soldiers in iraq as his genocide continues in palestine. netanyahu times israel secured the black flags, devices flying over them. i had lost in damascus. in chicago is professor john measure. i'm a co author of these are a lobby and u. s. foreign policy and how states think the rationality of foreign policy provides the best time and thanks so much for coming back on going underground. i guess 1st your reaction, the victory of the united states and is rarely neutralizing palestine facilitates a turkey and bathing in the north israel. as i said from the south and russia losing its military bases. presumably we can talk more about the china, the end of its belt road as far as its ports in the west to yeah, i mean there's so many implications of what's going on as a result of the collapse of syria that. ready hard to know where to start. i mean it's quite clear that the losers in this conflict were a ran russia and has. ready ha,

uh there's no question it for ran. this is a big blow. ready in the sense that syria was an ally, an important ally. and very importantly, siri was a conduit for a rainy and weapons to get to has the law inside of lab and on. and for the time being at least that conduit has been shut down. i think the russians also lost because they were supporting syria and of course has the last of the reasons i just described in the winter is, are clear. ready ready is real, the united states and turkey. how this all plays out moving forward is almost impossible to say. other than it's looks like there will be considerable chaos in syria for the foreseeable future, because it's hard to see a co here in government for me in damascus that can control the entire country. i presume you in short term success as regards for united states. i don't know when

the, when the majority, another great deal of success in afghanistan against the soviets. there was celebrating, in some nature, proof, attend newspapers in television. and that arguably would lead to $911.00 is a short term success in terms of the united states. and do you see the hands of a phonetic blinking state department here i had with the an organization of trump on the 20th of january. it is a short term success. there's no question about that. what happens in the long term is somewhat difficult to say, but it is possible that as a result of what's happened in syria that ran will acquire nuclear weapons. and if a rand requires to clear weapons, that would be disastrous for israel. and it would also be disastrous for the united states and who's to say whether that will happen or not. it's also just not clear what the implications are for turkey and all of this. i think the turks

believe that over throwing the side would lead to a new syria. it would be friends. ready with turkey, it allowed turkey to solve a lot of his problems, especially with the kurtz. but i wouldn't bet a lot of money on that. i think there's going to be a great deal of unrest in syria for the foreseeable future. and the short term victory for us for turkey will not turn out to be a positive development in the long term. so i want to do what i want to go to around in a 2nd. but on to a case you just said, i mean how it's your american weapon. we do these good. just groups have to attack . i took a symmetrically, can we expect the bombs and assembled in ankara this christmas pace. and that's what it is very hard to say. i mean, they'll certainly be incentives to do that. but i'm not sure what's going to happen on that front. and in terms of timing. i mean, if the state department in the bible regime is desperate to get things moving into

chaos in place iran, but they make a move on to buy the nuclear weapon. it goes, come any on record because it was on his left make but a, do they need the nuclear weapon before january, and can they produce a nuclear weapon in that sort of time? they cods, can they run? they don't need to be a weapon before january. i mean is every indication that the by did ministration is as hard line on iran as the trump administration will be. so i think what happens on january 20th does it matter to the iranians with regard to develop into but they have not made that decision yet as best we could tell. but they're all sorts of good reasons to think they, well, there's no question that they can produce enough. is i on material for a bomb in a couple weeks time, they're that close. but having the physical material is not the same as having a bomb. and it would, in my opinion, take them a good year to develop

a bomb and the capability to deliver that bomb. yeah, on the january 20 of that 9, it was actually saying jump was a more of the peaceful side of things, arguably then divide the ministration. so iran has to get a move on because trump would try and seek some sort of peas on like the blinking state, which is what i was referring to. i mean, do oh, is it your understanding that this by the ministration wants to so is what scales as possible for trump as well? i think there's not much question about that i think with regard to both ukraine and with regard to the middle east. what the by did ministration would like to do is last, trump been a and give him is little me do of or group as possible, but i don't think they have to worry that much. i don't think the trump is going to radically alter american foreign policy in the middle east for one second. the

administration is filled with hawks who wanna destroy or ran if they can, or at least affect regime change. and trump, himself is a hawk on or, and i think of trump is going to have any effect on foreign policy. in other words, if he's going to change foreign policy in any meaningful way, it will be in ukraine, not in the middle east. i think there was some hopeful people who support letting me approve in saying, perhaps it was russia taking outside out of the situation of damascus to us. so the chaos because he believes it'll blow back somehow. wishful thinking, arguably has row, was the wishful thinking coming out the russian foreign ministry that the 2 bases was safe on the mediterranean. how important to these bases, and does this mean the end of russian power in the middle east suddenly uh, in terms of um, an expression of power if the bases and talk to us and

