a cool play a note as a secondary act to africa cannot have a 2nd class participation on the un security council. we demanded require that we should have serious participation. one fixed that we from africa demand is for the united nations to embrace democracy in the security council by giving africa to permanent seats with vito power and institution that excludes 54 african countries . while allowing one nation to veto the decisions of the remaining 193 member states is unacceptable. the council is dysfunctional on democratic non inclusive, unaccountable, autocratic, and opaque. that's why russia is calling for real reforms, but moscow is not suggesting a new organization insisting that the framework already exist, but needs polishing, and ensuring everyone's voices are heard and respected. it's what we've heard from russian officials, time and time again, building a fair, multiple world based on the principles of equal and indivisible,

security. and together with this un security council reform, we will make the west understand that it is no longer capable of imposing its own rules on the whole world. for many centuries pumping out results from africa, asia, and latin america no longer capable of living at the expense of others, we should seek a balance of interests. if things continue this way with the majority of the world continuing feeling in order to install only a matter of time before countries give up on the united nations and start talking about building something else. it already happened decades ago in history does have a habit of repeating itself. you go up, it's going off r t now. so we've had time to come in the know for you. we will have more news when you read to you at the top of the next. so hope to see you then the,

the, [000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross software. all things are considered, i'm theater level, better late than never trump secretary of state, marco rubio admits america's unipolar moment, has passed. viewers over this program understood this long ago. how well this admission make comes foreign policy different will diplomacy make a comeback? the prospecting from foreign policy. i'm joined by my guess, daniel as our in new york. he's a journalist and author a 3 books on the us constitution in nashville, we have ryan christian,

he is founder, an editor of the last american vagabond, as well as co founder of the independent media alliance. and in brisbane, we crossed to what we could poll. he's an adjunct professor at queensland university and technology and senior fellow at the ty, hey, institute, or a gentleman cross talk role, is that effect? that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate a daniel, um, so much to talk about here. i was leading, obviously, in my introduction, i'm going to quote marco rubio right now. it's not normal for the world to have a unipolar power. remarkable coming from a secretary of state. and then on the heels of this, we have the or which seems to be the imminent destruction of the us. a i d, at least in his current or is former incarnation. we don't know where it's going to go from here. the point is my friend. so much is happening. i think they're related . take it from here. daniel. yeah, that's, i mean, i think what we're seeing is a global crash of,

of neo liberalism. and it reminds me of the crash of communism in 1989 to 91. i think the world is going to a major phase change uh the, the, the rules of the last 35 years or so. i have found the park and we're enter entering into a new era. and that era is based on multi polarity, intense international competition. uh, the uh, the destruction of old alliances, like, you know, nato was going to way of the warsaw pact. um, so, uh its uh, really a dramatic change that were uh, the was passing through. ryan, is this all a good thing? go ahead. i'd like to start with pointing out that i think in general, the destruction of us id is obviously a positive thing. if ultimately that is what happens to it, because i think it's one of the things that is being debated, which is frustrating for a lot of us that have followed along with what has been doing is that there's some ultimate positive net positive outcome to what it does i disagree with that? i think it's

a regime change engine with some things that are done positive around it, ultimately as a cover i would argue, but i think what i'm worried about here is that the process i think is important. and i think the way this is going is indicating to me that it's just more about framing it as a positive change in order to role in what i worries that is a worse outcome. and, but like we were kind of saying off air before i, it's a way, nonetheless, to see this begin to go that step. but i think what i'm seeing a lot across the trump administration right now is taking things that we've always wanted to go away or and, and framing it as a positive disruption. but really already rolling in something that i see is much worse. sort of like the digital end of this, the cdc direction, warmer, private end of that. but that's what i see happening here with mosque and the rest of this the way it's going or marco rubio taking control or merging of what the state department would or wouldn't already really was. it just seems more of a shell game to me, but i'm going to wait and see how it plays out. but i think if it was gonna be done right, it should have been done in a way that was more transparent and not only focused on the left has been doing this the entire time. that's it. so that's just just on us. yeah, i,

