is of their own sanctions that doesn't for me, this hour, but don't worry, i'll be back in, let's say 30 minutes with another full and fresh. what you say with with a with

hello and welcome to cross top. were all things are considered. i peter level washington's unipolar moment, ended years ago, unfortunately, and dangerously. the foreign policy blob has refused to come to grips with this new reality. this explains the increase tensions in europe, middle east, and asia, and the biggest loser is the west. ah . to discuss these issues and more i'm joined by my guest, glenn, these in oslo. he's a professor at the university of south easter norway as well as author of the book, research phobia propaganda in international politics. and in america we crossed to martin jay. he's an award winning journalist and commentator, or a gentleman crossed out rules and effect. that means you can jump any time you want . and i was appreciated. so i was going in oslo. um, you and i were in contact before we started this recording and you decide on the

topic on the uniform moment. well, how much to my surprise a tony blair, the former british prime minister, gave a big speech about dominance of the west is coming to an end. so what a interesting, a collision of perfect storms here for. so for our, for our audience, what he, what is meant by the unit polar moment uniformity, what does that mean? well again, this, i think was major story of our time. because when the soviet union collapsed, the world became unit polar. this means that there was only one central power in the world considering the cold war. you heard it was bipolar 2 centers. now under the uniform order, you only have one center which is united states. it was organized this, the west, a collective hedge money. so and so this really immersed in 30 years ago as the soviet union collapsed and megan, preserving the unit polar distribution of power, became the foundation for us security strategy. i, there was that as long as the u. s. maintained its global hedge money,

then there would be no rivalries between the great powers. and this was there for a, for address, a unit polar peace or hedge money. so the problem was, what many academics pointed out which of the unit for a moment would unavoidably be temporary, because 1st of all, it would exhaust use resources to dominate the world. but 2nd of all, because maintaining you as dominance would depend on preventing the rise of other centers of power. one would expect the country's says different, thus russia, china, india, brazil, and others is that your assistant resume confrontation with many, namely russia in europe, china and asia and iran in the middle east. and so this is what we're seeing that it's use will fight to restore his global hedge. mom, even though this does not seem very likely at all, will you bring up a really good point learn? i mean, one of the things that you know, in glenn gives a perfect explanation there. but is this an ideological thing? is it based on security? is it based on geo politics?

because if it's ideological, then the west cannot lose. will. that is, everything goes against everything in history. empires rise and fall centers of power, move around. i mean, that is the nature of geo politics to all of time. and so the west seems because of its ideology. the it is, the end of history is who piano said. go ahead, mark. think tony blair, having a wind about some western waning is quite funny, isn't it? must be done like a $1000000.00. but what's your question about ideology? i don't know if that's the right word. in ideology is a philosophy. it's the only model the west had. so wrong was the huge powers of beliefs which controlled politicians, you know, has a very singular view of the world which the functions followed. you know, they looked at poor countries and they said, oh, you pull them backward. do you have a huge democratic deficits?

you know, all human debts. do you need american age and when you foot on the ground, boots of uncle sam. and if countries around the world, so yes to those 5, then they will, welcomes, there was a huge body slap, you know, your all kind of guy, iraq kind of dictates all kind of leader. this is how americans sought and the west followed with this doctrine. but i think a little bit was about, you know, what we got now is we saw loses. this is the problem. we're losing our power and we don't really know how to deal with it. just just as a british empire imploded the end of the 2nd, we will use the americans to know how to deal with this new scenario that china, iran, russia, india, these companies already forming, they really get their act together and creating a real opposition to america. so you know, how do we cope with that in the longer term is going to be casualties. can be low chest, something winding. but some, i don't think most of it is genuine. i think a little bit is just just the west. don't really coping. ready well,

with this new world order, it's interesting that what martin just said there, glenn, because if we, we frame it in ideological terms. well, a lot of what the western liberalism and that's going to spread means today. well, 1st of all, very daily into most of the world this woke isn't stuff and all about me. most of the world scott, saturdays being is ridiculous. so me, now you are, you build a coherent, prosperous society based on these ideas of the west is very forcefully exporting right now. and, and i, as a result, than what we've seen on the global south are not condemning russia, birds, military operation, ukraine. i think you can draw 2 conclusions. one um they don't take the west very seriously anymore. and number 2 and very importantly, they're not afraid of it. any more thoughts? no, i agree, no other way. and another thing i think when the rest keeps talking about, this is an attack on the rules based quarter. this becomes a role. this becomes

