Latest / UK Column Radio / Davos Shock: Canada Just Called Out the US "Lie" | Silk and Steel

Transcript

Davos Shock: Canada Just Called Out the US "Lie" | Silk and Steel · UK Column Radio

0:01
Hello and welcome to another episode of the Silk and Steel
0:04
podcast. I'm your host Carl Zah.
0:06
Today I welcome back French entrepreneur Arnold Bertrand
0:10
back to our show. Arnold is a long term resident
0:13
of China. He write very passionately about
0:17
various Chinese topics and I invited Arnold.
0:22
First of all, welcome back to the show.
0:24
Arnold, always good to see you. Thank you.
0:28
Glad, glad to be back on. Yeah, so we have recently French
0:36
President Macron just spoke at Davos.
0:39
You know, like I never imagined Davos would be like exciting,
0:43
you know, news making because normally I expect all these
0:47
politician just make platitude boiler template speech.
0:51
But this this this year, Davos are quite lively.
0:55
I think thanks to Mr. Trump. You know, first we have Mark
0:58
Carney, the PM of Canada, leading with a speech saying the
1:04
rule based international order was a lie.
1:07
We just went along with a lie because he benefited us in the
1:10
past. And then you have the French
1:13
President Macron openly saying we need more investment, we need
1:19
more Chinese investment in Europe.
1:22
So do you think there's a, a pivot going on like a pivot to
1:26
China from for, you know, US allies like Canada and and EU?
1:31
Think it's it's not so much a pivot to China than it is a
1:37
pivot away from America. In fact, it's, it's, it's
1:42
actually America that decided to end the, the rules based order
1:49
explicitly so because they just don't respect any of the rules
1:53
anymore. So, you know, at some point
1:56
countries just have to acknowledge that fact.
2:00
And and that's, that's exactly what Carney did in his, in his
2:04
speech, which I think was by far the most important speech in, in
2:08
Davos. In fact, he used a very striking
2:12
analogy in his speech, which he took from Vaclav Havel, who is
2:18
the, the famous dissident in, in in Czechoslovakia back back in
2:24
the time of the Soviet Union. So the analogy was that of
2:29
shopkeepers who at the time of the Soviet Union all had to have
2:33
a sign in their window, you know, with Soviet slogans like
2:37
Workers of the world Unite and so on.
2:40
But at some point, you know, when the Soviet Union was
2:43
becoming quite weak, everyone knew those, those those slogans
2:49
were lies. That's workers of the world will
2:53
will not unite right. And So what, what calmly, what,
2:58
what the analogy says on the, on, on what calmly repeated in
3:02
his speech was at some point, you know, 1 shopkeeper has to
3:06
take down the sign because, you know, it's, it's just
3:10
acknowledging that's, that's a lie on, on, on the, on, on.
3:14
What he was saying is that basically he's that shopkeeper
3:18
in DeVos. He's taking down the sign and he
3:22
encourages everyone else to to do so, Which is, of course, you
3:28
know, quite quite a stunning analogy to to make because
3:31
that's comparing the US to to the Soviet Union with all the
3:36
implications that that that has, which is quite something for
3:43
Canada to say because as a reminder, like they're AG 7
3:47
country. There are five I country, there
3:49
are NATO country on their America's neighbor.
3:52
So for them to say that is, is is quite something.
3:58
So but taking down the sign does not mean that those countries
4:04
are, are, are somehow, you know, shifting sides to China, like
4:10
county is not going to adopt socialism with with Chinese
4:14
characteristics, right? What he's saying is that they
4:20
want to basically be independent somehow, like not be on any
4:26
side. And he was coming for middle
4:30
powers. So countries, you know, that are
4:34
not great powers basically, so not, not China, not not, not not
4:40
the US, not Russia to unite together.
4:45
So so they're stronger on to together asserts, you know, put
4:50
their interests together. So so that they together have
4:53
have have more than ever. So, so that's more the direction
4:57
that he wants to go. Whether that succeeds or not,
5:01
that's an entirely different matter.
