have rural west mason. he's the executive vice president of the ration center and in lake jackson, we cross to daniel mcadams. he is the executive director of the ron pol, institute for peace and prosperity. i gentleman cross stock rules and the fact that means you can jump in any time you want. i always appreciate when you do, danny, let me go to you 1st year. i mean, as i said in my introduction, is a lot of things going on right now. we have this growing tension with a poland and barrows over immigration, a lot of finger pointing, i must say a lot of a very exaggerated name calling out there doesn't help us understand what's going on. also, we seem to have kind of a revisiting of what happened with what was going on in ukraine and spring of this

year of this year. there's encouragement of the care of government. there are, there's caution, there's my arms coming in. there's back slapping, i and we have, we had a germany and the u. k. and, and france come out recently um, upholding the new, the, the borders and security in the sanctity of ukraine. again, a change of tone from the spring. we also we have the energy situation, the nor to stream to our pipeline has been put on fries again here. i mean, are all these things connected or is just chaos theory out there. go ahead, daniel. well, you know, peter mandatory is conspiracy theorists. of course, it all seems connected to me, obviously, obviously turning up the dial in ukraine, which is a very convenient thing for the west to do now. especially with zelinski in surprise, surprise,

still more trouble. he lost control of the night in their parliament. he's desperate to stay relevant. of course, the western countries are desperate to keep things going. we saw another barrage of rockets into don bass yesterday. i think it was recently, of course, and we see of we see the migrant ward, which i think is certainly a hybrid war in on the border of poland bows entirely. the fault indirectly certainly of the e u. and you have the us of course them out, whitney black sea. so this is sort of an encircling hybrid war against russia and it just goes to show the blinking is no better than previous secretaries of state. the buy in ministration is asleep at the wheel. okay, well peters, and then let's agree. these are all connected here and i think they are. that's why i posted here. i mean, what does washington hoped to achieve? what is brussels hoped to achieve by this? because this is really upping the spanks on the stakes on a variety of issues here. and none of them good. i mean they can be resolved,

but i don't see that there's any interest in resolving them. actually just the reverse rising tension serves their purposes. go ahead, peter. a peter, i'd actually like to broaden it a little bit because the other crisis that's developing is the one over taiwan. so we've got the potential for the right outbreak of violence, both in ukraine and in taiwan. so they're very, very dangerous moment, right? now, in the aftermath of the bungled pull out from afghanistan, dep biden has been desperate compounded by the plummeting approval ratings in the united states is really been looking for foreign policy when and he's gotten himself involved in 2 situations that could both backfire and, and are are both very, very dangerous right now. in the,

i'm approaching it less for the standpoint of where the blame lies them from the standpoint of what we have to do to defuse these crises. both of which can unravel very quickly. people draw the analogy to world war one, where we managed to get involved in war that nobody wanted, because of that various alliances and various things that happened there were out of people's control. but i see the same thing happening in this situation. so, yes, as a lensky is in a weakened position. yes, the right wingers in ukraine. i have been much more aggressive that and i now with the bay back tar drones, from a turkey that was so effective in as a, by john's defeat of armenia and using them now in ukraine. they feel like they're in a bolster position, and they seem to be much more aggressively going after the don bass. and so how does putin respond to that?

and to other provocations like the black sea, i've put a more troops at the border, and nobody really wants to war there. and if there is a war, much like with taiwan. with taiwan, the pentagon has run 18 war games. if the united states in china go to war over taiwan, and china has won all 18. similarly with the situation ukraine, russia is much more powerful. i don't think there's any chance that ukraine is going to withstand a military confrontation with russia. so, but these situations have got to be diffused before they get to that point. so i think we're playing a very dangerous game in the united states in heightening intensifying and upping the stakes there. and the tension pressure in both of those situations. and i'm really glad you know, i'm really glad that you broadened it out. i'm glad you mentioned taiwan here, earl, and me go to you. i mean, this is high risk, this is high stake stuff here because, you know, this is not iraq, this is not afghanistan. not even syria,

because since peter brought in china than what's included here, china and russia can fight back and they've made it very clear. they're read lines here. this is very different than fighting these ridiculous wars in the middle east here. russia, china have red lines. they've made them very clear and public here. nonetheless, we get all of these provocations. i mean, i, there's, there's no rational explanation for it other than what peter said, the biden ministration is desperate for apollo foreign policy. when i mean how you define winning here i, i mean that's the scary thought. go ahead, earl. no, peter, you're, i mean everyone. you're exactly right. and those peter and, and daniel on their perspectives. and they may say that the, the domestic agenda is a complete nightmare. here and, and they need popularity rating for buying or are or down can, i mean, considerably popularity rating for the vice president. tamala, harris is historically low. it's the lowest rated vice president ever so they need

