the new nato alliance.ry headquarters. ♪ in oslo, norway, the northern command, integrated international staff, danes and norwegians under a general, defense for your. europe. central european command. here there is a french commander in chief under three commanders. undersea, land and air. they guard the very heart of europe. naples, the headquarter on the southern flank. the base for the american six fleet. the historic british base, headquarters for the nato forces for five nato companies. and in the united states, supreme allied commander's, home of the u.s. navy and also international headquarters on american soil. symbol of the unity of the western world. and, on the island of britain, the general commands. the royal navy, muskies opened the vital supply of western europe. >>> and at the nato headquarters, these forces are assisted in their task by the royal air force. the defense of the western approaches to the british isles. >>> in 1952, two new nations joined the alliance. turkey and greece. greec

of either nato all the. but you might be able to make progress as i say on one of 2 precise issues big ones precise issues such as for instance the you could have forces treaty or possibly things connected with libya on those issues it might be possible to sign step daughters. otherwise. ok let me go to look look i'm going to give the last 30 seconds on the program what is public opinion in france about crones initiative visa v russia now i'm i'm not asking about the yellow bass i'm talking about russia go ahead 30 seconds to you. well i think for many people it would be a good point i mean france is one of the few countries within nato that outpaced the 2 percent requested by trump and by the promises made by all the countries germany doesn't so the voice of problems is heard and the french like the idea of the french and the other europeans too they like the idea to call it takes initiatives on the international front which the germans don't do and of friends boris johnson of stupidity with bricks it to do

when asked about nato,li i stated my in nato, as the strongest, probably most successful military alliance in history. we talked a little bit about other things, and i disagreed on another issue, as well. so, walking out of the room, i thought, probably, "well, that's that -- on my way back to hoover institution at stanford university." so i was a little surprised on t steps when he said i was the real deal.al he is the real deal. he is the real deal. thank you, jim. >> one of the other issues you disagreed out, it was reported in the press, was torture. >> well, yes.el i didn'tve in torture. i was against it on ethical grounds and what it do to our people. >> did you see it as a sign of strength or encouragement he president was willing to pick you to be his secretary of defense, despite a disagreement, and that he was open to an alternative argument about... >> a great point. >> ...about an issue that he had had a strong viet previously? >> well, it's a great point, margaret, that i disagreed with him. i assumed that i owed him my cand advice, and i gave him that right from the job intei

there's concern about whether nato will be strong enough to sustain a test to nato by vladimir putinr russia. do you worry about that? >> well, my concern is not about a direct challenge. we've always depended on a force presence to remindhe soviet or russian president, "don't go there, because you might kill an american, and that will causen american president to attack." that's why we had a tripwire for all of those years. so, on a direct challenge,'m not as worried. what i'm worried about is that you would fi the russians using these hybrid attacks, where it's a little bit cyber, it's a little clear who the people are, the kinds of things that they've done in ukraine.rr and i more about something along those lines. >>t brings me to another question. and, as you knowthis program was first hosted by helliam f. buckley jr., an hosted it from 1966 to 1999. d in 1987, there was a republican presidential primary s,in which all the candida republican candidates, came topu talk to bill buckley, and your former boss, george h.w. bus was on that stage talking about the inf treaty. >> yes. >

concerned about the expansion of nato nato has expanded into 13 countries up to the borders of russia 13 countries. shit way not. in early spring of 2014 eastern ukraine was also buzzing with protests against the new authorities in kiev this region with the population close to russia geographically and culturally feared that the ultra right leanings of the newly formed government would bring me own nationalism to their lands. and they have their reasons. the status of the russian language in ukraine has been a stumbling block for many years implementing russian as a 2nd state bank which was one of the main campaign promises president going to fulfill in 2012 the government passed a law making it the 2nd official language in the southern and eastern parts of ukraine the areas where the russian speaking. elation makes up a majority ukrainian nationalist groups and initiated massive protests opposing the law and observing viewer might see some familiar faces there on a 5 month. part of our last. on february 23rd 2014 the very next day after the regime change the new government voted for

