china. they have an instrument of domination that the other two do not. russia has no allies in europe, china has a lot of willing economic partners but does not have alleys or countries that would like to see it become dominant power in the region. but tehran does have alleys in the person of the shieh population spread around the region. it has sponsored and trained shieh power military forces such as hezbollah and lebanon which is taken over the country. so iran exercises a proxy control and lebanon and exercises considerable control from shieh militia in iraq, and exercises considerable control through the sponsorship of asad who is become an honorary shieh even though he is in our light, and exercises a certain amount of leverage in yemen to the sponsorship of the who do you movement. although the mechanism is somewhat different, the aim is the same, the goal is the same and as i said, iran has achieved some success in the middle east extending its influence. that brings us to the end of the formal session. thank you to all of you for coming and thinks to c

security council we treat them just the same russia and china but they are different china tends to support russia when it vetoes on syria russia does tend to take the lead on these middle east issues in the security council with regard to those 2 countries but i think the bigger story although you see the theatricals in the security council and vetoes and whatever and we always focus on russia the biggest story here potentially though is the rise of china they have just joined the security council in the last month much more vocal russia is china is is in general much more vocal much more assured when it comes to international affairs than just a few years ago china used to sit on the sidelines and say not as much they are now trying to deliver a much more assertive posture on issues not just economic issues but political issues and involvement at the united nations and it's worth reminding you that the u.n. secretary general raised the divisions between the u.s. and china in his speech on choose day here at the u.n. and warned of 2 competing worlds one led by the u.s. and one led by china

was still progressing but today we have a very strong russia and a very strong china i don't necessarily believe that there is going to the world of eloquence of multipolar about i always believe that the wells will be comprised of the 2 superpowers russia and america i don't attach much importance to the other great countries later i mean i think a very strong case can be made basically a topic for another program that i see are a bipolar world it will be a chinese han world it will be a competing west ok what the west will be made of but it comprises of is a different topic altogether and very very complicated but robert there really there isn't a recognition within the american foreign policy blob that multilateralism it is coming into being i mean and i think this. in this case this explains a lot of the aggression coming out of washington in its western allies where i'm thinking about iran i'm thinking of i'm in because then. window the unit polar moment it might even be already close to ok we're in something different is coming about and that that accounts explains why

it's being balanced i mean if you have what's going to happen once once the turn really face russia and china on their own territory they're going back you are likely to russia have a diff slightly different a game here i mean russia and china are purely defensive right now they're not exporting ideology they're not exporting their model they're none of those things they want to survive as the old as the world order evolves and it's going to be very. unstable it could be reckless and i'm thinking of brussels and washington as they see their power slipping through their fingers and you know. what's worse about this is that the american exceptionalism see it reminds me of what. during the after the 2nd world war in eastern europe and said that the gay. of socialism cannot be lost ok because that is what history has in one direction ok the burden is going to end so i feel that this is the same kind of mindset that you have with washington is that the the order that they created is the order that was ordained by american exceptionalism and the bolton the line ok that isn't true and that's what ma

from a leading superpower and all elements of a comprehensive strategic partnership between china and russia. meanwhile back on the ranch our president has pulled us out of the jay c.p.o. a new treaty impose sanctions on iran and terror of sun china and he abides the regime change meddling in venezuela and elsewhere is this erratic administration plus emerging eurasian collaboration the perfect storm that can sink the u.s. dollar as the world's preeminent currency and our leadership among nations let's ask our t. defense expert longtime pentagon official michael maloof and peter schiff chief economist and global strategist at euro pacific capital a welcome both and michael during the recent g. 7 meeting i couldn't resist the temptation i muted my t.v. and to me the body language was very telling is it my imagination or are other world leaders merely tolerating trumps before. well they're they're trying to be polite to answer your question but but on the other hand they are looking in other directions they see that the united states has gone is going it alone with its america 1st approach whi

the catalyst for change came when we started to look at our competitive advantage relative to china and russia in 2014 and 2015 compared to what it was in 2000. i will not go into great length about this. happy to answer all your questions, but china and russia began to feel the wide range of capabilities designed against what they perceived to be our vulnerabilities. as we were focused on the fight against violent extremism, it began to feel these capabilities. even as early as 2015, the first classified military strategy we wrote in 2015 was focused on a 4+1. we now call it the 2+3. china,is now focused on russia, iran, north korea, violent extremism, and then we refined that with the national defense strategy to focus on great power competition. number one, clearly much and i and russia are the benchmark against which we measure our capability development, how we think about risk, and how we prioritize and allocate resources for the force today. that is the framework within which we do that. but priorities do not mean exclusivity. the priority is to deal with the challenges we have today --