a lot takia are going well, i think there's no question that syria was important for russia, for purposes of having influence in the middle east. they don't have any bases, any place else. and if they lose those bases serious, it's hard to see where they can go. and you know, it's not clear they're going to lose the bases. and my do you think, what do you think that i don't know, i mean, it's just impossible to say at this point in time when sees evidence that the regime is cooperating with the russians and not interested in throwing the russians out the new regime. and one can make an argument that the russians have an interest in state. one could also make an argument that the russians or to just cut their losses and get out because it just doesn't matter that much. i think what's happened in syria is a bigger blow to a ran than it is to russia. from russia's point of view. this is basically

a side show for russia. what really matters is what's happy then ukraine. they would have preferred that to solve remain in power in syria, but it was not altogether that important to them because again, throwing their weight around in the middle east is not of great importance to. ready russians at this point in time. well, it's connected to brick, so the belgium road initiative for china and it is kaylee. uh, important, does it have that mediterranean presence? i think it's somewhat important for the russians. i don't deny that. i think all things considered the russians would prefer the side stay in power for sure, and that they keep the bases. but i think if they lose the bases, it's not that big a deal because will be an influence in the mid, at least in the final analysis, is not that important to the russians. and if they prefer that it was the bed chief

to support syria for iran and russia as compared to i agree, obviously it's more important to a run. we take this central, i'll give a need to a run, and that's how we were around. would see it. why didn't they pour the money into was needed to assure up they all positions rises. all guys are in syria or i think they were committed to helping syria defend itself against the h t. s. and the other groups. there is no question about that, but the problem they faced is that syria was incapable of defending itself. and there were just limits to, with both the rainy ends and the russians could doke. there's all sorts of evidence the russians and your radians were talking to a side about the problems in his military and the need to fix the military. and the need to reach some sort of accommodation with or on a turkey and with the rebels. to head off this problem,

and it's also quite clear that they were doing what they could to provide assistance once the conflicts started. but the fact is that the syrian military was so hollowed out, it was. so we did, it just couldn't stand up, came a rebel, certaintly, they were giving as much money as your generous us public money. and the manufacturers you owe us tax payers were giving way more money, so much money that ukraine was able, able to send the soldiers directly to train the guy to people according to the what i mean both i've money is not the issue here. i mean, just go back to the vietnam war, we gave huge amounts of money and huge amounts of equipment to the south vietnamese military, much more cells in the soviets or the chinese gave to the north vietnamese. but the fact is, the south vietnamese military was an incompetent military. and when the north vietnamese attacked in 1975,

the south vietnamese military quickly collapse. and this is an analogous situation . the syrian army was simply incapable of standing up to the rebels. it collapsed almost overnight. the russians tried to help. there were wagner forces in there, the russians were using their air force. but if the syrians are not going to put up a flight, there's not much the russians can do, or not much the uranium can do. and you might say, well, why didn't they try to fix this problem beforehand? and my problem is the, my point is there's a lot of evidence that they were trying to fix the problem. they were warning a saw that he had to do something. they had this problem off at the past, but they couldn't make any progress with his side. he was a remarkably stubborn and foolish man and yet, and as a result, he's now sitting in moscow and his country is occupied by the rebels proposal. mash, i'm or i'll stop you the law from the university of chicago scholar after this break the

wireless news from google as well. just give me the thoughts or just the sound seems to use to say combining is to say combining. so that's to combine the video one of the welcome below and you mean good continue for to, for this to them to the assembly of his choice. although he had a 4 digit pin on the and all the loading on the it seemed to by the old

old allow because this doesn't still we tie, continue to listen to me at the time of the of the the welcome back to going underground. i'm still here with professor of political science will be mostly chicago to immeasurable. president bush, i'm of you are telling me about how stubborn aside was in the syria, but sanctions on syria were clearly important. although historically they never worked us sanctions. they obviously have worked with russia, they had their work in cuba, venezuela. their work on north korea had been you need a us troop presence like,

occupying the energy fields that it added to the sanctions for it to make an impact . what do you think this means for us sanctions? the fact that they successfully destroyed syria using sanctions or well, it was not just sanctions that destroyed syria. i mean there were a number of other key factors that play as well. uh, 1st of all that. ready just a huge amount of corruption by almost all accounts inside of syria military. furthermore, there were these oil fields out in the eastern part of syria that before the war produced about $400000000000.00 in revenue. and what happened is that the americans and the kurtz basically took over those oil fields and the amount of money that the syrians are getting from those were getting from those oil fields has been remarkably reduced. so they didn't have

a lot of they didn't much of an economy at home. the sanctions were all alone. there was a great deal. ready of corruption and as a result of the army was hollowed out. and what we have seen happened in the past few weeks, is it that army collapse because it was hollowed out. so can we expect the turkey costs our uh, gas pipeline to uh, compete with us sell in g coming to your above to the north stream was destroyed? is this actually not so good for the united states in terms of uh, uh, geo political realignment in this region. financially, it's very hard to say, i'm just not sure what's going to happen on that front. there just so many questions that are open here that are hard to answer and this is just another one of those. where why do you think of the state department?

