sidelines only 416 people actually took pause. so to 7 percent of them oppose the potential us acquisition with well 5 percent still undecided? we go, reaction from greenland. parliament member pele brought back the posters, get ahold of people. they tend to get ahold of it more or less the same group of interest. if you're doing all of that, there's no down there. there are some in green them that don't mind joining the us by the external majority. breelan has a strategic position in the, in the arctic. it's one of the areas of all countries that are in the arctic. and it actually is one of the places where they have been sort of equipment since 2nd world war to make sure that they get early warning systems for us on the political parties in green. and i agreed upon is the statement that we don't want to change. we don't want to be american citizens. we want to be 3 letters in greenland. and one of the things is a is that defines us, is our ok,

good location of course. so we don't mind working with our neighbors and that's one of the main messages we've given so far. trump has even is the residents that use the military force to take greenland, which quickly became the boss of jokes, mixed with some criticism. it's just one of the call tunes on the mazda we spoke with. his also ted rule, who stays at the world, shouldn't joke around too much when the us shows interest in overseas territories. under article 5 of the nato treaty, i think the united states would be obligated to defend denmark slash greenland against itself. i'm not really sure how that works, but i would like to see it. um no, i mean i don't think we would need to see that a lot of things that in america can history that started out as outlanders in, in specially territorial acquisitions were laughed at that as they occurred. and you know, this is, you can go by the look for starting with the louisiana purchase through the gods

and purchase all the way through the invasion. people forget that hawaii was the subject of a military invasion by united states marines. um, you know that there was a all started the us grew through a lot of things that were left out before. so it some time, you know, you can't laugh this off completely. certainly if united states wanted to attack greenland, i suspect they probably wouldn't be able to be successful. i think it would be up to the people of greenland to decide what they want to do. obviously, that's the nature of sovereignty for everything that i've seen so far, it doesn't seem like they would be the subject would go in favor of anything other than continued independence. well enough to break away from denmark and be independent. seems to be really what the, the majority preference would be at this stage. you know, the us would have its own, its own take on it. it's always about who's administering the plebiscite. it's always good to have a company here right now. it's a piece of level on the cross store team right next on the international. then

we'll be back with more news that thanks and just back to you minutes. say then the the hello and welcome to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter level. as he leaves office secretary state anthony blinking will not be remembered as a diplomat. he will be remembered as a moral disgrace when faced with a chance to stop wars. in genocide, he refused. he talked about a rules based order, but he acted as an international criminal, the

prospect being blinking legacy. i'm joined by my guess michael rossi in task and he is a lecture of political science at rutgers university. and here in moscow we have alexander 8th, and he is a lecture at moscow institute of physics and technology. okay, let's start out with michael on test. scan them as anthony, blinking in his exit interviews and they were softball ones at that with the new york times. in the financial times and he was singing his own praises saying america is stronger its enemies or a week or he didn't talk about security, which is something remarkable about this administration and never talked about anyone security. he thinks he did a bang up job and he's very, very pleased with himself passing the baton to the next the administration. how will history judge anthony blinking go ahead, michael as well. i have absolutely no doubt that he thinks to himself that he did

a bang up job, and i have no doubt that the new york times and the financial times will judge him as a defender of the global liberal democracy in history is going to judge him at best as a very mediocre secretary of states. um as someone who is little more than a cog in the wheel, a voice, a mouth piece of the transatlantic liberal system. and one in which i have, as i said before, he has no doubt that he did a successful job, but his name will be connected to a rather unpopular presidency. one that has enabled genocide in the palestinian territories. another uh, that has been part of a war machine that has perpetuated the war in ukraine against russia.

and i'm sure that the critiques of his administration of his leadership will be something that he never really reads. but you know, if the absolute best, if he's lucky, he'll be considered little more than a footnote. yeah, well, i mean, for the rest of us, i hope that just this will catch up with them at some point. we all know that that's unlikely today, but who knows in the future? alexander, we also have well, i'm glad that michael brought up the genocide in the palestinian territories. but the, there's also he thinks his praises about the proxy war against russia. a war that was completely unnecessary and could have been easily avoided. and what's really remarkable, as anthony blinking is leaving office of people like michael waltz, that will be the national security council advise. and the next administration is talking about how to undo and, and the catastrophe that the bite and ministration perpetuated. but he does so he

seems completely unconcerned about that. alexander, i might ask who lincoln did a good job for because he certainly did it and did not do a good job for the united states. however, if we look at israel, i think he did a great job for israel, and that's probably who is very pleased with his work as well. remember that at the beginning of the october war between gaza, between him off and israel when that started off blink and moved his office to tell of the even took up a residence in israel for i don't remember how many weeks, but it's kind of is this is an unprecedented thing for the united states secretary of state to move to a foreign nation, as if he's coordinating efforts. there are something this is quite strange to have from someone who is supposed to represent the interest of the united states and not a foreign power. for example, israel, we might have to take that into account. and with mike waltz,

