hello and welcome to crosstalk where all things are considered i'm peter Lavelle
it is a truism american voters are far more interested in domestic issues
during a presidential election and this suits the foreign policy establishment
just fine since the end of the Cold War there has been a narrowing of foreign
policy debate does this explain why Washington blunders from one Fiasco
another
- crosstalk the foreign policy establishment i'm joined by my guest
Patrick Eddington in Washington
he's a journalist writer and founder of the news website 21st century
wired.com also in Washington we have Daniel faraci he is the director of
grassroots political consulting and in mountain view across the Stevens soon as
he is a professor of politics and international studies at the University
of San Francisco
all right gentlemen crosstalk rules in fact that means you can jump in anytime
you want i very much appreciate Patrick if i go to you first
you know since the end of the Cold where there's been a remarkable bipartisan
foreign policy coming out of Washington
sometimes they're called liberal interventionists sometimes they're
called neo cons but the difference between the two is getting quite blurry
if there ever was one
so my question to you is it at the foreign policy establishment determines
what's good for them in their interest and then gives the American people what
they need and not necessarily what the American people want go ahead
yeah I think you're you're you're spot on there Peter the if you look at a back
at past administrations
you'll see there's very little change in overall foreign policy i think between
the two parties there might be a difference in the nuance of the
Democrats have a more kinder gentler version of imperialism
where's the Republicans might be with a neo conservative ideology might be more
bombastic and sort of over in how they want to project a power from from the
United States but the very little difference even in selections of cabinet
members if you look at who Hillary Clinton brought in a secretary of state
you have people like Victoria Nuland who is ostensibly a neoconservative of our
talk and the wife of robert kagan there's no difference really between
parties there is kind of the seamless transition in foreign policy and also
the timing might affect this a little bit too
there's a little bit of war fatigue this is very similar to nineteen eighty
post-vietnam little bit of war fatigue that might swing voters a little bit
over to an anti interventionist
a message that maybe Donald Trump is broadcasting at the moment but very
little difference in the larger scheme of things you know Steve enough in
mountain view if i go to you I'm thank you for getting up so early in the
morning
do you think that the foreign policy establishment has been effective and
successful in selling benevolent global hegemony because that's exactly what it
is because there's there seems to be that they like the fact both parties
like the fact that there's a difference to the president I mean the reference to
the president even Congress gives deference to the president
I mean debate is going gone down to a few people in a small place in the Oval
Office and and and it's aight we just heard from Patrick there is fatigue
there too many soldiers coming in too many soldiers died in too many soldiers
come home and that what the number of suicides is quite extraordinary
I mean the American people are not invited into this debate because I've
never given that opportunity at least that's how i see it go ahead Stephen
foreign policy has been centralized in the executive branch in any way since
the beginning of the Cold War and with the end of the Cold War suppose an
emergency one would hope that there would be more decentralization more
debate more democracy in the process but unfortunately that has not been the case
the good news however is on the rank-and-file we're seeing a real shift
that not only are our Democrats according to polls a much more auntie
interventionist and they haven't been in many years when you're seeing this in
the wrong with Republicans as well kind of a libertarian American first
you know kind of strain as well the irony unfortunately is that the
Democrats are going to be apparently nominating the most hawkish mas
interventionist nominee in in recent memory and
and and Trump though he does occasionally talk about criticized for
on her sizing nation-building intervention his bellicose statements
and some of the foreign policy people he's gotten around him as well
doesn't look like he's going to be any better
anyway I agree with you Daniel if I can go to you one of the interesting things
here because what Stephen said here's the centralization it's been away it's
been around for a while and it's getting more intense but what's very important
is that the media is this filter and and they just that they wave the flag all of
the time CNN has never seen a war it didn't like okay and it reinforces the
establishments view of the world
American hegemony and it's a good thing by the way it's good that America leads
and on and but what is done in America's name
I think a lot of American people have no idea what is done in their name and the
media makes it to make sure that stays that way go ahead Daniel
yeah we have central control over the media five corporations running the
entire mainstream media apparatus and they feed heavily into the establishment
of politics because it's guaranteed and money and control
that's a new phenomenon also the last few administrations have had
inconsistent incoherent and ineffective foreign policy whether it be the Middle
East Russian relations were completely ignoring our partners in the Western
Hemisphere
besides bashing them on immigration and Congress has abdicated their
responsibility to weigh in
you look at things like the war against ISIL and they have still not even
declared war
even though in our Constitution at mandates any conflict over the 90-day
threshold would have to be a formal declaration of war but the reason for
that is is because they want their guide to have the ability to violate this
premise and then you correlate all of that together
take it to the election right now and both parties still the same we probably
will have neocon ideology because it won't be Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul is
for remove
and so the general nature of neocon ideology exists with many of these
candidates and both parties are projecting their entire election
strategy to try to make it look like 911 again only to the baby boomer voters and