and so we talk about russia/china. we almost -- it's almost like a hyphenated word russia-china. but when you look one level below that, you know, it's very different type of threats that they present. china presenting more of a maritime air threat. russia more of a conventional ground threat. and for the time being they are using the same concept, and essentially the same types of equipment to address both threats. my sense is, over time, that's going to become harder and harder as these threats diverge, as china becomes more capable and it's going to be hard to manage the duality of threat and maintaining your counterinsurgency capabilities. >> you talk a lot about successes and failures in the past and you mention fcs. can you dive a little bit deeper in terms of the successes and failures that we've seen in the past, and do you think the army is applying lessons learned from those? >> yes. so i'll talk about some of the -- i don't know if you want to call them failures. it's so pejorative. i start out in the paper talking about the pan tommic division, which reaction to presi

and a major international military drill gets underway in russia with russia china and india that's a surprise to us also to come on american street where sparks outrage by using the names of school shootings took place on the new range of get reaction from a relative of one of the victims i lost my brother in 25 other families for forever . i think that shows what type of person you are people side by those close so i think they're going to do very poorly if they decide to sell their clothes. good morning it's 11 o'clock here in moscow you're watching international the facebook c.e.o. mark zuckerberg has met with the president on trial. as part of his d.c. tour social media platforms chief is looking to defend his company amid mounting criticism by lawmakers over privacy issues and data protection facebook has been facing a number of legal battles in a recent case where a band user accused the social media giant of defamation facebook argued it was a publisher and hence had the right to choose what content to put out previously the company had claimed it is a platform and therefore n

that would include russia and china. they've all developed capabilities that threaten our space capabilities. day ising we do every somehow affected by space. we know that in the commercial and military sector. and military are commanded control systems. our ability to deliver and navigate are dependent on space. recognition, of the fact that space is no longer uncontested, number one, that will inform the capabilities in the future in a way that will allow them to survive in a contested area. now, we want to make sure we have the redundancy and protection in place to sustain the capabilities we have. the short answer to your question is, there is a real threat to the capabilities we have in space. therefore, a real threat to our commercial and military quitests that are an extra linked to space. -- inextricably linked to space. 20 our strikes, we let our guests go and we know you have much to do. i want to thank you for spending the time and going into such depth and breadth. thank you for the many years of your service

you know russia you know the manpower was in the world america russia china. and if these 3 people was just. they can dissolve most of the world issues and specifically this issue which which which potentially is is the most explosive issue in the world today and if these 3 people always get together i think they can resolve it arms deals are being provided by russia to both india and pakistan is this a double standard when it comes to resolve an issue specifically as you say of kashmir well certainly the arms deals all of the. question of the monon supply you know we shouldn't expect too much we're ality when it comes to selling arms. but but you know i repeat this is very serious the school will go very wrong this conflict between pakistan india simply because you know we are 2 countries who have nuclear weapons and that's why i think there is a big incentive for the world to step in what is pakistan's nuclear strategy that was recently misquoted is it no nuclear 1st strike policy or does it depend on the circumstances. look i can't say. you know i never in

we talk about russia and china. it's almost a high sit -- a hyphenated word, russia-china. one level below that they represent different threats. china representing a maritime and air threats, russia more of a conventional ground threat. for the time being, they are using the same concept and same types of equipment to address both threats. my senses, over time, that will be harder as the threats diverge and china becomes more capable. it will be harder to manage that duality of threat while also maintaining a counterinsurgency capability. >> you talk a lot about successes and failures. you mention fcs, can you dive deeper into the successes and failures that we have seen in the past? do you think the army is applying lessons learned? >> yes. i don't like calling them failures because it's so pejorative, but i start talking about the pentatonic division, which is the focus on nuclear weapons under eisenhower and how the army was in danger of becoming irrelevant. the chief of staff was persuaded to change his entire force and focus on nuclear warfare. so he created the pentat

countries like russia like china like india and european countries this should be rectified otherwise we cannot have. an international economic order based on the fair competition on fortunately the reality is that you're facing with the disease in the white house and. now we see that there is a there is a tendency by the major countries we have the summit between president putin and the president of china and we have other engagements in a devoted levon that they would try to in fact diminish the influence of the u.s. dollar over the international market that's a determination that we see video major powers in the even european union the reality is that the people around the world or very anxious and or very angry about the policy of the united states that in fact they want to pressurise all countries to be in line with their policies or get your prize implications in a 2nd when you were one of the negotiators of the j.c. p.o. a nuclear deal with the p 5 plus one well the opponents of you even participating in those negotiations saying don't trust them there's no point in being a neg

