turning to the other huge issue in the middle east, you know, there are a lot of fault lines in the middle east. there are certainly auutautocra and people yearning for democracy. there's also a sectarian fault line. and i think we just need to be a little more honest about what we're doing in the middle east and understand that as much as i'd like to impose our agenda on the middle east, we can't. do you remember those days back in 2003, 2004, when we had otherwise serious people in serious positions saying, we are going to create an iraq, a city on the hill that the other arab states would admire and ultimately would see that model as something that they want to follow. well, iraq is a shia majority state. the rest of the middle east, every single country putting aside syria, is sunni run. do you truly think the sunni arab states are inspired by the example of shia led iraq? they are not. and so just kind of missing basic facts like that i think had a huge effect. so i think, you know, since we're in an educational establishment, we should start by doing our homework and understand what

next, a discussion about the united states's policy towards the middle east. indiana university recently held a conference on the united states's role in the world. this is about one hour, 10 minutes. >> ok, good morning and welcome to the second session of the america's role in the world conference. the hussein banai, assistant professor here at the indiana university department of international studies. i have the pleasure of moderating this very distinguished panel. before i get into the introduction of our panelists, i thought it would be best to kind of setup the main subject matter of our panel, which is america's role in the middle east. very these, we could positively argue, i think, we are not for america's role in the middle east. wonck obama would not have the presidency in 2008, if not for the then-state senator barack obama's role in iraq, which hillary clinton authorized. he would've had a difficult way of distinguishing himself as the main rival for the democratic nomination. the iraq war and its aftermath than the was as much a litmus test on pr

policy on human rights in the middle east and also oversaw the middle east partnership initiative and serve as deputy special coordinate for her to middle east transition and central to organizing the u.s. government's response to the arab awakening. she is the author of freedoms' unsteady march. america's role in building arar democracy and yet juror of how the palestinians palestinians ae israel -- she has a news in the atlantic in response 0 to the jeffrey goldberg article. ambassador is the founding director of the indiana university center for the study of the mideast and also proffer of the practice of interhandle law and diplomacy in the school of law here at iu. ambassador was appointed ambassador and deputy permanent representative to iraq to the u.n. in 2004. prior to his diplomatic appoints the ambassador served as a legal adviser to the iraqi minister for foreign awares during the negotiations for u.n. security council resolution 1546 which recognized theroo assertion of iraq of its sovereignty. also the principle legal are drafter of iraq's interim constitution, the law o

it was 1986 my left i probably wouldn't have gone to the middle east. i would've done the poland or moscow, but it wasn't. it was 1996. the middle east is probably going to be the story of my generation. i would say to you, go home and think about it for couple days comeau what will be the story of the next 20 years. maybe it's not the middle east. maybe it's the environment. google place we think the environment will be most impacted. think about where politics are going to be and then go there. >> would you say maybe africa? >> i think africa is interesting. i'm not sure if the next 20 years, going to the middle east, you may have missed it. in the last 15 years of her two major american ground wars in the middle east, one of which did not go particularly well with hundreds of thousands of troops cycling through. as a foreign correspondent, a unity better? probably not. i doubt the 100 1st airborne division will ever be deployed en masse to baghdad again in our lifetimes. i could be wrong, but i don't anticipate another iraq style work. look at the map

today could we do that again over the middle east? i don't know that we have the political unity in our own country to stand up for something like that in the same way. so i'll leave the answer to the questions to the audience. >> along those lines, the number one oil producer in the world now is the united states. >> oil producer. >> there are a number of people who say that allows us to change the way we look at the world, the way we look at the middle east. do you think there's anything about the way the u.s. looks to the world, the way the u.s. thinks about global security, is there anything that's changed because our oil production has into a global super barrel. >> i would give three imperatives to stay engaged in the middle east. the first one is oil. we may not be tied to mid east oil so much. but believe me, from washington to new york, from san francisco to miami, our economy is tied to the world. and if the world's economy was to see the oil coming out of the gulf disrupted, 40% of the globally traded oil of this globally tr