>> nato is present in the region with a training mission in iraq but we don't, and so nato allies are present in the straits of hormuz and the gulf but there is no call for a nato mission, through the nato alliance in the straits of hormuz. david: right. >> therefore i'm not speculating about that because i think that adds to uncertainty. what we now we need to try to de-escalate and not speculate potential nato role. david: as you well know, mr. secretary-general, the united states and europe have very different views how to deal with iran. the europeans wanted the united states to stay in the agreement that was made by the obama administration, not ratified by the u.s. congress. does that interfere with any help the united states may try to get from the europeans specifically putting together a coalition? >> well, it is a well-known fact that in nato there are sometimes differences surrounding the nuclear deal. however i think the strength of nato is that we've been able to overcome differences and unite behind our core values to protect and defend each other. when it comes to iran

both nato and non-nato allies. who continue to fight alongside us. it wasn't just an american soldier who was killed on thursday. there was a romanian soldier killed on thursdays alongside the american. but we didn't have a strategy for resolving the issue and frankly the strategy we now have is not that different from the strategy we've had in the previous administration which is is how do we get out without anyone noticing? and the problem is that other guy notices when we leave and as a result will take actions that are likely to be contrary not only to our interests but the interests of the afghan people. dina: i would add strategy may be the wrong word. we're in a transaction to achieve a result. you said that yourself. this stuff shouldn't be win-lose. it should be win-win. i want to repeat something i quote -- jane: i want to repeat something i quoted from woodrow wilson and have everyone contemplate this. it is a fearful thing to lead this peaceful people into world but the -- into war but the right is more important than peace. we shall figh

but as we head to 9/11, the 18th anniversary, an issue like nato is on my mind because of what nato was prepared to do. and it's the only time nato involved article 5. and nick burns, who was then our ambassador to nato, we've had a slew of excellent ambassadors, nick burns, who is a professor at harvard and runs the foreign policy group for aspen newt, nick burns said he didn't ask, he was just told we're invoking article 5. that's pretty darn amazing. richard, we haven't talked about congress. you did work there in one lifetime for a hero of mine named john mccain -- >> two lifetimes. >> two lifetimes. whose voice is sorely missed right now. i would like you to think about john mccain and what john mccain taught so many of us about foreign policy. for anyone who missed this movie, another movie, john mccain was the leader of many congressional delegations on international trips. i went on at least ten of his codels to the munich security conference in munich, germany, in february. and then i've attended it another decade since. but john mccain, among other things, was the pid piper of

this is not just about nato.i will leave the questions with that >> jacobs question the austrians figtree did succeed in getting the russians out of austria. i have to say i've never had a single austrian complained to me about you great powers doing deals above our heads. i think they are all delighted by how that all turned out. george, you got the floor. >> thank you, vice president here at the center for the natural interest. thank you john for your remarks. very enlightening and i think somewhat controversial and i want to ask you a question about one point in your argument. that is that russia basically has the lower hand as opposed to the upper hand when it comes to developments in ukraine's east end the war. in that for a variety of reasons russia is under a lot of pressure to try to find a face-saving way out. i can understand the argument as you presented it but i think there is probably a strong school of thought that says the opposite. that in fact what's happened in ukraine as expressed in zelinski's

sees it as a full commitment to financial commitments to see the nato budget. indeed and interesting the point that you made peter that we heard the u.s. vice president not only touch on the 2nd world war which broke out 80 years ago but the more than 40 years the communists who have soviet rule that poland suffered under as well and that was a central part of his speech as well perhaps not entirely expected in the weight that we've seen in the other speeches and referring very much to sort of the if you will the christian spirit which which mike pence clearly believes like many poles clearly believe was that was the essential force of the allowing them to to battle against communism and to prevail against communism it was a it was a speech i mean there was a sentence nobody can understand history without its jesus and there were several sentences like that that would have been you know very close to the hearts of many poles but. it's. it's not necessarily the kind of thing you hear every day in political language here in germany for example it's not. as you sa

is something that concerns nato.o official based in a western european capital says, putin wants back in the g-8. he is testing irresponsible weapons systems. a nato officials says, the current leadership of the west appears to be okay with ignoring this incident. shooting nuclear reactors into the sky, poses a danger to everyone. to follow this disastrous aggression with trump suggests russia's reinstatement means putin doesn't need to fear sanctions. now we have the latest insult to add to the injury to pile on top of the ongoing mystery here about this russian disaster. putin was at eastern economic forum. he was discussing this experimental nuclear powered missile, specifically he was saying he has discussed this experimental nuclear powered missile with u.s. president donald trump. he says he discussed it with trump because he is planning on making the united states buy it. he says the united states is going to pay for these missiles. he said at the session today alongside the leaders of india and japan, i told