so how can president trump put pressure on china and russia to stop funding iran?i think it's working. i think if he can get the europeans to join the leadership of the u.s., russia and china will have no choice but to join them. arthel: okay. what do you think of israel's election? >> oh, we are very proud of our democracy. it's not a perfect system, but it is the best one we have. hopefully, in the next few weeks we will have a government, and we'll continue to strive for a successful economy, but with politics it's complicated. arthel: will everybody accept the outcome? >> absolutely. we always accept the outcome of the elections, but it's problematic because we have no winner in this election. maybe there will be a unity government, maybe there will be -- [inaudible] we will have to wait a few weeks for that. arthel: okay. word, we'll get you back then. -- ambassador, we'll get you back then. eric -- oh, no, i actually have something. i want to let everybody know tomorrow, yes, a big deal, catch two big interviews about the situation there in iran with iran. se

china. the persistence of a weak but troublesome russia. i'd like to draw you out on how we should think b about this notion of competition. with china and russia, maybe we should deal with them separately. and the practical priority steps for both the intelligence community and the defense community to really make that shift and focus. >> yeah, thanks. that was a great question. i think at a very high level, i think this is the competition is about influence, ideas and control of technology and perhaps the internet and some other things here, so at a high level, i think that's what the great power competition really means. certainly at the military level, we look at it as a competition for maintaining competitive advantages. i don't just mean weapons systems, but it also means other things like access facing overflight. it involves influence. it involves partnerships. there's a lot to be said for united states having head of the line privileges at the suez canal. that's the result of a long-term relationship with egypt. and maintaining that

that means china and russia has to receive 34% of the budget. well, if you take 33% plus 34% 34% of the budget, because otherwise you wouldn't be prioritizing china or russia over the other priorities. well, if you take 33% plus 34% plus 34%, you just busted 100% of the dod budget and you didn't spend anything on the other two priorities. so this gives us a deductive threshold we can use to try to parse dod's budget. the contingency budget provides us the reasonable proxy measure for countering violent extremism because most of the budget money from the oco budget goes to the countering violent extremism part of the strategy. so what we're really trying to do here is try to figure out whether or not the oco exceeds 32% of dod spending. it turns out it's not even close. the oco budget is roughly 8% of the current eod budget, far below the 32% threshold that would be necessary in order to invalidate the strategy. so based on the simple oco test, it appears that the budget does align with the priorities outlined in the strategy. now in the report, i

intends to constrain china and russia to deter china and russia to try to figure out how to pressurise china and russia we in moscow understand this perfectly and have not i have no doubt that people in beijing equally see what is going on so this is a game which is not that tricky for us that the u.s. is playing currently ok that's very good that we understand one other say trying to you also mentioned another very important agreement regarding global security i would say the new start treaty will expire in february 2021 more will happen next. i am hopeful that we still would be able to extend the treaty beyond that you know benchmark the. remember november 3rd next year the next presidential election in the us is due it means that sometime closer to the end of january 2021. the next president of the united states will be inaugurated. it is not possible i would say very you know straightforwardly to expect any new administration of the u.s. to take a decision of that magnitude between the inauguration of the president in january and february 5 we should act now before the u.s. is full

neighboring countries we have a very good relationship with russia with china up with india and pakistan we have exchange of presidents and summit meetings. we have a very good friend relationship be divied iraq with the central asian countries as you said in best in tajikistan we haue illustrated in dollars the reality is that this is the this is a phenomenon that we are facing in the international at the international level we know that even european countries are conscious about the fact that this is a problem for everybody that they are very much vulnerable to the in fact influence of us dollar we know that many countries are working very seriously that how can they can rectify this china and russia as the major countries and also india very recently and so many other countries are thinking that how they can make their trade relationship through not u.s. dollar what through the national currencies we have had a number of initiatives agreed with other countries like india pakistan and tell key and some others that russia and china that we can use our national currencies and we should