a way of expressing, again, ideology as power. so they're saying, you know, we without western hedge money, you can't have the survival of example, liberalism. but i think it the rest of the world in their bit critical because they see this is mainly as the power line behind. because when the west, after collapses, soviet union began to pursue this hedge, a monic liberal order. what it was to find us was giving essentially the rest is going to give itself an exemption from international law. so keep in mind when it, when the rest brings up this principles of great principles, democracy, human rights is not used to limit the they're the power of the state, rather, it enables it. so for example, it promotes this concept of sovereign inequality in which it was referred to democracy. human rights. the rest can interfere in domestic affairs. we can po documents by calling them credit pollutions for calling acumen terry interventions,

even severing territories of other countries. so there is this sense that liberalism has been so intertwined with their hedge among the concept that again when, when, when we're speak about the west leadership, we see it as the guarantee for liberal values of the rest of the world. increasingly see liberalism as simply being a logical, talking point to justify money. so again, when can take both sides of the argument. but it is quite interesting that these discussions aren't really being held in the west at the moment where the power of the west, the germans disappearing. thus at the same time the world is increasingly rejecting this liberal ideology which will justify the badge money. what mean martin or will under the current administration, the bite ministrations about democracy versus a ta chrissy or a real throw bag to the bass demising?

it wouldn't really know um, no perspective on the realities on the ground around the world. but then you know, joe biden, he, if we, if he takes on board is democracy versus a tar chrissy. he, this bump the, are the crown prince of suffolk rafia. i mean, what is there were other make of this year? i mean, you were, where's the human rights? where is the democracy? where is the rules based order? i mean, it just, it is absurd in the whole world. sees this, okay. as a glen glen touch from the point we said that these, these, these incredibly seismic issues, these qualities that we cling on to have done since the 1st part of the last 7 years are really just talking points as absolutely correct. use that phrase there. and the whole world is realized just now, before, perhaps if you go back and say only 15 or 20 years, you know, when the west meant huge decisions. it could, it could bank on a fair amount of his ex colonies in the global south, and to support of un to support his of those days gone. you know, now the west,

the so called worse. what is the west west is the you 2726 countries, and america, and canada and what, what is the west? what can it do now in with his huge subject, it's very much on his own. and it has to keep on banging the strum and going on about the liberal values. but the truth is, we don't even believe in the liberal values ourselves anymore. you know, democracy, free speech, human rights, just look at what we're doing to people look at the junior sand case. you know, look at the number of journalists are being arrested in europe for reporting on the war and ukraine. but role to that, the january 6 rioters. yeah. yeah. so you know that this, this edge that we had is gone. you know, we're looking at a new recent new world order. and china and russia are actually beginning to make it very, to the whole. well, that is an alternative out, you know, i think it was the longer we go wrong though with these ideas, the law that the west is exposed to being more corrupt and corruptions. now,

really a huge factor. now when we look at ukraine, when we look at china, i mean, how can you mentioned china without boyd and family relations for deals going on there? how can you talk about ukraine without looking at what biden's family are doing in the ukraine? it's disgusting, and the only way that we read about these articles read about this graph is from foreign journalists from the other side of this new world order from china, from russia, from turkey, from wherever, you know, we don't, journalists have just forgotten how to do the job and so we all shipping up to something completely new. we don't really know what it's going to look like. but we are living in a new reality in america and its allies in europe. i'm no longer a dominant force anymore. they're going to have to take a backseat to a new economy, a new set of rules, and we're not behaving really very well about it with our to, to china. which shocks me actually. so much religion see the so much chest beats in talk is a war. how do you go to war with one of your greatest trading? thomas?

it doesn't make any sense. the glen martin means of a great pointer and it goes back to my question. here is that this is just ideologically driven. it's not rationally, it's, it's not, this is not assessing your assets and your strength and your ability to get what you want to mean. if they these rows, glasses is itself limiting and if l actually so humiliate, go ahead. good, 30 seconds. are we going to break? i think good example of this is exactly the chinese, because our china could easily be a result of this because pack to this one, china policy like china, been very open. it will not intervene in taiwan unless the us that's over the line to recognize this independence. so want to do it gradually abandoning that one china policy, which sparks tiny since the wrench. and based on this, we're now making china enemy, because it's predictably responding to

a publication as we had already expected. so it is no different than nato expansion propagation. and then you're going to reaction gentlemen, we're going to go to what you're breaking out for that. your break, we'll continue, our discussion will stay ah ah, with willing of a cranium t thought here. soon enough id she ship, dr. lien that report to control input. you are both. so feel free to give to mobile

by like you system really premium. did not sing device for the from the city with stem cell, darker room. do a lot of the my subway, but just a quick actually with they go. they just go a double play. you have to go. so good. i'm approved. ah

a welcome back to cross stock were all things are considered. i'm peter labelle. this is the home addition to remind you were discussing some real news. ah,