completely ignoring every generation underneath them as a general strategy
that feeds into everything this episode is all about you know it's really
interesting Patrick I mean did they are looking at some of the things that don't
just come out of the donald trump admitted a campaign that he's accused of
scaremongering well there are plenty of people and watching the scaremonger all
of the time to asking for more Wars
I mean troops in Libya boots on the ground in Libya boots on the ground in
Yemen do because the American public even have a clue that the United States
into more countries right now and add to it
failure there's no downside ever for the foreign policy establishment for being
wrong
go ahead Patrick yeah you know I've and I've been in Washington DC out for a
weekend and you know I'm frankly shocked by the level of cognitive dissonance
particularly on issues of foreign policy and what's what the US is doing military
lovers overseas us is deployed
we have troops in Yemen and this is done to little fanfare in the media
we have boots on the ground in Syria now photographs of the more in Kurdish YPG
uniforms this week so the this normally this would be headline news but if you
look at the media spectrum is very little so the media plays a huge part in
that but getting back to your point about Trump you know that the
fear-mongering of Trump being a fascist or being an authoritarian near george w
bush came in as a running joke in the media in the run-up in two thousand he
got elected president and eight years later with even though that questionable
of a leader in terms of his intelligence or geographic knowledge of the country
still here after eight years
mind you there's a lot of damage around the world afterwards but you know
America will survive but they do that the media and the liberal establishment
always use this is a a sort of talking point to scare voters about what happens
but at the end of the day Peter Americans traditionally will vote in
November with their wallets pension funds interest rates how their
investments are doing this it will get in the run-up it might be foreign policy
it might show the prowess of a candidate against the others in the field but in
November it's about the wallet yeah but it always have
i agree with you Patrick but the American people are not aware of the
cost of interventions around the world has always put into different budgets
always pushed out
it's never counted it's a trick here Stephen if I can go to you one of the
things that I find really problematic because I for a short time was a
lecturer at the University of California you are an academic yourself and i'm
always as I was always astounded at how little
what the cream of the crop was supposed to be their lack of knowledge of history
and geography and all that again i see the mainstream media
I adding to that here I mean look at CNN they can't even find country sometimes
we put a country in the wrong hemisphere
I'm not joking here i'm not being snide here it's true i mean here is a media
outlet and then we always have these young people that are very
impressionable or don't learn anything at all
I find that very problematic as well go ahead Steven a very very much so I mean
given the impact the power of the United States has in the world the lack of
knowledge of basic history basic geography by even educated Americans is
really startling and indeed there's common anti-intellectualism even among
Democrats I mean people people say oh uh Hillary Clinton voted for the war
because of his shoulder
they had these weapons of mass destruction and there and everything
will be fine
well she and her staff were briefed by people like me by Middle East scholars
by independent arms control analyst
we told her we told John Kerry told joe biden we told Republicans you told all
these people who look they're the most people are cooking the numbers they
don't have weapons of mass destruction
even if they do it's illegal and necessary to invade and if we invade
we're going to be bogged down a long bloody counterinsurgency war
amid rising terrorism
sectarianism etc etc the very excuses they then used to keep troops in four
years and years and years
I spell this out the cover story the Nation magazine before the iraq war vote
the academic journals arms control journal so there are no WMDs
I mean that they're all this was out there in front of them and used to hear
these Hillary Clinton people saying excuse oh she didn't know Hillary
Clinton is to Middle East scholars you don't like Republicans are to climate
change
you know she doesn't it yeah it's like it's your ear ideology is what matters
not the facts that you don't even if i can say with you right before we go to
the break here one of the things i find remarkable doing this program is that
some of my guests get very frustrated with me just like what you're saying
when I present facts and then well that's a criticism and I take no it's a
back
it's just a fact okay we don't have to dispute that what it means is and that's
what's really frustrating and dealing with this because if you criticize that
and then it means you're being traitorous you're being paid off
you're a liar you're a fanatic this is some of the things that happen you're
all right gentlemen I'm going to jump in here we go to a short break and after
that short break will continue our discussion on American foreign policy
stay with Artie
yeah
welcome back to crosstalk were all things are considered on Peter labelled
to remind you we are discussing the American foreign policy establishment
ok packing to go back to you and watching the reason why i chose to do
this program because it was an interesting article in the national
interest and how to counter Trump's authoritarianism was a title and what I
find really remarkable and i'm not defending Donald Trump whatsoever and I
haven't on this program but what I find really was interesting is it
it's the foreign policy establishment that is authoritarian they're the ones
that don't want any input whatsoever because they know better
they know better what's good for the American people i would say that they
don't is a matter fact I think it's antithetical to him a lot of American
interests you say people vote with their pocketbook
you're right and instead of nation building and I'm pouring trillions of
dollars into wasteful and endeavors and dangerous ones
American bridges American schools and airports etc etc
I'm not being an isolation is here I'm being pragmatic it's a foreign policy
establishment that authoritarian go ahead
no you're absolutely correct you know if you look at the beneficiaries of u.s.