we should also be very careful of him because in front of a domestic audience in front of americans. yes, he's going to say that he wants to undo the damage caused by blinking caused by the bite and administration. but we have to consider what he's now saying with just that he's also supporting the ukrainians, reducing their minimum draft age to 18. so he's calling for the same sorts of things in ukraine, but the bite in administration is calling for right now. so mike waltz doesn't care how many ukrainians are slaughtered in this war on the front lines. for him, it's all just part of the big political game and increasing the trumpet, ministrations, leverage, and potential negotiations with russia. so there's actually appears to be very little difference between this incoming trump administration on the foreign policy front compared to the current bite and administration well above the view of

rapidly moved into the 2nd point. well, what i had hoped to be the 2nd part of the program, but i'm going to go with the flow here. michael. i mean i, i agree. i mean, you have like keith kellogg. you know, he's supposed to be, would be the point man for ukraine, and he's talking about maximum pressure against the rad. i mean, well, i don't know what administration he was speaking for the current one or the one that's going to come about. go ahead. michael. as well, i mean, as far as iran is concerned, both the trump and by the administration's are in lock step. right. the wrong is public enemy number one. when it comes to the middle east, it's been long regarded as the greatest belligerent. the great as rival to us american interest and that's on yahoo has long regarded iran also as one of the biggest obstacles against what he regards as stability. iran is the enabler of his bowl. um it,

it propped up the former assad regime in syria. and so, you know, in this step um it's, it's, it's, it's tempting to think the trump is going to be somehow different. how from that of the but i didn't ministration when it comes to iran in the middle east. the 2 of them are basically just continuing the same strategy that the united states has been employing within that region. since you know, time the memorial. so, you know, we'd like to think many people like to think that trump is going to be a breath of fresh air against, you know, against the, by to ministration a new sense of american foreign policy. maybe that would be for ukraine. i don't know. right. ukraine is one story, trump seems to be eager to end that conflict. it's just simply redirect all efforts in the middle east. but when it comes to that, um, you know, there was very little change between bite and waltz between, i'm sorry, between the blinking and and waltz and between bite and, and trump. well, you know,

alexander, i mean, since the crane is being brought up here. um i, i just, it, uh, i'm just befuddled on how the incoming administration, the individuals we have mentioned here, discontinue the same, talking points as if they're saying something different. i mean we, we had waltz, so he goes on the blood shed must come to an end. paraphrasing, of course, must come to an end as trench warfare must come to and then, but we all, in the same paragraph, they must a lower the conscription age and ukraine. i mean, what do you see talking about that? that's just more for the meat grinder. i, i and i don't know how it's being received in the united states, but these people are saying that, well, but it's the same conversation. maybe it's 2 sides of the same calling, but it's the same message. alexander. while i would say that it's not being seen in the united states, the united states has one of the most rigorous and vicious censorship regimes in the entire world. and we have to understand that the american people by and large

don't really understand what's going on because they're not being told. so frankly, cross talk is one of the only available widely broadcasted places where you can get english language information that is accurate. everything domestically produced in the united states is complete nonsense from ivory left or the right. they're both just trying to manipulate their audiences and slightly different ways, but in ways which are always beneficial to the business of leads in the united states. and what we're starting to see now is that the american funds to some extent american, some of them are americans, but the business, the leads in the united states, i hate the american people. there is no other way to describe it. and we look at what you on musk and other elements of the new trump administration are pushing in terms of the h one b work visa program, trying to bring in,

who knows how many millions of people from india? well, we've already flooded the american labor market and destroyed a low skill labor in the united states through immigration from latin america. so the united states doesn't really need more low skill immigration, and there isn't a huge pool of labor to draw on for that in latin america anymore. anyway, most of the people who want to, to get into the united states already have but who has not gotten into the united states. it's people who could take on sort of tech roles and middle the middle income, middle wage, middle class positions, particularly the sorts of jobs of the h one b visa program would allow. so the business of leads of the united states are going to now use the trump administration in order to massively increase the number of low wage workers coming in to displace american work well and the preferred

alexander, as with the this is america 1st policies i'm being facetious, of course, that's one of the things we're going to find out, michael, before we go to the break here, do you remember what joe biden said when he was an aggravated what kind of foreign policy he wanted to have you met? i mean, this is not a trick question. um, but he said that um, his administration will have a middle class foreign policy. do you remember that? what happened to that? i have to confess. i don't remember that. well, i mean, we're going, we're, we're going to quickly forget the buying in ministration. believe me keep going. i mean, i, you know, i, i, the one thing i remember is, you know, nothing fundamentally will change that. you know, that i remember, i mean, i didn't, was selected by the democratic party to be the gatekeeper of the current neo liberal system. and you know, it, to that extent. i think he's been highly successful in