all nato. you know this is one of the reactions of the u.s. that germany is too slow to spend the 2 percent because the government has agreed to spend a 2 percent you know we're happy that these troops will leave germany it is really a pity that they're going to poland at home you know their poland will see what they have from these troops they will suffering from them they're destroying the environment their aggressions against women and all the consequences for the military base and other countries means so it is definitely another aggression against russia it is enlarging the confrontation to russia and this is definitely the opposite of a politics of common security which we need in europe so it is a deep deep step in the wrong direction helping other issues around trade tariffs the nordstrom to gas pipeline from russia germany which has many german u.s. ties not as strong as they once were what consequences do you 1st see that this latest development may. you know the consequence is that the trust between russia and the western european c

we are forcing it into nato.sia has every right to defend sot land that they spent much blood and treasure for in world war ii. plain and simple, it is their land and they will hold it. host: quick response? guest: let me start with fascism in ukraine. there are some worrying developments with white supremacy, fascism, and white nazism in ukraine as around the rest of the world, including our own country. in ukraine, they enjoy very little electoral support and do not have anyone in parliament. they were not able to meet the parliamentary threshold. the united states state department has categorized it as a neo-nazi hate group. we are very clear on what is going on with fascism and nazism. regarding ukraine's sovereignty, it is an independent nation and has been for 30 years. culture,s own history, and traditions. at theans would bristle idea that because they were part of the soviet union and the russian empire that they do not have a right to self-determination, which is the agreement and international law, tha

part of nato.certainly they are not going to let us down if we get into a problem here. they've got our backs. we told the georgians, don't get into a war. condoleezza rice said to the georgian president, don't attack. don't fall for the russian trap. what did suckers really here? what he heard was, yes i know. don't attack the russians that would be bad. but the words were used said one thing, the actions that we took going there meeting with him said something else and that something else said, you really matter to the united states. so what did he do? he decided that he could use the security umbrella to go recover some of the separate of states and georgia that had long peeled away from the central georgian government so he attacked first, the russians were waiting for him. they knew what might be coming they counter invaded, took over these separatist territories recognize their independence so we wound up in a war that we were trying to deter. why? i would argue that it's because we had the w

part of nato. so these are all signals that according to that dominant paradigm should have caused the kremlin to say issue need to look elsewhere for my ambitions, but instead what happened? a very complicated situation, a complex system dynamics problem occurred. the georgians red all this and said, i wow, we're presenter. the president of the united states carolina about georgia. he visits me. talks to me on the phone, condoleezza rice, the national security advisedder, secretary of state, comes to georgia. wow. we matter. and certainly they're not going to let us down if we get into a problem here. they got our backs. now, we told the georgians don't get into a war. condoleezza rice said to georgian president, adopt attack, don't fall for the russian trap, right? what did he snaer he heard, yeah,ishing know-dope attack the russians, that would be bad. but the words we used said one thing. the actions we took going there, beating with him, said something else and that something else said you rea

support, public support for nato in order to maintain or increase the use commitment to nato is not at its highest level in 45 years. u.s. support for nato as an essential to american security in size since we first asked the question in 2002. u.s. support for alliances in asia and in the middle east remains extremely high, as does the question of whether the u.s. should use its troops to defend its allies. in all his ways public opinion remains robustly supportive of alliances. the second way which we try to maintain this order pursuant open economic system based on the concept of trade. and again, the u.s. public is more supportive of trade now that it has been adding time we've asked questions about trade, including on the bleep trade is good for the american economy. 87% of americans, that's, that's a large number, 87% of americans think that trade is good for the u.s. economy and it's good for american companies. and then finally one of of the things we did in this report, we've been asking the question which actually comes from dallas so goes back to 1946, should the united state