i agree with you because it's settling domestic political scores are also very much so because this is, i would say, shown as being the machinations of the democratic party. they've said this very openly, so you're absolutely right. but where we go, i kind of got drawing upon what daniel had to say, which is really interesting is that, you know, when the, with the end of the cold war, the end of the soviet union, the end of the warsaw pact we had, you know, kind of a i was gonna say ideological boy, but we actually had a, a preponderance of neo liberalism around the world. i agree with daniel, 100 percent and we're not on the same frequency when it comes to many, many politics here. but it's, it's good to see that go, it's a low will be less of an ideological world. that's a plus. but the is it going back to this great power, a rivalry which has its pluses and minuses to go ahead and brisbane, a yellow good school debate with the paid around the especially after the uh,

the last time we try to disconnect it. so i agreeing to you and have the look. i think that um there's no doubt that the 35 year period of the liberalism, he's coming to an end and insightful nice people. they've been watching these things closely for a number of years. it ended a little while ago. it's just taking the united states leadership, i guess. so the political legal sections of the political a like to come to terms of that reality. but i think it also spells the end of a 500 year period of liberal wisdom, liberal klein new going on. so we've got 2 endings in a science. one is i short term ending, which is a 35 year period of a particularly intense type of western neoliberalism. but we're also seeing fundamental changes in the way that the global economic system in logan eyes. and as a result of that, the ways in which countries interact with each other. so it is a moments as purity that we're living through. and um, you know, and that's kind of read the ride for quite some time because there's

a whole bunch of vested interest. so you don't want to let go. and i'm, and i will fight tooth and the aisle of course to hang onto what they've had. and um, and the struggle in a sense has gone to continue for a little while yet before the da simple. yes, me there cuz no one likes to give up power in this, the new neo liberalism is a powerful if not toxic force, it will not give up easily as well. but daniel, i mean, you know, i mentioned great power politics. okay. for me they'll be a relief not to hear a secretary of state or we're only doing this for democracy around the world and i think we're all tired of all of that. okay. um. but then on the other side of the ledger is a drum says he's going to take a greenland in panama. okay. i mean, not for democratic reasons, either for disappear, national se, now national interest here. i mean, that's the flip side of it, isn't it daniel? yeah, i mean the, the, the us, you know, polarity is not unprecedented. we saw a british

u unit polarity for 99 year period from the 1815 to 1914 van that collapsed. and we all know what happened next. a trump is. ready is, you know, these, he's like, he's sees themselves a copper and he's picking fights with the, with minor parties that he certainly can win. i mean, it's no big deal for the us to steam roll over canada, or mexico or, or panama or denmark for that matter. but the point is that the, the old pieces for when you're parked in a very dramatic fashion and no one knows how it. ready shape a shape shake out. so no one knows what, right? china is reaction will be no one quite knows what russia's reaction well, you know, ryan, it, they, they, they, one of the, the,

the outcomes of all of this is that the alliance system that we've been in place. it's been in place since the 2nd world war will start to unravel. i think certainly, it's already been mentioned that nato may find a it's fate, is that it doesn't. us doesn't need nato the way it did before, because it's not an ideological conflict according to at least as someone like marco rubio. go ahead, right. or? yeah, i mean, i think it's worth considering this. there's might be more global collaboration on, on certain directions that we see then then the not even a lot of these different things like i, i definitely agree with what, what, what both other panels are saying in the context of what seems to be changing. but again, i would like to argue that i really worry about how that is. you know, whether it's the change is that even a positive change when you're really using 2 different establishment powers, a fight over who controls our lives. you know that that's what i kind of see happening, but i worry that there's more collaboration on the like during the like the cobra 19 era which is not really done. we saw a lot of global collaboration and things that really concerned a lot of people that were going the direction of more of

a world power. and i worry that that might be in a ways what some of these are going in the direction of, even though it does seem to be more, you know, trump taking for his own interest or for the united states interest or the government. but if you look at it on a grander scale, like what we're looking at with canada, and i mean even the, even panama included or, or mexico, you're talking about something that's been discussed for a long time, north american union dynamic, you know, coming off the conversation of something like the european union, it's the same kind of idea. and i think this is going to a very clearly away from the idea of freedom and liberty. and i think that was the problem. is that because we're seeing things go away that we argue are obviously bad. that is tricking a lot of americans into feeling like we're going in a positive direction toward freedom. when i see all of the directions, they're taking as dramatically the other direction, even if we're seeing positive things come down and again, we'll see what comes up underneath it. that's all i kind of see it right now, but i see these things as positive steps, but if they're simply rolling out like the fed goes away and it's simply a private stable coin, cvc, dynamic, and that's not a positive change. that's how i see it as yeah,