we tried to ignore the middle east, but the middle east could not ignore us. host: luanne, oklahoma city. good morning. caller: yes, sir. wanted -- the man who was talking earlier and talking about all of the wars we have be en in. when are we going to get our act together and do something. if we do not do something about these terrorists now, they will be here in our streets. host: congressman, what should be done? guest: everybody wants an immediate solution, and anyone who promises an immediate solution is leading us down the wrong road. there is no way to send over 200,000 troops and have it be done and all of a sudden, it is won world -- like we war ii. this is a problem. it is a problem that will come after us, and it has to be managed. youquestion is, how do manage it at the lowest -- the lives of our men and women of service. if it is in the news and we are involved, it seems like a day in twice 16 is like a day in 2003, but it is not. one person or two service people being killed over a couple years in a rock is different from losing -- in iraq is dif

the mideast is marginal. we're pivoting to the east. but even in the east and this is news that probably the white house should know, even in the east they're looking at what's happening in the middle east. when you sit with asian diplomats or asian politicians from singapore, china, et cetera, they will tell you, and i have these conversations, probably we all have these conversations. the way the u.s. is behaving in the mideast is telling us if in 20 years from now china takes over taiwan, or singapore in the sea of china, if we are able to count on the american protection. and this is the new world order. i mean, this is not something related to assad and the family and lebanon. this is something planetary. we are redesigning the equilibrium of the world. now, on the regional level, forget about the city guys, the saudis and the turks. they are murky, play with islamists. in every speech the department says that our aim in the middle east and in syria is to protect also and to, let's say, avoid and strengthen the fragility of states like lebanon, jordan, and et cetera. what are these states today living out of the syrian crisis? lebanon is on the verge of collapse. jordan is on

you just finished a book that seems to leaders in the middle east. hat have we learned what is the experience in your book? a >> the >> it's not only in the middle east. we won make a comment on the campaigns, but look at europe. one has already cited that she is in trouble so it is a global problem i think. it's always been going on and it studied some of them. i think that it's now tells me the question to the leader of the statesman and i think it needs to have a vision for the convictions and the ability to identify to make the bold decision to act on them and to be able to carry people with y you. remember in 1942 a very difficult year. it's been going on for a few months because the focus of the late of the politics shifted from london to washington and he knows that he does to america for a few months and does it and then of course during the war of independence state building and so forth. second, the leader of the right against the concessions when they saw the opportunity to make peace at the cost of sinai into signing the agreement she does

scale back america's involvement in and commitment to the middle east. he has tried to convince us the unfolding crisis in the middle east is simply a local problem, that our nation's core interests are not truly threatened, that the consequence of regional , hundreds of thousands dead in syria, sectarian strikes in iraq, all of these can be mitigated and contains. but the crisis in the middle east has not been contained. it has reached the streets of paris, brussels, and san bernardino. it has produced a refugee crisis that has destabilized europe and divided the west. it has given vladimir putin an opportunity to reassert russia as a global power through intervention in syria. foes andd america's allies to question our commitment. no more is this clearer than in the war against isil. we have achieved tactical operation against isil thanks to the excellence of military leadership and troops on the ground. but it is strategic, we always seem to be a step behind, a day late, a dollar short. isil has taken the strategic offensive, launching sophisticated at

turning to the other huge issue in the middle east, you know, there are a lot of fault lines in the middle east. there are certainly autocrats and people yearning for democracy. there's also a sectarian fault line. and i think we just need to be a little more honest about what we're doing in the middle east and understand that as much as i'd like to impose our agenda on the middle east, we can't. do you remember those days back in 2003, 2004, when we had otherwise serious people in serious positions saying, we are going to create an iraq, a city on the hill that the other arab states would admire and ultimately would see that model as something that they want to follow. well, iraq is a shia majority state. the rest of the middle east, every single country putting aside syria, is sunni run. do you truly think the sunni arab states are inspired by the example of shia led iraq? they are not. and so just kind of missing basic facts like that i think had a huge effect. so i think, you know, since we're in an educational establishment, we should start by doing our homework and understand what we