nato on one side taleban on the other side. you know there's no disagreement in terms of the outcome now but i'm just there's disagreement you get there but the afghan government's forces and it doesn't it's. going to ask you i mean how do you reconcile those to the afghan government wants to respect women's rights for example and we know that the telly bought they're not known for doing that at all so are they going to change a fundament of their thinking or can these 2 opposing ideas be expected to live in peace to to co-exist in afghanistan peacefully. right well when you look at actual behaviors you see a much more mixed picture than than than what you presented of course on the ground in afghanistan and this is exactly what a confidence building approach is important that all sides. the u.s. and nato the afghan government and the taleban need to demonstrate that they can make it to and maintain credible commitments that lead step by step towards reductions in violence and ultimately toss towards a political settlement in a

become part of nato.these are all signals that according to that dominant paradigm should have caused the kremlin to say, that's not where i want to go i want to look elsewhere for my ambitions. but instead what happened? a very complicated situation, a complex system dynamic problem occurred. the georgians read all this and said, wow, we are important. the president of the united states cares about georgia. he visits me. he talks to me on the phone. condoleezza rice the national security advisor, secretary of state comes to georgia. wow. we matter. in her certainly they are not going to let us down if we get into a problem. they've got our backs. we told the georgians, don't get into a war. condoleezza rice said to the georgian president, don't attack. don't fall for the russian trap. what he heard was, i know, don't attack the russians, that would be bad. but the words we use said one thing, the actions that we took going there when meeting with him said something else and that something else said you r

united states has more friends and allies than any other power in the world because of nato.in different missions operations, so especially in, growing china it is important as we maintain that stand up for free, open societies. >> mr. secretary general good to see you. thank you for joining us secretary general stoltenberg massive uaw strike against general motors dealerships running out of parts grady trimble in detroit with patriot now grady. reporter: maria, i am standing in front of the renaissance center gm headquarters also where the contract negotiations have been going on, we are told the two sides are closer than ever to reaching an deal, talks have moved up the chain to the top negotiations on both sides we are tolls we have been talking about picket line how the picket line has essentially become a mandatory campaign stop, for the 2020 democratic hopefuls bernie sanders here in detroit yesterday calling for justice for workers, bringing up the issues of pay, health care and the fact that gm and other automakerss have been closing plants in u.s. moving to other cou

is again beings substituted by a rule that nato. practices as it continues thinking in terms of searching for enemies while moving its military infrastructure to the east towards russia and increasing its military budgets although they exceed the russian one by 20 times we call a nato to return to the agreements on shipping equal and into visible security in the o.e.c.d. area recently a number of high ranking european politicians have been speaking in favor of this in particular this was demonstrated during the meeting between the presidents of russia and france in august the asia pacific region is a reliable and open security infrastructure architecture as well it is dangerous to yield to the temptation of dividing it into conflicting blocks such attempts will be at odds with the task of dividing it into conflicting blocks such attempts will be at odds with the task of the uniting countries in the region in order to effectively addressing continuing threats and challenges there including the task of resolving the whole range of iss

strike a blow against cyber criminals and pull the plug on a huge illegal data center set up in an old nato bunker. i'm nick spicer thanks for joining us in washington the battle between the white house and congressional democrats intensified on friday 3 investigative committees subpoenaed secretary of state might bump a 0 for documents related to that controversial phone call between president trump and the president of ukraine but trump is hitting back. the show is carrying on as normal at the white house president trump mading hispanic community late is a key voting group who needs to win in 2020. crisis what crisis was put away from the cameras the president is right his anger directed at the man now leading the impeachment inquiry gainst him on twitter trump right adam schiff must resign and be investigated he's been doing this for 2 years he's a sick man. chairmanships committee is now in overdrive the california democrat has signaled he came to hear from key witnesses as soon as possible and that from the president's inner circle we know there are many other witnesses to this conduct

as part of a global coalition against isis global coalition in nato and several other coalitions with many of the same members whose total g.d.p. is roughly double that of the united states that we should not be paying the burden that we're paying and that is simply a view of his it was a view expressed for example in the nato 2 percent by the obama administration before him and it's a view that is held by the american people the american people do not like the deal in which we have to pay a disproportionately high percent of the costs as well as be in most of the military risk. and losses in these international conflicts that's simply the way it is and i just go back to the issue of justice. because there is some of the willingness to look at allegations of war crimes committed by the coalition in syria amnesty international report that was prime the facia evidence that several coalition at that killed and injured civilians may flouted international humanitarian. be investigated this all 1st of all i'm not a lawyer but. international humanitarian law is not law. it is a political the