providing a platform for the professional managerial class to continue to exert leverage over that working class that he claims to still think that he comes from as well. i mean my michael, the, the, the of the p. m saves, i'm glad you brought it up here because as we move forward a week, next week, we will have the next president of the united states for 47. but it seems to me that they're trading one set of all the guards and billionaires for another set because i don't see, i didn't see the last 4 years, the middle class foreign policy. and i don't see a mag of foreign policy because of the people that drum as around him. alright gentlemen, i'm going to interrupt myself. we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue our discussion on anthony blinking like us to the state with our to the

of the welcome ex, across stock, where all things are considered on peter roosevelt to mind you were discussing lincoln's legacy the

okay, let's go back to alexandra i mean, one of the things that is quite fascinating to want or maybe, but now depending on how you want to look at it, is that, you know, we had an election in november and in many ways kind of world historical. we've never seen this kind of political come back considering the establishment law fair against trump. it's control of the media of hollywood, about academia, etc, etc. and they still came out on top of most like a last or it's a figure and he won the popular vote. okay. and so i usually don't invoke up this program. brock obama, but i will elections have consequences or at least they should. and i think that, you know, what we've seen since the election to the, to the point that we're talking right now is that, you know, uh, the, the trump team on spring break. they're having a wonderful time the right me on their parents gave them credit cards so they're having a wonderful time. but it's good to get very, very sober next week. go ahead. alexander. well,

we have to consider who won the 2024 election because we have to remember that the 2020 election was stolen. and a lot of people in the united states are living in a fairy land where they just decided to forget that trump won the 2020 election, but was denied the office. well now and 24. somehow the democrats managed to get 6000000 fewer votes than in 2020. how does this happen? well, we know that something on the order of 15000000 fake votes were created in order to get bite in the presidency. and so this time the democrats just didn't do that. so why? well, the only logical explanation is that trump made a deal with people who have the influence to prevent the democratic party machine from stealing another presidential election when they already control the executive

office. so they had everything going for them and they just decided to let it go. well, have it done by the hours that are involved in all fair. i'm not going to disagree with you. but in all fairness, the, the drums, but victory was so overwhelming that it was really hard to deny. and we didn't have the conditions of cobit as well, which is an important call the out here. but i get to a point here. let me go back to michael and tash can i was returning to blinking in, in an important way. here. one of the things that divide in ministration did with its foreign policy, is it really turn the united states into a pariah on the world stage? americans don't know this are not aware of this year, but the culpability of dividing administration with the genocide is not gonna go away. ever. go ahead and test good. ever. you know, i've been thinking about whether or not people like bite in and blinking are directly complicit with in this genocide. and i know that this is

a very controversial word to use, but that's exactly what it is. and i would say at absolute best people like blinking and bite and are not come are directly complicit because this is the actions and the decisions of the as rarely state and these really government. but they're enablers. they're defenders at the international front. economically speaking, they provide israel with cart blash support militarily, diplomatically at the un security council is real, would not be able to do what it does without the complete support from the united states. and we need to be very clear that next week when trump takes over, this is not going to change exactly. exactly. it is not going to change.

i, i, i very rarely go on twitter x, whatever. it's called these days. but i warned everyone that you know, you can have a good feeling right now. but we, we could go from easily genocide, joe, to genocide don. and it's going to have because the world is not going to see it differently. donald trump is not some great hope to change the world, but people are hoping is that maybe he will start adjusting american fault foreign policy. that would be in the interest of the american middle class. as i pointed out at the 1st part of the program here. so yeah, alexander, you know, this is what we are faced right now because there's going to be a huge disappointment. and i would even wait, wait your to say within the mag a movement. go ahead, it's donald trump is beholden to his donors and he took $100000000.00 from miriam 8 also in reportedly in exchange for commitments on

supporting and is really annexation of the west bank. $100000000.00 is not something that trump can just walk away from. he needed it. and he's going to need the support of these people in order to be able to get anything done, whatever he may try to get done in this administration. so we have to understand also the direction of the relationship between the united states and israel, and the united states does not necessarily support is real. rather we should understand the united states is a vassal state of israel. we saw when leaving nothing yahoo came to washington and he got a record number standing ovations. practically every sentence. he said in congress, it was a standing ovation for longer than the sentence took to say it was, it was absolutely ridiculous. it was disgusting to see a foreign leader applauded in this way when he was carrying out this genocide in the middle of the east attacking multiple countries. and this is what the united

states has been reduced to as a vassal state of israel. and trump understood that to his credit, perhaps from a campaigning perspective and took advantage of it during his campaign. and now we're going to read the consequences of that during his administration. you know, my, the alexander brings up a good point. i'm not necessarily, i don't think i really necessarily agree, i mean as a facile of state, it seems to me that america, the american foreign policy, once continued hedge them on a, particularly in the middle east. and israel is its proxy and well they commit. so a jet aside, but based continue are had gemini, i think it's more like that kind of relationship right there. it's, yeah, it's because the americans want to maintain, had germany and deny countries like you around influence. they're willing to go along with the most growth test acts that humans can commit against each other.