5:05
And to be fair, it it will mean that they will probably do more
5:12
with China, like more trade, for instance, which is exactly what
5:16
what county promised to do when he was in Beijing just a few
5:19
days before Davos. So for instance, they changed
5:23
the rules on the, on the Chinese EVs, remove the tariffs on that.
5:29
So they will, they will to some extent sort of the risk from the
5:36
US and when it derives from the US, you, you do more with China,
5:40
but that doesn't mean shifting side.
5:44
And so and so it's sort of rebalancing the relationship so
5:47
it's more equal between, between, between China and the
5:51
US. Yeah, I, I think Mark Carney
5:55
also made that clear. He said he want to reduce
5:57
dependence on United States, you know, which means maybe taking
6:01
the trade balance from like 80% trade with US to maybe about 50%
6:07
trade and he would redirect some of that trade to China.
6:11
And when he made the speech about mid power, got a huddle
6:14
together, I think he's making appeal to the Europeans and say,
6:18
hey, us, we have similar values. You know, unlike that barbarian
6:23
Trump, we got to stay together. You know, we can we can still
6:27
make it a go. But you know, what do you make
6:32
make out of that? I mean, like, you know, you have
6:35
Macron echoing similar sentiment and Macron made, to be fair,
6:40
Macron made similar sentiment before about EU needs strategic
6:44
autonomy. But then, you know, Macron is
6:46
famously saying the right thing to the right audience and then
6:50
end up doing nothing. And this time he also said we
6:54
need more Chinese investment in Europe.
6:56
Do you think there will be anything coming out of that?
7:01
Yeah, So on, on your first point, another thing that I
7:04
found interesting in Carney's speech is that he did speak
7:07
about values, but actually not in the way that not in the
7:12
meaning that values used to have.
7:14
So, you know, under the so-called rules based order
7:19
values was all about, you know, democracy promotion, I mean
7:25
liberal democracy promotion and so on and so forth.
7:28
That's not the way he meant it. He, he, he actually said that
7:33
they could, you know, cooperate with, with countries like like
7:39
China and so on, on values. But on specific topic like he,
7:44
he did say that, you know, for instance, on, on free trades or
7:50
the defence of some aspects of international law, he shares
7:55
China's values more than the US values.
7:59
So, so that's more the way I think he he means it cooperation
8:09
on, I will say more principles than than values with, with
8:15
countries that are not only within, within liberal
8:20
democracies. So I don't think it's really
8:22
limited to to Europe, but it's much broader than that on, on
8:26
that Secretary, the smart way to do it.
8:28
I think because if, if they continue sort of the, the old
8:34
game of of, you know, liberal hegemony on sun, then, you know,
8:41
that's the world that's that's dying, that's the world that
8:43
that failed. So you need to add that to the
8:46
new reality. The the new reality is multi
8:49
polarity, sort of adapting yourself to a world where where,
8:55
which is much more complex than, you know, the world where the
8:59
West dominated and could dictate its values to to to the rest of
9:04
the world. And when it comes to to Macron,
9:09
I mean, I'm, I'm, I'm basically like you.
9:12
I think that's what Micron says can be almost automatically
9:17
dismissed as as just words because he has he has a history
9:23
of speaking. I mean, first of all, Macron has
9:33
no constant position. He, he, he is famous for
9:38
Armamento in, in, in French. So he, he always says one thing
9:42
on the, on the inverse. So one day you listen to him and
9:46
this sounds like a, like a Marxist, and then the next day
9:49
he will sound like a fascist. So yeah, it's, it's very
9:54
difficult to to keep track with Macron, for instance, on on this
9:59
Chinese investment thing. So he did say that, but then
10:03
just a couple of days after you have his minister of, of
10:06
commerce, I think who said that his, his exact expression was
10:13
that France would bash the Chinese head in or something
10:20
like, like, like a very aggressive statement, which is
10:25
not exactly attractive for Chinese investment, right?