phase could be done by perfectly competent forces from other coalition countries many of whom are nato countries we know the qualities a true i i that's what he wanted he told us to go out and find our country why couldn't they come up with say 500 or 600 or few more numbers of troops not a bad question however the answer we had to tell him was they would not commit to forces unless there were some american 4 cases the statement in december we have won against isis we've beaten them and beaten them badly and hasn't been borne out by defense and it was left last month to the lead inspector general of your anti isis in the haven't result of operation to inform congress of an altogether different reality you know in the history of 50 years roughly that i've been involved in wars. i have really seen a statement by any victorious political force that is more close to the truth than what donald trump said isis was unique in a way that focused the international's attention from 2014 until about march of this year whereas we all forgot about al qaeda why because it had gone away no i actually

the husband a problem since the beginning of nato. every president since harry truman has complained that the europeans are not paying enough. none of them have done it quite president trump house but the sentiment is not original within because it goes back to the beginning of nato. that comes with the territory. you can get somewhere with europeans by nagging and it's worth nagging them, in the end, the united states will have to pay more than its fair share in europe of the cost of the nato alliance and containing russia. i don't think those costs need be prohibited because russia is not the soviet union, but there is always going to be a grievance on the american side and a justified one as long as the alliance continues. east asia is a little different, the countries are really frightened of china and they are spending more on defense unlike the europeans. although there has never been a pan-european security organization in the east asia has always bilateral relations between the united states and other important east asian coun

see here in the video yet the estimates more than 91000000 people in russia the united states and nato allied countries might be killed or injured within 3 hours following a single nuclear warning shot 91000000 people and that doesn't even take into account the deaths from nuclear fallout and all the other long term health and environmental effects from a full on nucular exchange it's sobering videos and statistics like these that remind us that it isn't duck and cover that will keep us safe. it's watching the hawks. what is. the. real thing it's like. as the plot of. the day like you that i got. with. this. well they were going to watching the hawks i am tired robot and i'm happy to watch this. dramatic video aerobatic pretty well then we will forget just how big these like air strikes like it's nice to sit and say in your in your comfy house your comfy apartment and say well you know i just think we should bomb iran i mean what's the big deal anguish totally newcome newcome up i mean we've heard people we've had people say that this doesn't say yes that is a great idea with that ther

in 2014 in the prior -- in the obama administration the nato countries voluntarily agreed that their target tore defense expenditures would be 2% of gdp and often commit to people by 2024, ten years later. when the trump administration came in, that commitment achieved a much higher sale in the obama administration. i think all would agree on that. the nato secretary-general reported as a result of the pressure that's been applied, a aggregate from january 2017 forward have increased over 100 billion dollar. that's ex the united states. that's significant, some countries aren't at 2% and have no bath to get to it in 2014. implicitly if we are allowing nato members not to live up to that commitment, while we're spending over 4% of our gdp on global defense, we are subsidizing european welfare systems. that's a very hard case to make to the american people. all we're saying to others is, if you believe in your own self-defense, live up to the commitment you voluntarily made. i remember one european leader at the nato summit in 2018 said, well, we were trying to move up to get closer to

from nato and the usa and not angels. these are the same people the u.s. military and nato has been spending sending there for the last 17 years but the difference is as a contractor they can go and attach to the same unit and live in the same valley and live and work and train and fight with those guys with afghan counterparts month after month for years so they have that continuity is that 2nd resume the afghan government they don't like your plan they say it's a nonstarter they said under no circumstances will we allow the war to become a quote private for profit business to form afghan president hamid karzai said even when the opposes your proposal i think you would say differently if you asked him now i literally asked his office on friday and they said they're dead against it. but i've talked to other people i've talked to other people his office who disagree with ok the current office and government here say things their position is well. under no circumstance i doubt very much that ashraf ghani will win in the next election but you're waiting for a