america's war for the greater middle east: a military history." in the book bacevich argues the , untied states has been involved in gigantic failed war with the middle east since the that continues today with no end 1980's in sight. amy: in the book andrew bacevich writes "as an american who cares , deeply about the fate of his country, i should state plainly my own assessment of this ongoing war, now well into its fourth decade. we have not won it. we are not winning it. simply trying harder is unlikely to produce a different outcome." bacevich is author of several other books, including "washington rules." his son was killed in action in iraq in 2007. professor bacevich, welcome back to democracy now! we will prevail. we will pull fail -- prevail. we will prevail. have we? >> we haven't. those are exquisitely chosen clips because they do illustrate what is the point of my book, a and that is that we have been engaged militarily in the greater middle east, and a large part of the islamic world, for going on for decades. we have engaged in innumer

it is clearly more difficult with relationships in the middle east. o ask you, how much of that can you honestly put on one person, on the obama administration? how much of that do you say is simply structural at this point? jane harman: he went to cairo and give a major speech at the start of his administration. which some did not like. i happened to like it. he talked about a way forward for the middle east. there did not seem to be much follow-through. i do not think there is an overarching narrative in the middle east. we do this little move here. part of it is retrenching from bush's adventurism, don't do stupid stuff, it is not foreign policy. do something that conveys to people that our values, our interests are wide across the middle east. i was going to say something else, and it relates mostly to saudi arabia. we have not talked about wavism, their invention of an extreme form of islam that is now being exported around and the , intellectual basis to the there is an intellectual basis for many of these terror movements. so saudi arabia made a

they need to get the caliph through the middle east. something we can't control just like we can't control the arab spring. >> it's a period of day turmoil but it's not clear that the united states could or should have reacted dramatically differently whether it would have been deeply successful. you got a bunch of sclerotic tyrannies not providing any good for their citizens and ultimately you had revolutions in these places. they haven't done particularly well, a lot of turmoil someone wrote a book about the j curve on you things often go down before they come back up. youity a lot of turmoil there and ones like saudi arabia that didn't have the turmoil have stayed sclerotic tyrannies and reforming which they aren't going to be anything they can do. so u.s. has tried whether invading and occupying whether inviting or not occupying or giving aid, they have the same outcome which is turmoil and chaos on the ground. the obama administration is saying basically we don't know how to deal with this and we'll wash our hands a little bit. >>

>> i would just give three imperatives for us to stay engaged in the middle east. the first one is oil. we may not be tied to middle east oil so much but believe me from washington to new york, san francisco to miami, our economy is tied to the world. and if the world's economy was to see the oil coming out of the gulf disrupted, 40% of the globally traded oil of this globally traded commodity we would get a terrible impact, not only on the world economy but it would immediately impact here at home. so, there's an economic reason to stay engaged out there. there's also a diplomatic reason and if we want the nations with us on so many other issues we can't ignore them when they've got serious issues. a third would be security. are we really so long from 9/11 that we've forgotten what it was like to look over at the pentagon with smoke pouring out of it? i'd suggest we're not that far removed from it. no nation on its own provides security in this world. no nation in a globalized world, actually ever, but certainly not today can do this on its own. so, if we're going

today could we do that again over the middle east? i don't know that we have the political unity in our own country to stand up for something like that in the same way. so i'll leave the answer to the questions to the audience. >> along those lines, the number one oil producer in the world now is the united states. >> oil producer. >> there are a number of people who say that allows us to change the way we look at the world, the way we look at the middle east. do you think there's anything about the way the u.s. looks to the world, the way the u.s. thinks about global security, is there anything that's changed because our oil production has into a global super barrel. >> i would give three imperatives to stay engaged in the middle east. the first one is oil. we may not be tied to mid east oil so much. but believe me, from washington to new york, from san francisco to miami, our economy is tied to the world. and if the world's economy was to see the oil coming out of the gulf disrupted, 40% of the globally traded oil of this globally tr