been more work. i think also the end of the word sovereignty is really important here. and you know, pursuing a sovereignty policy. the like trump appears to be doing that. it also encourages other countries to do exactly the same thing. i mean, i'd be getting to thinking in this is early days, but i wonder if you know, the, the, the ideas about international law in cooperation of the 2nd half of the 20th century is going to be forgotten. we're going to go right back to the 19th century, go ahead. warwick. i was, i pulled out all the way back to the 19th century, but then, but of course, history channel on ron a little bit. i think one of the things that we are saying and is that um, it is, is not necessarily a complete pretended right politics yet. but a recognition by the united states that the, the foundations of its global hegemony and its global power, not along the way. and therefore, it's going to have to recalibrate its position, at least in the short term, whether that is

a short term recalibration that leads to a long time system of change. whether it's really an attempt to re group is another question altogether. the recognition, i think that the debacle, the new crime is tantamount to a strategic phase for the west night 5 and of course united states. this is the predominant finance here in provider of weapons into the crime. the mess that is in the middle east of the monument, and of course, the, the diminution of american privacy in asia as old driven, i think i very realist, trumpet ministration. here's one more way we've worked before we go to the break. let me just ask you a quick questionnaire and because you know, we've bad need about the term had gemini, but you know, privacy is not the same thing. company. trump, once primacy isn't ministration is apparently not going to stripe or to germany. there are 2 different things, but real quick before we go to the break or yeah, look, i think he's, he's looking to, um,

it looks too useless driving colloquialisms. he's going to matthew's territory. yeah. i'm like adult, they territory and um, and that's the 1st thing that he's going to do. and clearly he's doing that model. read of that is that in part it's, i test the recognition of the, of the face of, of the united states as a global head. your mom that you wrap these are about. and that guys with the demise of the liberalism and the reassertion of american preponderance cybert's and okay, you're probably going to end up this part of the program on preponderance and we'll discuss it in the 2nd half here. gentlemen, i'm going to jump in. we're going to go to a short break, and after that your break, we'll continue our discussion on transform policy, stay with our to the

with the discovery of the new world. at the end of the 15 center, there appeared atlantics, slave dre. the slave traders from european countries started building for its on the western coast of the african continent to transport the african inhabitants to america, to be forced into hard labor. until the middle of the 17th century. portugal had laid the main role in this atrocious business. then great britain, france and the netherlands took the leadership for this fan of 400 years of legal and illegal slave trade. about 17000000 people were forcefully shipped across the atlantic. not including those who died on the way due to unbearable living conditions. modern historians estimate that for each slave ship to america, there were 5 who died while captured, or in transportation,

and cruel obliteration of rebellion. this route, because the whole tre practiced by the leading european countries, took away tens of millions of african lines. the organization of united nations class advised the trans atlantics slave trade as one of the greatest human rights abuses in the history of humanity. this is the biggest act of deep orientation of the people ever seen by mankind. the welcome act across stock where all things are considered on peter level to remind you we're discussing trumps new foreign policy. the . okay, let's go back to daniel and new york and i'm talking to the title of this program is tax americana. and the reason why i put that there is because it seems that you

lied. what we have said already in this program that there is going, there is a transition going on for impacts america to tax america. trumpet has this amazing affinity for a tear of so taxes. he's doesn't push sanction so much. but i mean that's still in the, in the, in the cards. it's kind of, i'm trying to uh, break bread here with ryan because you know, these tools here can be very much, you know, associated with the behavior of me. will liberalism, it may not be a spouse to say it might be all a g, but it looks for the same outcomes. daniel. oh, what else think it does. i disagree with that? i think that on that uh, that neo liberalism, uh, str. ready for a new world order under us of gemini, and i think a trump is a, is a bringing in a new system based on national ecosystem. his, his, uh, his, his, um, tariffs. uh. where is that a good? is that a good thing? national eagle ism, is that a good thing?