they would just blank. i mean, they're always blank faces of those press conferences, but the $10000000.00 bounty is still on the website that the us state department of doing the blankets. so what i can get $10000000.00 of i tell you a government to information about i have to kill july any whatever his real name is you're, you're asking me, am i surprised that that's up there? i am surprised that they haven't taken it down. i mean, it's quite clear that the administration and mainstream media in the united states is doing everything they can to clean up val gilani and portray him as a changed man to make him look like he's now thomas jefferson and no longer an allocate operative. so the fact that they've left that up on the website is somewhat surprising. what do you think go through the heads of old is john list on the news rooms on the coal face that your broadcast is in your big newspapers, knowing full well. the pictures coming through on social media of judge is being

destroyed. half is our last sides. what's the liam being destroyed? and the executions and the isis flags all across syria. i will go through the i think, i think it, most of them are not going to be surprised at all. i mean, it's just not surprising. we basically to, we're locked in with a number of out cade and isis operatives, and they won and they have scores to settle different, sorry, sorry to interrupt, but they keep telling the public in the united states. i know the united states is more interested in uh, united healthcare, so you can play, but certainly in the information in western europe on uses. know this guy's good, and look how terrible asset was, what a torture he was. is it going down to move a didn't exist? what goes to the hands of the trend is going full?

well, they must know who the ice is, all kinds of people that killed american soldiers. of course, i mean these journalists understand for, well, most americans understand full well there's all sorts of this course, you know, in the media here on this very issue that the united states is support. ready being a terrace and that the terrorist or the rebels call them with you on have one. but i think when you ask what's going through their head, i mean, it's pretty simple. everybody knows the basic story here. you know, a lot of people say that us policy is about creating chaos. actually, the 9 to the president, very tray, a country i'll give you the most sanctioned in the world. and he said it was all about k us. i know you've been predicting the defeat for the land scan ukraine, but you don't think that the, there's some in the state department do believe at least create as much tales as i

think it was another. another so many b2xb from the united states as part of 50000000000 g 7 loan pay by interest, unfrozen, rushing people's money to kill russian soldiers. how well do you think the chaos is going in georgia, remaining animal dover, as a by john wayne blinking his go all seeing eyes here. he did it incredibly competent state department. i don't think the american policy is to create chaos in places like ukraine or, or in places like syria. i think what we were interested in in syria was regime change. we wanted to get rid of a saw and we thought that we could put in place for government that would be friendly to the united states. and most importantly, friendly to israel. i think the united states believes that chaos and syria would not work error advantage, and it would not work. israel's advantage with regard to ukraine. i think our basic

goal there was to deal the russians a severe blow to defeat them on the battlefield. in ukraine. we can rush it to the point where it was knocked out of the ranks of the great powers. i don't believe that we wanted to purposely. so k us and ukraine and effectively rec, ukraine. i don't think that was the goal. one could argue that the end result is that we're wrecking ukraine. that's been my argument all along. and one can argue that the end result of what we're doing in syria is to create chaos. but that's not the same thing and saying that that was the intended goal to start with. it's just a way of saying that the united states because of its bone headed policies, often times does end up creating chaos, which is at odds with what it wants to do. so they actually believed that they could defeat russia. i think there's no question that they believe that good defeat

russia. i think if you look at how the ukranian military performed on the battle field in 2022, that was when the war started, the war started in february 2022. if you look at how the ukranian military performed on the battlefield leave, you look at the fact that the russians in the summer, late summer, early fall re treated from the western part of her son and retreated from hart keys. and also if you look at the fact that the west or the united states especially thought that sanctions would bring the russians to their knees. uh, the west concluded, based on those 2 factors that it could deal russia a devastating blow. that seems ridiculous. now when you think about what's happened in 20232024, where we are at today. but if you go back to late 2022. it looked like we were in excellent shape. it looked like the sanctions might work. and also it looked like

the ukrainians were doing very well on the battlefield. and there was all sorts of talked about how when confident the russian army was. so that led us to believe that we could actually defeat the rush. you'd never believe that the progress and find all through it. i did. and obviously they, they would clearly not listening to you. but now, of course, infamously, when the boots inside the nuclear doctrine was changing as regards nuclear weapons . uh, i think one of your papers could have been sold to biggest deal times with the business, the washington post that it was just a yawn. and this gave the 500 when these a new ideas of the use of nuclear weapons were emerging from moscow. well, is producing, going to do as these a new longer range weapons are increasingly being engaged against russia as well. you will remember the proven has 2 goals here. one is to win the war in ukraine,