let's go back to martin then america's one of the interesting things about this unipolar moment coming to an end, it has come to an end. and well, one of the big differences in looking at european politics and the crisis in ukraine is that it seems to me that that germany has finally completely abandon us politic of billy brant mama, the current government in germany no longer. i think it was a really broad talk about 2 different legs. one be able to stand on our stay in the west, but be able at the same time to reach out to the east. it seems like those days are over, and that is one of the accomplishments of washington in london. i mean, to finally break the relationship potent wanted since he came to power of having a good, vibrant relationship with germany. that seems to have come to an end, and i would say as a result, it is isolated europe because there's not

a major power in europe. now there wants to reach out and out some kind of data, and we haven't used that word in a long time. with russia, go ahead, mark. no, i think we're a long way from it at all. unfortunately, because when you get into the heads of some of these western elise, you still believe they can play the war of attrition with russia. you see that they're not, they're not interested in any long term friendship or deal with russia. you know, we liked russia during johnson's period because it was poor and backward and nothing seemed to work. and they needed the help of them. america, at certain point, it was a little tiny window where yeltsin seem to be our guy, you know, soon as prudent came in. so the build the economy, something going on like rushmore rushes a problem versus the threat rushes, creating all these problems for us, you know, and what comes from that. what i noticed as a journalist is this package fear mongering, which is delivered through the media. you know, we go this fear mongering go now. so memory is nothing new in the west. we've been doing it. you know, even go back to the days when russell was young,

man and nixon went to russia. the soviet union matching 60 and came back with the so called deal rum sold. and cheney, we're looking at him say, now we've got these new russian submarines which are non acoustic, that hundreds of them just parked off the coast of america here. and we couldn't, they couldn't get to get into their heads. that because we couldn't detect the us russian submarines newsome reins. that doesn't mean that they're not there. in reality, they didn't exist. they won fair. but did it is always great inflation. yeah. the cleaner the power of nightmares, the power of that fear mongering, huge about didn't stop the next administration for the ministration. some old, correctly from wrong investing in today's and billions of dollars in more military industrial compet kit to try and detect the so called non acoustic russian mac submarines which didn't exist the same things going on today. we've got more fear mongering over china. i know where it's heading. it's heading towards more military spending. that's the number one thing and it's,

we've seen it in ukraine and i'm beginning to wonder, you know, as a skeptical journalist that's covered graft for the best part over 30 years. i'm beginning to wonder whether big international mafia style and corruption is taking over here are these leads to we elected as so called democratic leaders of our values of our beliefs in this, in this neoliberalism? are they actually pocketing huge amounts of money from these obstacles? we don't know where these arms go. we don't know even we don't even see the receipts from lockheed martin and rape him. you know, we don't even know they get delivered. you know, if you're as old as i am, you can probably remember reagan coming to power in the arms, the arm scandal with the conscious. you know, reagan use the fog of war to cover up all this secrecy. to create secrecy over basically selling arms, iranians, which is a legal taking $30000000.00 off iran, and taking $18000000.00 of that and giving it to the counters to $5.00 to $7.00 inches in the drag your own course from the illegal he got off the hook even of

a noun for that, because he used the fog of war to actually move dirty money around the people in the worst of very, very naive. they don't understand it. and the people did money. the people that did take the hall for it were pardoned of yes, i am the president of the and already and so we're going to quite good job. i'm also, i mean, i hate in both the tony blair's name again, sorry, but i mean to talk about the, you know, the, the, the, the dominance of the west coming to an end. i mean, he was part of the, the tipping point. he was very much with agreeing to the legal war in iraq. the point is, isn't one thing i'm going is that the point about ukraine and the point about iraq and the point about afghanistan is dirty money. you don't keep money is all about these games. you, how do you move money around? how do you store dirty money? how do you save money and you cream dirty? my of huge arms contract. a son said pretty much the same thing about afghanistan.

he said, the point of us get guns done was not to finish a war winner war it was create a sort of black zone where you could keep a little dirty money and keep everybody in check. you know, i was afghanistan, 2000 something. i, british soldiers and one of the biggest frustrations they had was there was show me the head cam video of while they were fighting taliban once on field. other people were collecting a heroine, morphine on the other side and packing it away in it. and you know, so there was a little corruption there and i think all i see in ukraine there is 30 money. i see dirty money in china. yeah. who's getting this money? who's actually profiteering go was wrong about the wrong iran contra fist. we still don't know today how those american arms companies got paid the $30000000.00, how they get paid. i think they will end up going at the 100 by model glen. you're going back to the big picture of the end of the unit polar moment. i mean, are we in that vicinity trap right now?