it's more or less how i look at it. what are your thoughts, michael? yeah, i'm in agreement with you on this. do i mean, is this big debate as to who controls who, you know, some came to believe it is real controls the united states. other say that the united states is the one that ultimately uses israel as a proxy. if i'm of the mind in which american foreign policy, regardless of democrat or republican in the white house as follows, the same strategy and the same policies within strategic areas like the middle east, within the study of international relations. we have a model colds, you know, commitment theory or commitment problems is largely written by the great i, r c, or as james sphere on. in other words, the united states is committed to propping up defending certain states and certain

policies and regions around the world. let's just use it as real as a good example of this get wrong is the bad guy is real, is the good guide and it doesn't matter what is real. does iran does? it gets much more prudent for the united states to continue with the same policy, then completely per 1st and tactics making it look like we are now suddenly abandoning our ally, despite the fact that the ally is now committing grotesque acts of well multiple war crimes, not just in the palestinian territories, but also in southern lebanon. they are now just openly occupying large areas of southern syria. if they just simply annex it along with the goal on heights. i am very doubtful that american foreign policy will condemn this in the same way they condemned russia's annexation of territories in ukraine. so simply because of the fact that it makes more sense to continue down the path that you are on,

then to do a complete $180.00, and seem like you are now abandoning your allies because of the new administration or just new geo political realities. you know, it's, it's very interesting, alexander, the calling card of anthony blinking during the past disastrous for years was the rules based order. and i was really interesting because they got the americans got all their minions in europe to start mimicking it over and over again. is a bit of had some kind of meaning, but what we have is a rules disorder at the end of this administration. i, we all agree here that there is continuity with the, with a uh, a obama administration or a bush administration tolerate genocide. we don't know, okay, that's only a hypothetical thing here, but to, to, to gloss it over in the rules based order. i certainly hope that, that, that term is forever retired. go ahead. alexander. yeah,

i think that america has not been taken very seriously by the adults in the room like russia, china, and other emerging economies around the world when the secretary of state flies around the world. and all he produces is a bunch of slogans designed for domestic consumption in america. it's a very embarrassing, very embarrassing. but you see that when lincoln was in d. c, he would be simply doing the jobs that israel would send him. so his job was to run cover for an engineer. well, well he would like sandra, i mean the phrase is he was israel's lawyer. right? right, right. so he's giving press conferences and explaining that a ceasefire is very close on it and yahoo has agreed to a cease fire in the very same day. nothing yahoo has already announced that he will not agree to any cease fire. obviously the administration knew that obviously blinking knew that and yet they went and said it,

so what could this be except for domestic propaganda purposes or just to confuse people or confuse some observers as to how disconnected they could be. but we know they cannot be this disconnected during regular communication. okay, michael, we have one last minute here. i'm going to be a little provocative with you. i started out the program by claiming that, that, again to me blinking wasn't a diplomat. does that make you considering his 10 years? is that make you miss henry kissinger? i know that, you know, i'll just leave it at that. no, no, no. what i'm so what, what my, my point is, my point is, i'm a and i'm obviously being provocative here. michael, but you know, the, the, you know, the, be the, the going to try nixon going to china, things like that. this is what diplomats do. i mean, there, there's a lot of collateral damage, obviously, but that was thinking strategically about the national interest, even if we disagree with the outcomes. but the point is, is it,

i think it's already been mentioned here, is that now the secretary of state is just the cog in the works. and diplomacy has no role in american foreign policy. unfortunately, i don't think it's gonna change. it's all the time we have gentlemen want to take my guess and tests good. and here in moscow. and of course i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at r t c. you next time. remember, the,

the south korea's in page president is detained under the expected system trial level last month, marshall crisis. you said you reject the charges of insurrection on the piece of power that says he wants to avoid bloodshed. also it had this on the wrong and delivered on the present, the outgoing un secretary of state and leg can, is repeatedly told of the attempt to last a plan for a long promise to get still uh delivered bill between as well. um, so not as a growing number of id have to refute the unless the toilet is which.