russia and china have vetoed a u.n. security council resolution demanding a truce in northwest syria it called for an end to hostilities and it led the last rebel held province russia is the assad government's main ally this is its 13th security council veto in relation to the syrian conflict at the mass again sir james bass has this reports. about the bands here are you going to use your features you will see it was clear by the time the russian ambassador arrived at the security council that he was likely to yet again use his veto on a resolution about syria. 3 members of the security council kuwait germany and belgium have been working on a resolution calling for a cease fire need lived for over a month their draft allowed for what they called counterterrorism operations but only if they didn't breach international law is there a chance for last minute negotiations to avoid a russian veto at this stage we do everything possible to reach our goal and that is to protect civilians and have international humanitarian law

know towing one's lot in with with one so it would actually be maybe especially for russia or in russia china relationship but if russia tried to deal with the problems you know around its own borders when it tried to deal with us russia that's where the relationship however difficult it is in a way that made it possible to leverage both sides i think that would be an immense advantage for russia and probably lead to broader stability in terms of the world over a few years ago you described my country as a dissatisfied scavenger on the fringes of the current order and it's evident to me that you didn't try to hide the ideas they had there but don't you think that this scavenger as you put it may prove to be a crucial to both china and the united states as the balance or if the rivalry indeed continues to depend i'm sorry for that formulation but what i was trying to say is that the way russia has spent over the post decade or so is very much not engaging with what are the central issues in terms of global governance but broader issues that have to do immediately with its own beliefs is natura

and a major international military exercise in central russia enters its final stage which china and india among the participants. a very warm welcome to the program from all of us here at r t h q in moscow thanks for joining us this hour. facebook c.e.o. mark zuckerberg has met with president donald trump as part of his d.c. tour the social media platforms chief is looking to defend his company amid mounting criticism by lawmakers are privacy issues and data protection and a recent legal case facebook claimed it is a publisher and is therefore allowed to ban who it once but potentially that would also make it liable for what goes out on its platform responsibility its previously tried to dodge it trying to look at the potential ramifications. water out of we here. that's better. plaintive ultra right activist laura luma who was taken off pretty much all major online platforms defendant facebook one of the giants which kicked her out we carefully flicked through these court papers which the defendant filed could fly and bury the lawsuit and here's what really caught the eye. to the e

and so we talk about russia and china. it's almost like a hyphenated word, him russia-china. when you look one level below that, it's different types of threats they present. china representing more of an air time war threat and russia more of a conventional ground threat and for the time being, they are using the same concept and essentially the same types of equipment to address both threats. my sense is over time that will become harder and harder as these threats diverge and china becomes more and more capable and it's going to be hard to manage that duality of threat and also maintain your counterinsurgency capabilities. ms. hudson: you talk a lot about successes and failures and mention f.c.s. can you dive deeper in terms of the successes and failures we've seen in the past and do you think the army is applying lessons learned from those? mr. spoehr: yes. so i'll talk about some of the -- i don't know whether you want to call them failures because it's so pejorative. i talk about talking about the pentomic division, this reaction to president eisenhower's focus on nuclea

from the world stage has resulted in the rise of five new powers, and certain western values, russia, china, turkey, iran and radical groups. >> good evening everybody and welcome. i am jesse, one of the rabbis here. by show of hands, how many of you is this your first time here? welcome. for those of you who are new let's give you a bit of her history. the building open at the synagogue in 1908 in about 50 years later it became the home to the memorial ame church in a 2002 it was almost sold to someone who wanted to turn it into a nightclub. it was saved within 24 hours in a building in search of a mission. today's it is a center for arts and culture in entertainment and ideas in a synagogue that reimagines jewish life and religion and community in the 21st century. if you want to explore the past programs you can check out our podcast on itunes which features a conversation with a recent guest including howard schulte, doran door screens goodwin. and i'm delighted to welcome tonight's guest, he is a philosopher of public intellectual and an author with a distinctive view of world history

now one resolution was backed by germany kuwait and belgium and that resolution was vetoed by russia and china then a joint resolution from russia and china regarding it was put forward and that resolution was also rejected vetoed by members of the security council so what was the difference between these 2 resolutions regarding the situation well both sides and both different resolutions called for a ceasefire there is universal agreement that there needs to be a cease fire in the issue of disagreement was the terrorists now the resolution put forward by russia and china specified that the syrian government had the right to continue fighting against the terrorists and anti terrorist operations should continue and as the debate ensued it became pretty clear that there was pretty solid disagreement about what was designated as a terrorist and what was designated as just syrian opposition this is some of what happened in the security council chamber. unfortunately the content of the draft on the course of the work on it is a clear indication of the real objective of our colleagues which is to sa