the axis of regional politics, i mean not all regional politics in the middle east are arranged along that axis. but if you are looking for some coherence or structure, order, in the region of politics or middle east, the saudi-iranian rivalry which is almost -- with the shiite sunni rivalry is maybe the most important organizing principle right now the in regional politics. >> got you. thank you. >> barry with george washington university, elliott school. could you comment on what seems to be a deteriorating relationship between western europe and israel? >> yeah, it's -- you know, it obviously has to do with the palestinian issue and the ongoing failure to end it. israel has good relations with leaders in britain, with cameron, germany with merkel. a little less so with hollande, less so in italy and spain but on the whole in western europe, public opinion, intellectuals, a young generation of students and so forth are critical of israel policy. there's been eu resolutions for boycotting products from the settlements. there is i would say anger in not just in the israeli right wing

we've made the middle east more unstable and chaotic than ever before. left christians subject to intense persecution and even genocide. [applause] we have done nothing to help the christians, nothing, and we should always be ashamed for that, for that lack of action. our actions in iraq, libya and syria have helped unleash isis, and we're in a war against radical islam, but president obama won't even name the enemy, and unless you name the enemy, you will never ever solve the problem. [applause] hillary clinton also refuses to say the words radical islam, even as she pushes for a massive increase in refugees coming into our country. after secretary clinton's failed intervention in libya, islamic terrorists in benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave americans. then, instead of taking charge that night, hillary clinton decided to go home and sleep. incredible. decided to go home and sleep. incredible. clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was a total lie, proven to be absolutely a total lie. our ambassador was

it was like moving off the middle east. nk making an investment, and economic investment in asia, toch is what tpp is supposed be, is the right move. i am worried that the residential campaign will never ,nd in our national lifetimes will not really talk about trade. ian bremmer: let me raise the economic populism question. we have seen bernie sanders, donald trump, even hillary clinton come out against tpp. there is obviously a very strong populist opposition to the supposedly benefits of globalization and u.s.-led trade. i am wondering what you think is a matter of proper messaging on the part of the u.s. president. what is actually a reality that the americans are not going to be able to cheerlead on free trade agreement. i didn't expect obama to be such a champion of the tpp. i'm delighted the administration has done it. i think they are doing, saying exactly the right thing. it is not a matter of prosperity. it is also strategic interests. we have to telegraph the american people there are going to be rules and terms of

not only to israel, but to the middle east and the world. kly, they work with our other partners in the middle east. they have been unable enormous asset -- they have been an enormous asset. let us not discount the role that they have played. they have been very effective. host: norman, independent in massachusetts. caller: it is disgraceful that president obama and publicans are supporting the gulf states in this, they are slave states. one thing, it is climate science these gulf states are slave states and right now, the u.s. is supporting slave states in a war against yemen, the only country on the arabian peninsula that is not a slave state and is not have royalty. the u.s. with its allies is trying to impose royalty and slavery in yemen. if it is to get oil, it is still stealing. completely immoral and president obama and republicans are working together on this. it is really antithetical to our democracy. they did the same thing supporting the nazis in ukraine for fossil. fossil fuels are not the future and i'd rather see democrats and

as much as i like the idea of pivoting east asia, i think we did create unintended consequences, we left the middle east with the sense that we didn't want to be involved. now we are back dealg with the middle east. we left europe with a sense that maybe we didn't care as much about the atlantic relationship and worse yet coming back to my first point, we created a situation for the chinese were they thought that we were actually beginning a sort of encirclement. when you think about this, didn't it inaugurate a great moment for u.s. and china relationships. >> you could even state the end of the war, the cold war 1972. and so i think we need to be careful not to create unintended consequences and in diplomacy a big pivot like that would create the unintended consequences. little things can create huge problems. you remember the congress of vienna, the russian ambassador deals over from the heart a heart attack in the french ambassador said why did he do that. even sort of small muscle movements can cause people to sort of wonder what the real objectives are. so i think we need to be careful giving