10:29
So that is the, the, the messaging of, of France right
10:32
now is, is just completely contradictory.
10:34
So it's very, very hard to, to take Macron's words seriously.
10:41
Unfortunately. That being said, there is in
10:46
fact a, a general movement in in Europe to to be a bit like
10:57
Canada. So they, they've understood
10:59
basically the risk that's the US constitutes like public opinion
11:07
are shifting dramatically. So now everyone sees Trump as a,
11:14
as a threat in Europe. I mean, everyone like a very,
11:17
very big share of the European population.
11:20
When you listen to French TV these days, it's all about, you
11:25
know, Greenland on the defending ourselves, defending our
11:28
sovereignty. There is no political party zero
11:33
that defends Trump, even nominally Trump allies like Le
11:37
Pen and so on. They're actually very anti Trump
11:41
right now. So yeah, it's the the the mood
11:47
is is definitely de risking from from the US.
11:50
But what? Now you know, you know, with the
11:54
you know, we know that Europeans have been European leadership at
11:58
least have been despising Trump in private or or not so
12:03
privately. But whenever US, you know, Trump
12:07
summons him to the White House and ask them to jump, they will
12:11
say how high like would this does this make up?
12:15
Does this whole Greenland mess make a meaningful break in the
12:20
transatlantic relationship? Yeah, I think it is changing.
12:26
I mean, you, you saw that they opposed the, the investment that
12:31
the, the, the, the, the deal that they made with with Trump
12:35
back last summer. So this is quite, quite
12:40
meaningful. I would say it's a, it's a
12:41
strong action on, on this deal was, you know, very shocking
12:46
because it was basically inferior tribute to, to the US.
12:52
It was, you know, but I was sending, you know, hundreds of
12:59
billions of, of, of euros to the US, buying an enormous quantity
13:04
of US weapons, of US energy and so on.
13:07
It's increased the, the, the dependency on the US.
13:11
So the fact that deposits is, I think, quite, quite meaningful
13:18
and I don't know if it will remain posed.
13:22
I certainly, I certainly hope so.
13:26
And you're starting to see, you know, more and more actions in
13:31
the opposite direction. So just yesterday, for instance,
13:34
the French government announced that it will start to remove all
13:40
US tech from government for, for government employees.
13:47
So it's it's they're starting small, like they're starting
13:50
with Visio conference, so starting to use, you know,
13:54
Microsoft Teams or, or stuff like that.
13:56
But you can see that they're starting initiatives in in that
14:00
direction. So yeah, definitely, I think
14:03
that the there has been a mood shift for sure.
14:09
OK, well, what now this is for Europe.
14:13
So I I actually before our show, I was listening to you on a
14:17
panel that you had with my other friend Daniel Dumbrell and Ben
14:24
Norton to talk about this new polarity.
14:28
Then you know you you made a point that US itself actually
14:32
recognize it now lives in a multi polar world.
14:36
I think that correlates also with the latest release of US
14:42
National Security strategy and the new Pentagon document, which
14:48
said specifically that they will deprioritize China as a threat
14:53
and they will focus on the Western Hemisphere, which is
14:57
what we have seen. You know, the the action going
15:00
both toward Venezuela, but also, you know, land grab toward
15:04
Greenland is all part of shoring the US position within its own
15:09
hemisphere. So I I would like to hear your
15:11
take on that. Yeah, so I think this is
15:18
actually the key roots behind the the latest changes that that
15:23
the US, this is the US acknowledging that it lives in a
15:27
in in a multi polar world. And so when the US was in a
15:32
unipolar world, it, it made a lot of sense for them to back
15:38
rules because rules was, you know, when you have the only
15:42
game in town, basically, then it's your rules.