no, it's not a good thing at all. it's a, it's a very bad things, beggars. i, neighbor policies are precisely the same as the same type we saw in the early thirty's. i mean it's, it's, it's one thing of trump imposes tariffs, but of every other country imposes terrorist and which allegation then world trade goes to 0 very, very fast. uh, and, and with that comes, uh, a serious economic uh, contraction. so uh, so trump is, you know, he's, he's bringing in a new order and questionable a, but that's not a good new order. well, um, okay, um, i can absolutely see where you're coming from here. but brian, as we're speaking right now, um, uh columbia, panama, mexico, and canada, who are taking the ne, is trump on to something as well. i mean, obviously if we're just talking about whether or not he wins in his political

dynamic, then he's, then he's gaining. but ultimately this is a, i think, a negative thing. whether we're talking about the way the world sees the united states policy or but whether we're just for whether the united states is in any way what he pretends to be to the world, right? i mean, it's, it's just, there's imperialism naked, imperialism. the way of carrying this out, what is the parents are not, it's, it's belligerent in my opinion. and again, go back to the point that i think this is about like like he was, it's interesting you, you talked about like the old, like dynamic, a new world order, new liberalism. but you know, in comparison to what he's doing today. but i frankly think it's just kind of the merging of all this stuff. it's, i, this is going in that direction of a global tower. but not, i mean, it's hard to see it when you think through, through trump, only as this nationalistic kind of, you know, america 1st, but that's not really what their policies are. when you look at a broader dynamic look at the what that mean. i don't see much deviation between bite in terms of policy when it comes to foreign policy for ukraine, for israel. and i think quite frankly, we're seeing a lot kind of just break down in that very basically us government, throwing all of its agendas out for the interest of other foreign policy agenda is

for israel, for example. and so if we're talking about the parents, we're talking about the new canada mixed with them and they were watching things implode, things that have destroyed previous bi partisan or just, you know, any both democrat and republican administration from before that we're trying to accomplish. or just the basic idea of the rules based order that is completely collapse because of their foreign policy. that's not in america's interest, even right now what trump is doing, you can argue there's interest and resources and an x, y, and z. but as you were pointing out, the tariffs are only going to begin to cause more international problems for both countries, even though you see somebody getting to take the knee as you put it. i think it's only gonna spin out further when other countries react. and so i've seen that negative and all of this other than imperialism for jeff. yeah, i mean, why don't we get me, you know, we could really, we can figure out this entire conversation in the sense that trump wants to have a fortress um, uh, western hemisphere. i mean, it was being clued so apparently, i mean, as we speak right now,

um these rarely prime minister is visiting the united states will see it marco rubio is uh, approach to the world. you know, when he was on, um, making kelly um, what's going on with you with a id that may all be a side show the in, in new cycle time, considering the vested interest that the bite and ministration and apparently will find out the trumpet administration house with the genocide going on and gaza a look, i don't think that there is a tiger and strategy at this point in time. i think that there is a kind of here and i'm a saw switch. i guess some of us have described here as a form of nationalism or an actual legal reason. but what we say is a whole bunch of, of initiatives or actions that you know, i say to satisfy particular constituencies. and also i say to create particular emotional responses from the political bice and, but that's largely about here at the bottom. and so we don't have

a car here in strategy in relation to you crime promises of solving that in 24 hours. not withstanding the fact that it was a bully campaign, how terribly have amounted to nothing at this point in time. and i'm not convinced that there is actually a meaningful strategy at all to bring that was a meaningful close. that's certainly nice strategy and relation to stabilize in the middle east then, and believes that there is a strategy in relation to the asia pacific. eva, all the areas of the monument is a consolidation loan which is around the back yard, so to speak. and an assertion of regional, sorry, of the neighbors. so the quite clearly not in the same league, you know, it's a pretty easy thing to do as a terrace. the reality is, is that the united states now on the wheels, the, the, the big stick that at once the, in i and, and that's mainly because the united states contributes not more than 15 percent of