so zigzagging through the middle east. and the combined effect of eight years of military action and very soon to be eight years of this zigzag unleashed all of the rot and the old system, the one i arrived to in cairo is broken, and the middle east today -- i said i never have seen it worse is because it is a period of chaos. and isis is the physical embodyment of that chaos. if you continue this model, you can speculate on where it might go from here and i think what we will see next is the series of strong men reemerging themselves and i think egypt is probably the first example of that and i think there will be more to come. i think the people of the region are going to embrace this but they should be very careful what they wish for because after periods of chaos as europe as seen in the last century when following chaos, when people embrace strong men and duckitators and fascist really bad things can happen -- dictators. i think that is what is coming. i think our government and other governments will reach out and emb

eleanor: to make sure we don't get involved in another land war in the middle east. that is why we have a defense department. john: why don't they keep him informed? >> they do. eleanor: i think the president is acting on his understanding of what american power can do and american power military power is not going to solve what is happening in the middle east. john: when we come pwabgback trade voters. >> did you find the flashlight and batteries? >> yes. >> did you make sure we are not missing anything in the first aid kit? >> yep. >> did you go through the thing with the kids again? >> the more you prepare today the more you can reduce the devastating effects of a ou john: issue two. life boat for lula? >> home to energetic soccer the amazon rain forest, 2016 olympic games and 200 million people, brazil is a vibrant nation and with an annual g.d.p. of nearly $2 poeu $2.25 trillion it is increasingly wealthy. but led by president dilma rousseff, brazil is in political crisis. that is because already facing impeachment for possibly concealing government budget defici

aid administrator, building things in the middle east. t's watch this interview we did in the middle east back in 2003. >> we will see an improvement in public service that affect the great mass of the iraqi people within the next two months, electricity system, water system, a critical part of what you need in an arid climate and what you need for public service. you have to have electricity and we now have made an agreement to andambassador for bechtel the other contractors we have in year two essentially provide the overall management and the accountability system and the purchase of equipment like generators. brian lamb: i understand he worked for bechtel before he had this job. sally denton: i think he oversaw part of the eight-day project, not -- oversaw part of the big dig project. there was some sort of historical relationship there. brian lamb: did paul grammar work for bechtel bechte? sally denton: he obviously oversaw the distribution of the contracts, the major contracts that bechtel got in iraq which turned out to be disastrou

saying for many years that it would destabilize the middle east. sadly, i was correct. and the biggest beneficiary has been iran. who has systemically gained access to rich oil reserves. something it has wanted to do for decades. and now to top it off, we have isis. my goal is to establish a foreign policy that will endure for several generations. that's why i also look and have to look for talented experts with approaches and practical ideas rather than surrounding myself with those who have perfect resumes but very little to brag about except responsibility for a long history of failed policies and continued losses at war. we have to look to new people. [ applause ] we have to look to new people because many of the old people, frankly, don't know what they're doing, even though they may look awfully good writing in "the new york times" or watched on television. finally, i will work with our allies to reinvigorate values and institutions instead of trying to spread universal values that not everybody shares or wants. we should understand that strengthening and promoting

but the existing deals with the middle east, the existing deals with europe -- >> do you think we haveo protect -- >> we don't need nato? >> nato is obsolete and we're spending disproportional -- >> how about the middle east? >> we are spending so much money. you know what, with fracking and all of the things that are taking place and with all of the oil that canada has, canada has almost more than anybody, when you look at what we have, we aren't dependent on that anymore. >> we don't need jordan or the saudis or the emirates? we don't need those countries? >> people have to pay their fair share. saudi arabia was making $1 billion a day and we're defending them and getting almost nothing -- >> but you're the only one that can cut a deal. >> they don't cut deals like i cut deals. that i can tell you. >> and you're going to walk on all these deals. you walk. >> you always have to be able to walk. >> how do you walk from nato, the middle east, north asia, china, all these relationships, just drop them all? >> nato is 68 years old. >> yeah. >> you have countries that are getting a free ri