some wins and era. you know, i mean, you've got, you've got your order challenge from mexico, with almost 200000 illegal aliens crossing a month. not 2 to 5000. i wonder when it will start to point the finger at for or collaborating with the next bill or something. but yes they, they need to do, they need to divert attention away. so they're looking for foreign policy one. but if you look at it, every foreign policy approach they've done. everything has been a failure with china, with russia, relations, or even the office deal has irritated france, one of our historically longest allies in the u. and it's just, they're looking for something and actually i think away,

part of this is to contain russia and china. i do think they're all interconnected real. if you look at the root cause of every one of the issues, the energy crisis, the don bath issues in ukraine, the migrants in the, in bell root. they all go back to foreign policy. failures for mistakes or missteps. whether that's invading the, the middle east, whether that's changing how, you know, spot market energy contracts. well, that's supporting my don. it all feed back into mistakes that were the root cause of from, from western western countries, mainly led by the u. s. gets yeah, you're absolute trying to look for something, even if, even if russia comes in and or thailand or china takes taiwan, russia, it comes in and crushes ukraine. then they can point, oh, you know,

they'll look for a political women. ok, that does. that's exactly where i want to go, because daniel went, what do we mean by a win here? because it might be a quote unquote diplomatic political wind. but i mean, it depends. you know, what, the situation is, a wind over ukraine scenes. ukraine crushed and thousands and thousands of people. that is, that's a win. i mean, if that is a win that then, then, you know, then we live in a very pathetic world here because that would, the way i look at is all these things. is the u. s looks added to by administration . looks at it is low cost. ok, but the outcomes could be catastrophic. go ahead, daniel. you know, i've always, i've often thought about the irrationality of us one policy. and i've also often thought of it in terms of mistakes, but i really no longer think that way. i think these mistakes are all very well plans, and i think it has to do with very, very powerful vested interest in the united states that depend on continuing conflict in the rest of the world to justify massive,

massive military budgets to justify the us military industrial complex, think tank complex media complex. all of these things are built on a house of sand. they rely on conte looking for about 20 years. it was the war on terror and that sustained what i think that was more of a bridging maneuver and now we're back into territory where they feel more comfortable cold war 2 point. oh, and this time we have a new a costar, which is china with the old bad boy, russia. so i think i'm beginning to think these things are all very well planned to keep these people working. whereas we would probably say they deserve to be out of work, but i think these mistakes are well planned. i think the us once a conflict, but not necessarily a war, and that's why it is so dangerous. they want to see how far they can push to conflict and assume that russia and china won't go all in when you assume in that situation. that's not a lot of room for maneuver. i don't think. yeah, pete,

later that's like putting it's like bedding your entire fortune on a day trader. that's an american cor policy that day. trade or daniel? just explain it. ok. ok, boss 23rd 30 seconds before we go to the ready. go ahead peter. we can comment on that danny's right, as the united states is pushing these confrontations and conflicts up to a point and thinks they could control them. but i'd like to talk about when we come back is how the abide is foreign policy has really been a continuation of trumps foreign policy for the most part. and that this is creating these stabilizing situations and much of the world right now. okay, but i'm going to go to a break here. i mean, peter is just teased us with a overarching theory and it has all connected with donald trump and we're going to explore that after a break. so we'll continue our discussion on rising tension state with

with oh, there is a patch of water around me. try a seal island that's in contention between canada and the united states. northern government has suddenly become optimal for lobster. our population here is exploded . one of the most valuable fisheries that's ever existed. suddenly you had me and canadian fishermen in these waters. at the same time jousting for position and attentions are high. violence is bound to happen. this is the last land border dispute between canada and the united states. it could be magnified to the point where there could be costs that would be significant to quote countries. border disputes don't go away, they just fester. something's going to happen with

join me every thursday on the alex salmon. sure. i'll be speaking to guess what the world of politics, sport business, i'm show business. i'll see you then. oh, welcome back to cross hock. we're all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing rising tensions. ah okay, let's go back to peter in washington. i mean, considering the by been ministration bends over backwards to do the very opposite of donald trump on almost everything except for foreign policy. you teased it in the end of the 1st block there. tell us what you think. go ahead. peter. foreign