global will trade today, which is down from 20 percent. and the 60 is a guy, frankly, it is just less important, relatively speaking, and sort of has less impact in terms of with policies brooks nations i able to adjust, should they be a 100 percent higher if imposed on them with the and all of this to my 2 and a half to 3 is to fully comp insights. so the last of the us market. the us in the meantime will take between 55 and 10 years and possibly even longer to adjust to a loss of the industrial machinery. the robotics and not to mention the role of materials that comes from the rest of the world. you know, when you've been living on devices of i use for the last 3540 years. and you come to the realization that at some point, a really call them the names real things. it's a bit of a shopping realization of the world doesn't need american. i are using the why it wants the that's just the reality in daniel, this new approach. and i think all of us would agree it's,

it's in its formative stage right now, or maybe it's just the one off. they wanted to go after this agency. and ned could follow, which would be great in my opinion, but daniel, they've been given the trajectory, at least this is as trumps approach, making the world more or less safe. oh, it's making us far less safe. i mean, 1st of all, number one, i mean you have to where you're told, with things like this, you use phrases like trumps to approach. trump is a highly erratic individual. yeah. i mean, is a really a med tech. uh, there's a certain kind of logical in what he's doing, but he has not thought this out fully, and he's going to get in big trouble very, very soon. the just stabilizing effects are profound. i mean, i think the, you know, the, the, the,

the weakening of nato will have from magic fx throughout the region. cons. so it might actually feed the war up a new crane rather than, than tapping it down. this is a and that of course, the middle east. i mean, i mean that yahoo is now trumps both of them. how he is the he is the trump whisper . and so, so essentially he's running the entire middle east as a proxy for the us. and that is pretty extraordinary and that does not. ready a more peaceful region, obviously corrupt. i'd like to point out though that i feel good, but go ahead, jump in. i'd like to point out that i think that it's, it's worth considering and it's, i'm of the opinion that it's possibly the other way around. right. the idea that we're watching all of these things that as you pointed out or not. and i mean, you can say for instance, greenland and minerals to meet or either resources, there's a renter's for america that might be positive for short term gain or maybe long term gain. but ultimately it's, i think like i said, in that positive and a lot of different reasons that are imploding, a lot of things for

a long term american interest. and i think that that benefits is real in a lot of ways. and that's more abstract. i think for some people, unless you understand some long term policy that they will just to be frank that, that people like ben baron smote rich. and some of the more radical people are openly talking about, which is the stabilisation of 4 countries. weaponized migration. these, these are with statements by then just so that's clear. but so thinking about how these things like, even with nato, i think you could argue that these things benefit what they're trying to accomplish in the world. let's not forget that even the promises of the ending funding for ukraine or israel for that matter, both have been broken even recently, despite the pause, even though they what is really huge of continue trump, then through poland for through israel sent weapons back to you create that just happen. so it just seems to be even challenging as on promises to his base. i the, i see all of this is in the interest of at least 4 and countries as opposed to united states. but i would say israel, i think that's worth considering a war waco of last 40 seconds. go to you that you've given what we've heard from daniel and ryan, is there a coherent strategy here?

go ahead. 35 seconds. there's no kind of doing strategy. it's um, it's a series of emotionally driven reactions to changes in the world that the trump is coming to grips with. it is a function of a deep side of displacement. i'm the see from a country and a man or he's experienced a world that was dramatically different and where the united states, i have a pinnacle that's my level of the k. it, it's, it's quite fascinating the, the, the, the new administration is inherent in a world very, very different than the 1st administration of trump. it's really quite fascinating . and i guess we'll all agree, we'll see where it all goes. it's, it's very difficult to keep track of what's going on here. i want to thank my, i guess in a nashville new york and in brisbane. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at r t c. and next time, remember across platforms, the,

the a, the same wrong just don't you have to safe house because the and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves will support. we choose to look so common ground, the the wireless name from google. that will just give it to us or just the machines to use to combine into say,

combining. so that's them to combine the, the welcome below and you mean to continue for to, for this to them to the assembly at least choice. although we see a 4 digit pin on the and all of this loading on the of seem to buy to to allow because this doesn't still lead time between the easy to, to read the time the

the, the us will take over the gaza strip and we will do a job with a to pull out at the us present shocks the wells with the funds to take control of gauze and displace palestinians from the land. donald trump plains everyone who loves the idea, but so far the only will leave this to induces his benjamin netanyahu. you are the greatest friend is room is ever had in the white house, the josie recitation of the main hospitals that served the northern gauze as trip dollars in terms of the dent tricks on maternity for the population. here we report from inside his