we've made the middle east more unstable and chaotic than ever before. we left christians subject to intense persecution, and even genocide. [applause] mr. trump: we have done nothing to help the christians, nothing, and we should always be ashamed for that, for that lack of action. our actions in iraq, libya, and syria have helped unleash isis. and we're in a war against radical islam, but president obama won't even name the enemy, and unless you name the enemy, you will never, ever solve the problem. [applause] mr. trump: hillary clinton also refuses to say the words "radical islam," even as she pushes for a massive increase in refugees coming into our country. after secretary clinton's failed intervention in libya, islamic terrorists in benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave americans. then, instead of taking charge that night, hillary clinton decided to go home and sleep. incredible. clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was a total lie, proven to be absolutely a total lie. our ambassador was murdered and

no new order has emerged in the middle east, only chaos. and the vacuum we left behind has been filled by the most extreme and anti-american of forces. isil, al qaeda, iran, and its terrorist proxies. and now russia. we cannot afford to believe that this is not our problem. it is our problem. as general david petraeus wrote last week, "the attacks and other activities of extremists will not be confined to the areas or regions in which they are located. rather, as in the case of syria, the actions of the extremist groups are likely to spew instability, extremism, violence, and refugees far beyond their immediate surroundings. " we cannot go on pretending that we can avoid these problems or that the current approach of trying to treat the symptoms of the disease rather than its cause will work if only we give it more time. it will not. we need to stop fixating on military details and look at the bigger picture. no one believes there are easy solutions. after the past seven years, this much should be clear -- walking away isn't the answer. time

you've talked about north asia, north atlantic treaty, the middle east, mexico, the ability to walk, the ability to say no more trade, the ability to say we're not going to buy your oil. it's always leverage, it's always i'm going to walk. what is your leverage are republican bosses when you get to cleveland when they try to keep you from winning the nomination on ballot? >> first, the voters. i have millions more votes than anybody else. it's not even close. you know, you've reported on it. we're setting records in terms of republican primaries. if you look at new hampshire, if you look at south carolina, no matter where you look, we're setting records. that's my leverage. and these are people that are really -- they really like donald trump. they really like what i'm saying. people that -- we're going to make america great again. that's what it is and what my leverage is. now, without me, they lose millions -- i think millions of people and nobody's going to have a chance. i will beat hillary clinton. and i haven't started that process yet. i have two people left. we started off wi

where would we drop a nuclear weapon in the middle east? >> somebody hits us with isis, you wouldn't fight back? >> dropping a nuclear weapon into a community -- >> you don't want to say take everything off the table. >> just nuclear. just nuclear. >> look, nuclear should be off the table, but would there be a time when it could be used? possibly. possibly. >> the trouble is david cameron heard t the japanese. a guy running for the president of united states heard about possibly using nuclear weapons. >> why do we make snem. >> because of the old -- >> i was against iraq. i'd be the last one to use the nuclear weapons. >> can you tell the middle east we're not using a nuclear weapon? >> i would never say that. i would never take any cards off the table. >> how about in europe? >> no, i don't think so. >> just say it, i'll never use a nuclear weapon in europe. >> i am not taking cards off the table. i'm not using nuks -- >> the same people hear you and the insane people are not affected by your threats. that's 9 troubling. the real fanatics.

let's talk specifically about the middle east and his approach to iran and libya. how would trump deal with the iranians right now? >> he just announced that he will restructure the current u.s. policy changes with iran by admitting this deal did not work and beyond the deal, iran regime has taken advantage of the deal and they are purchasing weapons and continuing in the aggression in iraq and syria and lebanon and allies in the gulf. and so what you heard today from mr. trump it would be changed and regarding the tension in the region and he spoke about one of which change the the way we address the international relations. he will talk to the russian and make sure on the the ground we have a coalition of friends. we'll not abandon friends one of them israel and then the arab countries. >> there is questions in israel about donald trump's loyalty to the country. how would you describe it? >> israelistic is a democratic country. and mr. trump at apac israel is a ally of the united states regardless who is in the white house. israel was not happy with the current wh