send to it to nato at @nato, and then it's gone. >> anthony: really?r there? >> akram: it's out of the movies. >> anthony: did anyone think it was possible that in their lifetime they were going to see the end of this son of a bitch? most people are telling me they never dreamed. >> akram: i don't know if you can call them dreams, hopes, wishes. it was just something in the sky. something i look at every night. >> anthony: right. >> akram: but when i hit that point and got into misrata and stood on gaddafi's body, any dream will come true. >> anthony: what's the situation now? >> akram: uh, it's fluid. it can swing any direction. >> anthony: well, look, what happened in benghazi a few months ago, i mean, what does this mean to the country? >> akram: i think there is a dark, mysterious hand who doesn't like this country to prosper. they see system and organization as a big enemy to them. these dark hands are slowly getting diminished. >> anthony: how -- >> akram: it's a matter of time before we can get rid of them. >> anthony: how hard do you think that

nato troops in afghanistan. when that unfortunate incident happened with the american soldier being killed, the romanian soldier was killed at the same time. this has been a nato operation from day one. the idea that we should be negotiating without any regard for those who have suffered as greatly as us, who have also been attacked by isis which is now active in afghanistan, it just demonstrates that there really hasn't been a process or much thinking to the afghan policy, but more largely just demonstrates that people are free wheeling in this administration. it's not just that john bolton wasn't doing the honest brokering that a national security adviser does, it's that everyone is doing their own thing without much coordination from the president to the secretary of state to the national security adviser who became his own diplomat. henry kissinger said the only way you can avoid confrontations and disagreements between the national security adviser and the secretary of state, is if it's the same person whic

nato is actually stronger today. there are political tensions.ons have always been there in nato where the american presidents -- i remember all the way back to president clinton when i became aware of this issue -- president clinton, president bush, president obama all saying the same thing president trump is. you've got to pay more. the way i carried the message to nato when i first went there as the secretary of defense was i've sat in this room and you've heard this message before. but the american people are saying they will not care more about your children's future than you care. you've got to pay your fair share. >> in your resignation letter, returning to that, you clearly were making this message you didn't want to abandon allies. >> that's true. >> the allies on the ground in syria. the brits were there, they were blindsided by that decision in december. i know that for a fact. as you know, better than i do. importantly, the troops that we were training, the syrian defense forces, and now there's an inspector general report, the most r

nato and other country veterans difference between the between blackwater and nato i'm sorry by saying i don't think you're that sharp that you can tell the difference between a polish guy a french guy or you name your that sharp to tell the difference well thank you thank you very much i did time to go but i'm sure you are going to be very retract if you're going to agree before this because i would carry on with your i carry on with you wouldn't go to the debate with a tie in the suit. so i've got to be in war since i was in one fighting 20 international terrorist groups since 2014 the afghan national security forces have been doing this by themselves so how do you justify that you'll get a contract and go and do the war in afghanistan given that you're making money out of this business and you don't ever want to conclude this business there and one point please do us a favor and have a bold line between the centers of the democracy is totally up to the people of afghanistan to decide who is their next president thank you are you ready for. you after yourself and you believe the afgh

president olds back military assistance to ukraine, through nato and instrumentalities, ongress must insist on transparency on any conversations that relate to our cooperation with the nation of ukraine. lease let me remind, after the collapse of communist russia in the officially known as union of soviet socialist ukraine became a free nation. had a chance to be. ukraine had been occupied for history by russia its jagged path forward to the free world, a been torturous, setbacks,ith dangerous on ill be a permanent block american history that certain americans, including president manager, paul n manafort, and others were the ved in supporting corrupt, pro-russian political operatives in ukraine and doing earn money, millions and kremlin of dollars from allies. liberty.bomination to since ukraine's revolution of ignity five years ago, the ukrainian people have bravely demonstrated their resolute to their their nation's democratic future. the latest example is the recent historic presidential and parliamentary elections in international observers lauded as free and fair. progress. ukr

nato and other country veterans difference between the between blackwater and nato i'm sorry by saying i don't think you're that sharp that you can tell the difference between a polish guy a french guy or you need a yard and sharp to tell the difference well thank you i've always wanted. to do was always a very very retract if you're going to agree before this because i would carry on with your i carry on with your audience will go to the debate with the tie in the suit. so i've got to be. on one fighting 20 international terrorist groups since 2014 the afghan national security forces have been doing this by themselves so how do you justify that you'll get a contract and go and do the war in afghanistan given that you're making money out of this business and you don't ever want to conclude this business there and one point please do us a favor and have a bold line between the centers of the democracy and it's totally up to the people of afghanistan to decide who is their next president thank you are you ready for. you after yourself and you believe the afghans don't want nothing like t