foreign policy which hasn't changed a whole lot in the larger scheme of things
since world war two the main beneficiaries are those who financed the
wars
so the u.s. takes on quite a lot of extra debt to pay for its military
intervention is amiss goes in a form of a national deficit and also the military
defense contractors will benefit so you have a centralization of wealth in these
areas and the average American if you're in these industries you will benefit you
work for Boeing or if you have a retirement pension fund with lockheed
martin or you're a shareholder of KBR or beefy ball tour one of these uh
Halliburton with his contract you'll benefit from it but everybody else
it's debatable whether this is beneficiary I think the u.s. foreign
policy is there is no foreign policy
u.s. foreign policy and American interests are corporate interests at the
end of the day and so this kind of hyper corporate foreign policy which is really
what it's been at least for the last 40 years it's about opening up markets for
American products and keeping competitors out Africa will be the big
area in this in this domain in the next 20 years
this is where the u.s. is currently wrapping up its military footprint
during the Obama administration of the last eight years
ok it's very interesting that you mention Africa because the the the US
wants to militarize it while the Chinese being a building amazing infrastructure
on that continent is going to be a very interesting contest
Daniel thing go to you when i look at how American media deals with Libya and
and Hillary Clinton
they seem to be more focused on the death of an ambassador which was awful
but they don't really give the background so they don't really like to
go there because if you look at what's happened to Libby and I saw chris cuomo
ask Hillary Clinton Clinton a question about the the result of the war and she
just said well we brought democracy there and everyone's like cheering as we
promised but that was it that was the hard question for Libya
my point is Daniel I mean that's a catastrophe by any measure right now
it totally disqualify that woman to be President the United States but that's
just you know they're more worried about her males about her negative so you know
what Bill Clinton is saying it's extraordinary to me the media deflects
away from what's really really important a road record go ahead and you
yeah i want to touch on the earlier . well but I Libya
it's a nonchalant approach just like bombings in Iraq every day
that's how the media handles at the Benghazi committees are a shame as well
they're only about emails because john mccain lindsey graham and Hillary
Clinton would be equally guilty if they ever presented the facts and so that is
never going to happen for both sides to protect their own
in addition to that when we talk about this incoherent foreign policy that
we've had for so long and the lack of abdicating responsibility by Congress
and the President as well and correlate that to the election
I mean there are forces that are speaking up Bill Kristol for example
making all the noise he is about as alternative candidate and Hillary
Clinton are the constants to where the neo-cons in Hawke's know they have
consistency trump still is and no defensive from either as as you state
but he still is the outlier that nobody really knows
and you look at even the confusion from the political parties to polling
I mean pew research gives
an edge to Hillary on terrorism whereas fox and all these other media outlets
give an edge to trump on foreign policy prowess
so everybody's confused and anyone that's not confused or as as was pointed
out earlier the defense contractors stock value and at the end of the day
all of this will collapse because i think this is a unique cycle as the
parties continue to make it nine eleven the american people i need a patent that
button
it's the economy stupid from the nineties that's what people are caring
about those of wage stagnation growth being stagnant or infrastructure
crumbling our education system falling to pieces and that's where the hearts
and minds of the Americans are no matter what the parties and mainstream media
continue to try to let me this election don't let me talk about the Democratic
Party is steven i want a little while follow you very closely on facebook your
commentaries about the election and they're very interesting for me
what happened to the Democratic Party in the last 25 years because you know when
we look at the anti-war movement in Vietnam and in post-vietnam inand and
not you know not making the same mistakes again here
what happened what what because Hillary Clinton is the most me oh , sh hawkish
candidate in the whole race how did that happen to the Democratic Party go ahead
it's very very frustrating because again polls especially on younger people show
much more progressive vision they're saying you know we need this test
fitting so much the military instead of these interventions overseas we need
that money back here for education for health care for for it for
infrastructure for housing for public transportation for tackling climate
change
these are the priorities of most rank-and-file Democrats especially
younger ones and yet
united states is is you know supporting again the most hawkish interventionist
foreign policy account it so we we ever had and it's ironic because I think a