the middle east is going through a great sorting out. we have already seen that with the jews be included out of every city in the middle east and europe. they collected a palestine minority. the only minority that have really become the majority in palestine. but all the others were minority states because of colonial experiences. s in syria. those minorities are clinging on for dear life because they see this as a zero-sum game. 20% of christians ethnically cleansed and during the revolution. go on to iraqties as a result of this shorting out and the sunni and shiite fighting it out. syria is the same way. look at this world and say there are no more christians in turkey. the maronites lost. thists lost in iraq. they look at a grim future. if they lost, high chance they would be ethnically cleansed. so the barrel bombs. they would use any method in order to destroy their enemy. and they have. that is because they see it as a quintessentially, existential fight. the numbers have not arrived to eastern europe in numbers, and it is religio

eleanor: to make sure we don't involved in another happened war in the middle east. that is why we have a defense department. john: why don't they keep him informed? tom: they do. the president k is acting on his understanding what american power can do. nd american power, military power, is not going to solve what is happening in the middle east. life boat for , lula? amazonetic soccer, rain forest, 2016 olympic games million people, brazil is a vibrant nation. annual g.d.p. of early $2.25 trillion it is increasingly wealthy. but led by president dilma rousseff, brazil is in political crisis. facing because already impeachment for possibly oncealing government budget deficits preside rousseff has been implicated in brazil's petrobras corruption scandal. fearing for their democracy, of brazilians are taking to the streets to demand justice. note this. another target of petrobras investigators, former president luiz inacio lula da sil known as lula. as just joined rousseff's cabinet. while a judge has put a hold on lula's intment, rationale seems obvious. lula's azilia

the mideast is marginal. we're pivoting to the east. but even in the east and this is news the white house should know, even in the east they are looking at what's happening in the middle east. when you sit with asian diplomats or asian politicians from singapore, china, et cetera, they tell you and i had these conversations. as probably we have had all these conversations. the way the u.s. is behaving in the mideast is telling us if in 20 years from now china takes over taiwan or singapore in the sea of china, if we are able to. count on the american protection. and this is the new world order. this is not something related to assad and the family and lebanon. this is something planetary. we're redesigning the equilibrium of the world. on the regional level, forget about the city guys trk saudis and turks, murky, play with s s islamists. in every speech the department says that our aim in the middle east and in syria is to protect also and to, let's say, avoid and strengthen the fragility of states like lebanon, jordan, and et cetera. what are these states today living out of the syrian crisis? lebanon is on the verge of collapse. jordan is on the verge of serious pro

but we're talking about the middle east at an inflection point, and i would just point out right now that among the many challenges the middle east faces i think iran is actually foremost, and yet at the same time it appears here in washington that we've forgotten how to keep certain issues foremost. you remember a few months ago you couldn't pick up the newspaper without iran in big letters above the fold, and today it's like it just disappeared off the headlines. and you have to wonder how that happens. and i think that it's important, i come from hoover on the west coast. here we have csis, two think tanks that are quite capable of keeping focused on issues and coming up with good policy recommendations. we only pray the rest of us outside this town that someone good is listening here to the good recommendation that is come out of here. i am routinely copying down things that csis puts out and finding a lot of value in my own thinking, shifting my own thinking. csis doesn't just make assertions. it also includes discussions where you actually come out with something that is perhaps

you are going to destabilize the entire middle east. if our politicians went on vacation 15 years ago, we would be a lot better off in the middle east that we are right now. day,we have right now is a back, ugly mess. right? . big mess then i heard a certain senator, lindsey graham, he said, i do not know why donald trump does not listen to me. i am been fighting this war for many years. that is right. i want to fight it or about two weeks, folks. not many years. we have to get back to our country, rebuild america, rebuild the united states. our infrastructure is going to .ell we build schools in the middle east. they get blown up, we rebuild them. they get blown up again and again at 10. want to build a school in pencil alien. -- in pennsylvania. we have noent says money. right? no good. no good. we spent over $4 trillion in the middle east. shape now than we were 15 years ago. and when obama got out, instead of doing it in a certain way of leaving some troops behind and protecting a little bit of whatever. he took everybody out. ent an