policy in the united states has been frustrating, elite bipartisan for a long time, and bite and ran as the anti trump in terms of competence care as a compassion in terms of being a peacemaker rather than a war maker. but the reality has been very, very frustrating in many ways. what biden represents toward trump is what obama represented to our bush, a more sophisticated approach that legitimized be confrontational policies of the previous administration. as so when ari fleischer said that, well, bomb is 2nd term is really george bush's 4th term. he was on to something there. and in many ways, biden is doubling down on trump's foreign policy, especially visa v. china. but also visa v. russia and, and iran as well. so what we've gotten out with,

we saw with the bush administration when they brought in all the people from the project for a new american century. and how they were the neocons and they were the hawks. and they brought us afghanistan that brought us iraq and, and libya and then our, when we give biden's obama some credit for livia to and sit and syria. now what you've see with the biden administration is they brought in 16 top people from the center for new american security. and these are the hawks who are doubling down on so many of trumps policies at this point. and so instead of peeling back what you know, there was the june summit in geneva between potent and biden. and then there was some easing of tensions after that. the problem in the united states is that you've got a bipartisan right wing pressure on biden, to be hawkish toward china, to be hawkish toward russia. and so now with this situation developing in ukraine,

it is not a lot of room for maneuver for biden. so and, and the situation as, as danny was saying, is really, we were pushing these, these crises because we need to support a frightened population to support vast spend it, you're on arms sales, which is the heart of the military industrial complex and has been for decades but this is creating a very dangerous conflict that can easily spiral out of control in both the pacific and in ukraine right now. yeah, but earl, i mean if we, if we look at, i'm a completely agreeing with peter. but i mean, if what we're looking just at the law in this century, the last 20 years, i mean the road record of quote unquote success. and they're applying their expertise. now the difference is, like i said, in the 1st part of the program, we're not dealing with afghanistan and iraq. we're dealing with russia and china. ok. and by definition, these 2 countries have the ability to say, no, i mean,

that's not a very interesting negotiating pattern here. and i would, i look at it this way, is it washington and its allies do not want to negotiate? they want surrender, which is not going to happen. and that's why we're making this program here. go ahead. earl. now, peter, you're absolutely right. the, what we've got in a way, it's a policy of containment. they think they can push, push right up to the edge. and ideally, they would like to be a reading change in china, and russia is not going to have the also, they're kind of kind of thinking that china and russia are bluffing, but, but try to rush, you're been very clear on the red line. and they, i do not think they're bluffing. and so next time the conflicts that the u. s. think they can maneuver and manage multiple things. i'm going to say the high grid

. you've got the energy and i'm excited you got the conflict naval present long. the ukraine as well. it's all wrapped together, but it's so easy, so easy to explode and get out of hand. and then also it's dangerous. as you as follows, now is open, at least discussions of the use of tactical nuclear weapons. right. lorrie, i'm sorry, you're not going to container. use that for me. it's going to blow up. strategic. yeah. and either way, ukraine ah, the region around taiwan, ukraine in europe will be the ones that will pay the most. and no matter how the, how the situation, by, by definition i, i meant i was aghast. that you know, for a tactical nuclear weapons. first you thought that we were, i thought we, we retired these things. but apparently not here, daniel, just as

a geography questionnaire. and united states has not border the black sea, but it acts like it's a black sea power. i mean, can you, can you explain that to our viewers? because, you know, the, the, of the amount of interest and an interest that's being expressed by the u. s. navy in the black sea, obviously the can in this cannot be any more than a provocation. rush is show known aggression to romania bulgaria at all. okay. but now all of a sudden it said tension point here is that's, that's intentional. go ahead, daniel. well, how about this? oh, my gosh, russian troops are massing in russia. this is what we get into what passes for a free press in the united states. and you know, that is key. and the other key we've talking a little bit about china and taiwan. the other key is when the u. s. continuously runs warships through the south china sea, key word being china. you know, the u. s. is still fighting world war 2,

a world war one. this idea of territorial warfare is gone. nobody has it. china isn't taking over places. russia isn't taking over places. they're actually doing business overseas, especially the chinese in africa and elsewhere in latin america and elsewhere. the was still obsessed with this idea of taking territory. it's so antiquated, nobody does it any war any more. and again, you have to look back to why and it's what we call the deep status, what we call washington. i mean, as much as i'd hate and who your war will be nice to see washington media relevant again and revert to the swamp from whence it came. a men on that. peter, you mentioned august 1914 and a perfect historical parallel, but i think we look at ukraine right now. august of 2008. seems very appropriate. given that you know, you have this demetrius yarborough's, a fanatic nazi like figure. all he wants is