i mean, because, because i think we're all in agreement. yeah. it's a, is a combination of ideological possession and greed. okay. i mean, i guess there was a rift. i mean, that wasn't when it was the keep it going though. the whole thing is the keep it going. it looks like that's something they may try in ukraine. i don't think they're going to be nearly as successful. that's why i think the pumping so much money in their big hub, it now uh you care. okay. and they'll be no accounting for it later. just like in afghanistan. so. so glen, i mean, are we in a trap right now with the westbound enough to, to maintain its ideological predominance because it's messianic b or turn to pores because everything's well loss of face. they've created a situation where either you, when completely or you lose completely but world history is everything's in the middle. it doesn't usually get the extremes, go ahead one. no, i agree,

but it also depends how one would define the object if i mean, if you look at ukraine and russia, they were actually moving towards a little diplomacy. we're moving forward towards disagreements as we know in march . and again, what's not the student is that the ukrainians walked away from it because the united states and the person to do so, arguing that, you know, you can, we will give you all the work. and of course there's no, no one of the things today that you came across about. still, the strategy is give you credit weapons, but what they need for, what if they can't process, it's going to continue. there's going and they get it from the u. s. congress no, and the media you comparing this idea over and over again. this is an opportunity as well to bleed ross and dr. second nomic and military power. so i think this idea of dragging the war is, is part of the part of the goal. and it's also good for our minds to building

because what the united states, as a key military power is a lot of influence comes from having this enduring complex. i mean, and united states been trying to get the economic and political it was over the years for years. only now with this war i'm going is our europe bending over and doing what the americans want to do. and i think you can also see the same possibly in asia, military conflict begins to intensify or escalate some pressure rooms with china. maybe it can mobilize some of the neighbors of china with united states. and obviously, the reason i'm saying it's because we sing the song as well. it's a grievance now which made in israel and then going to saudi arabia. this is to build up the rhetoric against iran. now, why would united states do this?

well, obviously this can open up for this really a tax on your over. it would also be simply the short use leadership influence and the release for having this conflict there. the have to look to our students for leadership. that's the source of influence in the region. so again, i am not sure what else to explanation for because pursuing a conflict with us, russia, europe, china, in asia, and iran now in the middle, is a major war there. if you can't possibly fight on 3 front, so i think this having this slow burning conflict is minimum, might be a strategic objective, you know, a martin it exactly in the, the 3 regions. and i mentioned in my, my introduction. i mean if you have count that you have received. busy a crisis, inflation is itself the justification to do to be involved in, in these, in these areas here. because i have always said like in the middle east,

the u. s. in the west got out of the middle east, they would make their peace. it might be very turbulent and might be very violent, but they would come to terms ok, the same thing in asia. but when you have the western powers, primarily the united states, that is it, it creates a, a slippery slope not to make hard decisions. okay. and on top of it, i mean, you know, we glenn was saying here, i mean, the european, the west has dominance in europe, but it's a pretty hollow prize, isn't it? i mean, it, germans are not going to be freezing in the winter. what kind of price is that? i would say that we need a marshall plan, the americans to fly in d. c, threes, and drop food over us citizen europe. you know, that's where we're heading. i mean, the germans now have to rush in the hot water, but it can not, you have to boss week or something, one of the richest countries in the world for the 1st time it is true, right? you know, so this is worrying and when you can see the german news us,

but the european union will the power it's, you know, i think when we look at the west in general, and we talk about middle eastern biden and in saudi arabia, the last couple of days and the 1st punch is punch. what have you call it? um, there's a lot of smoke and mirrors the love b s up there, frankly. and this idea that america is going to stand by israel and we're going to defeat iran. i mean, for god's sake, what planet are you on, man, who is going to take on iran in their right mind? and when it is ready, germans push spider each. each is shrunken seat and he just kept saying, roger as a loft or maybe would probably work juggler. nonsense, absolute nonsense. and the interesting thing is, is that we in the west of this, this, this, this, this, this fear mongering going in the middle is for a long time now because it's great business for us is great business for arms countries. um, companies, you know, and, and, but the, it's freight, it's completely taken. you only have to look very closely at the relationship between saudi arabia and around how it's becoming slightly cooler. and, you know,

these 2 neighbors are actually starting to open up by chance towards each other. you know, they're both lining up to join bricks. how can they be enemies? they're both gonna be in a new train or a saying here, it's one big grift year. okay. all right, jasmine would run out of pamela. think my guess, and i'll slow and america. and what i think our viewers are watching us here are the next time. remember? oh, no one else seem wrong. i just don't want you to see how you see an engagement trail when suddenly find themselves worlds

apart. we choose to look for common ground. ah, [000:00:00;00] a proof. the person who lockhear's forces continue their relentless shelling of the african republic are 2 visits. the mother of a 10 year old girl killed in a ukrainian artillery strike right in front of her home. russia in iran are now the most sanctioned countries in the world. but the latest efforts by the western european countries to isolate russia only led to closer ties between russia in the

hispanic republican, russia and iran plan to deepen bilateral ties with