and number 2 is to make sure that the conflict doesn't escalate into world war 3. put has a deep seated interest in defeat and ukraine. and it also has a deep seated interest in avoiding nuclear war. so i don't believe the pool is likely to use nuclear weapons unless she is in a position where it looks like russia is going to lose the war of ukraine. but that's not going to happen. so i think that there's little chance at this point in time that the rush, it will use nuclear weapons, but there's no question that the russians understand that they're facing the next a central threat in ukraine. and there is no doubt that the russians understand that the united states has its cross hairs on russia. and that's not going to change even when donald trump comes into power. so as a consequence, the russians are sending a very clear signal that if the americans push too far and they do back rush it

into a corner, they should fully understand that russia has lowered the nuclear threshold. which means that it is likely to use nuclear weapons. if it's in that situation except rush, i can still hear by then you hypersonic. uh me. so, and are we talking literally about this christmas, really? because the head of trump senior organization, trump, who is said, i mean, as you say, he's going, did all these old civil war with roger. but the jump says he's going to change policy. so it's all about the next 3 weeks. and russia has to come up with some strategy and some responses, and how to reply to increasing provocation, avoided by blinking jake sullivan and the rest of them literally in the next 3 weeks. and so we're going to happen now, or if the problem is these prob occasions are, are not that significant. it's not like these

a tac homes that ukraine is firing at russia or having a major impact on the course of the war. they're just not. so there's no questions the russians have to retaliate, and it has to be a forceful retaliation against any use of a tack, thems, or storm shadows, or what have you. but the russians don't have to do too much. they certainly don't have to use nuclear weapons. and what's gonna happen here is that in a few weeks, we're going to have a new government and we'll see what happens then. and just finally, how soon can we expect the blow back for these policies? are the bible at era of simple or the guys outside or in syria of means? or lensky is supporting with american weapons. the ice is all kinds of elements in syria, all these years, 4 years of foreign policy, billions of dollars of your public money. how soon are the blow back going to be

felt in uh, in the mainland united states with a symmetric warfare? i was i said to you before. it's just impossible to say with any certainty when we should expect flow back. first of all, we just don't know exactly how things are going to play out in syria. but furthermore, we find it very difficult to guess as to when the blow back will take place. i think there's going to be significant blow back. i think you'll be significant blow back for what's happening in gaza. many people around the world think that the united states is complicit. the genocide, they think the germany in west europe more generally is complicit in the genocide. and one can hypothesize all sorts of plausible scenarios where you get blow back there. so i think the potential for a blow back in the west as a result of what's been happening in the middle east since october 7th is a huge, but predicting exactly when that will happen and what it will look like is upset

the site impossible for us to draw measure, i thank you. you're more than welcome. that's it for the show. continued condolences to those arriving u. k u. s. u, i'm genocide here in this region will be back on monday with the legendary pink floyd front ben roger waters. and you'll then keep in touch by the social media, and it's not expensive, new country. and how do i channel going undergrads? you feel normal to come to watching, you know the episodes ongoing undergrad. so you monday, the oh, the the

have gave us, dan has a drug with conquerors attention from time immemorial, in the 19th century, the british empire decided to subjugate that century. the british view, the afghan lands as the northern gateway to india, and wanted to turn them into an obedient province, trying to predict independence, the mere of a dentist in doors to homage turned for help to russia. waste the rate is considered their deal political adversary. this was the last straw for london. britain declared war on the half gans in august 18, 39. the invaders occupied couple and brought their henchmen to bower. the invaders brutally suppressed any resistance, thus, is deli. they slaughtered all ask in man who had reached adulthood and raped hundreds of women seeking to humiliate the muslims to 1841. a general uprising

against the british yoke began debris. it is under the command of general elton stone last couple and started to retreat. only a few out of the $16000.00 invaders who had begun their march from google, made it to the british position, was in general about the defeat of the royal army caused enormous damage to the prestige of the british empire throughout the world. the victory of the afghan people became the most important event in the history of the arrest people's resistance to the colonialists. it just failed the racist smith of the yard at the inn invincibility the, the, [000:00:00;00]

the, the idea for a portable you bombs to syrian ports and the capitol region. in a while, the is really defense ministry, instructed the troops to break for a winter in the buffer zone in the country 1000. you politicians are syrian refugees living in europe to return home with some even offering it cash incentives to this place, community fears for their lives. it isn't in the should investment. that's a terrible idea. the situation in syria is just as dangerous as it was before. let's see where it needs another 2 to 3 years these people. so it's a republicans move to the fund a us agency over accusations and promote the censorship under the disguise of