lot of people are so desperate to have a female president
yeah you know because the attacks by the right wing against her so ridiculous
a lot of liberals are kind of rally around the flag and he's the same
liberals you give
money to MCR National Human Rights Watch whatever nearly Clinton badges them
because they criticize Israel in the kindest eyes on us ally or whatever you
know and and she supports are you Netanyahu and then in these Arab
dictators and and I all these other other people who are to the antithesis
of liberal values and yet
yeah she's getting that kind of support so it's very frustrating
frankly that we asked it's going to be like 1968 you know again when you had
the majority of Americans and the huge majority Democrats opposed the Vietnam
or and we're stuck between two pro war cabinet some free and Nixon
yeah which takes ended up winning in a squeaker
and here this is the this is the kind of alienation that you're seeing among the
UH you know within the Democratic Party and the fact that somebody like Bernie
Sanders despite my name is false as well as he did
I think shows that there really is at least the grassroots the party
a desperate need for change but the party establishment is is holding on
desperately to keep their kind of a interventionist a and and militaristic
foreign policy
Patrick like one of the things i find really interesting is that the American
people have been sold and and they imbibe did I would say it's messy and
it's messianic American Empire course don't call the empire but America must
lead America much I make the rules I mean Obama was talking about trade rules
I mean it was almost to the point of absurdity the hubris of it all but the
American people have taken that on board and i don't think they have a hard time
rejecting it or questioning it because you're never asked or told to question
the base America must lead
well that that that usually means it's pretty dangerous for everyone else in
the world
you never really much hear about it when you're inside the country go ahead go
ahead Patrick you know that the still the two in the two dominant paradigms
with the discussion of America's place in the world foreign policy is a sort of
there's a cold war paradigm
that still has been reinvigorated recently with regards to Russia and
China and then there's the Israeli issue as well so candidates are meant to back
Israel to the hilt and to oppose Russia or any move by China ash Carter said
recently it was amazing uh made some comment about the South China Sea
the Chinese Foreign Minister put it beautifully he said he said that today
some people physically reside in the 21st century but psychologically they're
still stuck in a cold war and I think he was referring to Carter's comments there
but that so that the public in America has been gasps lighted by the mainstream
media for decades to the point where people what Stephen said about the
American left is so true it's been fractured subdivided and it's been cut
down the middle on so many issues and really minimized and what that does is
it minimizes and compartmentalize the opposition and I think this is what we
see with Syria with the regime change crowd in the pro Palestinian crowds been
that the liberal crowds been split down the middle on the issue of regime change
and you see this through so many different issue issues now
so this is the problem with the discussion Daniel find anything but then
again I'd like to remove stress here is that the establishment doesn't really
want to have a discussion
I mean I find it extraordinary the number of journals and magazines out
there online you know and that's what I read every single day preparing for
these programs here and some of it is really really good
but I have a feeling it's a very small group of people that are actually
reading it and discussing it
and importantly we're not the decision makers and I think this is what's so
frustrating to me the knowledge is out there there's not a lot of secrets and
there's a lot of descent but it doesn't seem to get itself into the political
process go ahead Daniel but in that process especially in this election they
are only the parties in the media only projecting their control and voice to
the baby boomer generation those below it are reading more are much more
suspect of the government what they hear what they read and watch
and as for as this topic you're discussing American exceptionalism ya
there
America is a super PAC
or should project its strength but that does not mean regime change intervention
ilysm 19 trillion-dollar debt allowing the domestic economy to crumble and
doing everything for a nefarious special interest that's not what our
Constitution in our country was set up to be so it's amazing to see the twists
turns and the manipulation of what that's supposed to mean
and it you know leadership comes responsibility as well in a global
market economy and in a global security environment and we are definitely
changing what that term means for political convenience sent expediency
are gentlemen I have to jump in here we've had a fascinating discussion many
thanks to my guest in Washington and in mountain view
and thanks to our viewers for watching us here at RT see you next time and
remember cross top goals
yeah
下载YouTube(cc)字幕请访问http://zhuwei.me/youtube