a conflict in the dom best he wants to kill people. he's recently been brought back into the highest levels of the cleaning. that cannot be an accident here. ok. i worry that we have a wag the dog situation here, and all of the ingredients are being set up for that happening. go ahead peter. a zalinski is in a weakened position there. they haven't been able to deal with the corruption. the economy is very, very shaky. politically, the right wing in ukraine has been gaining more power, although the more pro russian faction had been sent than for a while. but they're trying to tamp down on that. and so, and they've gotten more, they're encouraged by the use of these drones. so. busy effectively, a lot of things have happened to change the situation the last couple of years. so landscape, i had come to power in part of overwhelmingly of when the victory, based on saying he was gonna bring peace with russia,

has now gone the opposite direction. and the talks broken down, we know what the solution is there. it's some version of the minsky to agreement, we can solve that problem. but soleski has backed off of that. and the united states is not putting any pressure on him to come to the table. that was an agreement that was signed between ukraine, russia, france, and germany. and this can be resolved that situation. the situation in taiwan also has been heated up unnecessarily. that with the status quo, there was very, very calm for a long time till the united states began meddling there as well. so we're, we're in a precarious situation. you, you talked about august of 1914 and i are always talking about red lines. we have to remember that william burns c, now c i, a director, was the former us ambassador to russia and in 2008. when the united states started

talking about george bush talking about ukraine and georgia, joining nato. it was burns, they sent back the memo to washington, titled me yet means in the yet, don't their cross rushes red lines when it comes to ukraine, joining nato. and that now he recently went over to moscow to try to talk to them as has other top officials from this administration. and we're getting nowhere in terms of actually resolving these things to those united states. want to resolve them. is part of the question, what were, as we were saying is united states simply want russia and china to accept you as a gemini, u. s. domination u. s. p. u to polarity and come in as junior partners and help us solve climate crisis and other things like that. well, china and russia are not willing to play that role anymore. as a chinese foreign minister and the top foreign policy official made clear to blanket and sullivan in anchorage, you can't talk to us for

a position of strength anymore. and russia is showing the same thing. and so we're, it's, that's why we're at this attention point. now we're, we're all worried that it's good to unravel with these entangling alliances. the u . s. is not officially have responsibility to come to ukraine's military defense. they're not part of nato united states as not have responsibility to come to tie one's military defense. we are position is strategic ambiguity, yet we're saying bite is making statements on both fronts, to indicate that we will. and that's even more provocative and more dangerous in earl, i mean at the end of the day it's very, very simple as a biden ministration, like the previous administrations days, demanding that the world accept american hegemony. and that is eroding very, very quickly on all across the world. we saw it happened in the middle east. we saw without anason. and now we're seeing it now here. and there are countries like russia, tyner saying, no, that is the dilemma. here it is, the u. s that has to accept it's new strategic position,

not russia and china. last 30 seconds. go to you url, go ahead. i think you're right in a way we're, we're definitely we're still thinking of what, what's doctrine as far as us supremacy and do whatever to me. but i think there's conflicting things going on within the administration as well. you recently heard, i think the defense department mentioned that there's try try, great power competition going on and, and we're moving on multi polar war world. that's where we're moving to in the us needs to. if they don't accept that, if they try to fight like a like a rabid dog to maintain their superiority, the world is going to be in a very critical, dangerous situation. well we're, we're an yeah, not a very depressing. no, but like, i like how we started here, but that's all the time we have. i want to thank my guests in washington and, and like jackson, and i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at ortiz. see you next time

and remember, cross titles. ah, or new york? it's really what america's about, ah, when our mayor took our place, he was elected because of his campaign on our city, being a tale of 2 cities, the haves and i have not. and those who have not are usually the ones who end up being buried on hard. i. the cities always wanted to forget about hold island. city is wanted to forget about the people who are buried there. just wanted to forget about the fact that there is a potter's field that there was a place where difficult stories are hidden. the fact that we're using inmates to

maintain this active burial site, where 1000000 souls are buried. where so much of new york city history is buried is payment of the inequality that exists in the city for centuries. ah, ah, ah, we're seeing high levels. one certainty creeping in dicky can all make life. and i think we're all aware of the disruption of global supply chains with spike in the cost of energy. we're seeing a reappearance of inflation. i think all of these constitute the economists cool down to sign risks. which could mean the to why that is still ahead of us despite the moderation of the severity of the image use crisis

a as to the information gauge or if we did to refine that a valid kyle 8 written tile each read how not guilty breaking news teenager col rittenhouse, whose case has divided the united states, have been massive media coverage is found not guilty on all charges, but we're a shooting the kill 2 people at a racial justice protest. last year the ruling and received with emotional reactions. hm. with also breaking right now, angry protest and the partly lockdown netherlands as the government balls tightening cobit pass criteria, which would.