15:45
And it's, it's all about, you know, everyone, everyone sort of
15:51
it's, it's like if, if you're, if you're the state of a country
15:55
and then you have the law of the country, it's in your interest
16:00
as the state to make sure that the law is, is respected.
16:04
But if, if suddenly there are different powers, if said there
16:09
is a a civil war in the country, which is kind of what multi
16:15
priority is at at the global level, then doesn't make sense
16:20
for you to be like the policeman of, of that country and make
16:25
sure that the rules are respected on, on that also
16:29
benefits, benefits the the the others, right?
16:33
Like you, you're the one from the US standpoint, like you're
16:36
the one assuming that burden of being the policeman and that
16:42
that benefits everyone sort of to your to your detriment.
16:46
So I think this is a key reason for them stopping to respect,
16:52
respect frozen and, and, and there is the fact that I, I
17:01
think the reassertion of the Monroe Doctrine on the, on, on
17:06
their retrenchment on, on the, on the Western Hemisphere is
17:11
also very meaningful. Because what the, the, the
17:14
Monroe of cream was not, was not part of, of, of, of US political
17:19
language for for decades, because they used to claim the
17:24
entire world as their sphere of influence right when they were
17:28
unipolar. The the only great power out
17:33
there. The fact that they reassert the
17:37
Monroe of cream, which is a a doctrine that was born when they
17:41
were basically a regional power, sort of says that they're a
17:47
regional power again, right. So that also goes to show that
17:52
they they they accept, they acknowledge that they live in in
17:58
multi priority and may debate with what discussion rather with
18:05
with Ben Norton on Daniel Dumbril in in in Chongqing last
18:11
week. The question I think we we all
18:14
agree on that, but the question is what is the ultimate
18:18
objective of the US? Is it to re become the unipolar
18:26
hegemon, global hegemon or is it more is, is their acceptance of
18:34
multiparty more permanent? And on, on that basically agreed
18:38
that in the long term, they will, they have no option than
18:42
to coexist with China. And, and, and that's why we had
18:47
the difference of opinion with, with them because he thinks that
18:53
they will do everything to regain unipolar, unipolar power.
19:02
And my point was that I have no doubt that they want to, but I
19:09
also have no doubt that they can't at this stage that it's
19:12
it's over. China is just too big, too
19:15
powerful to basically be relegated to second rate power
19:23
again. So even though they want to,
19:26
it's not about will, but it's about, you know, power is about
19:30
not about what you want to do. It's about what what you can do.
19:34
It's about capabilities. I don't see a scenario where the
19:39
US can regain the capabilities to once again become a, a
19:45
unipolar power anymore. But you know, I completely
19:51
respect Ben's opinion as well. Who knows, the IT might be
19:55
right? Let's see.
19:57
But in any case, that's an interesting debate and I will
19:59
encourage people to to watch it. It's it's, it's exactly the kind
20:05
of discussion that's that we need to have at this moment.
20:10
Right, I want you now. Now I'm asking you to speculate
20:14
because for decades after World War 2, United States have
20:20
constructed this post war order where it was it sits on top and
20:26
with the so-called rule based international order that
20:29
benefits US the most. You know of course as Mark
20:32
Carney's point out, the Europeans and Canadians, they
20:36
all went along Willy nilly because he benefited them as
20:40
well. Why then does Trump
20:44
administration is seeming hell bent on destroying this whole
20:48
international framework that US has set up?
20:51
And why why does you Trump use the language that seem to
20:55
suggest that he thinks somehow European NATO are these free
20:59
riders that's ripping Americans off And and that's why he he
21:04
want nothing to do with NATO when most of us you know, as
21:09
observer seems OK. Well, NATO is set up to benefit
21:13
US is to keep the Germans down, keep the Russian out and keep
21:18
American in What's so what's going what's going on here?
21:22
Do you want to take a take? Take a stab at it?
21:26
Yeah, so, So what I called it was America's Khrushchev Moments
21:33
actually wrote an article on that, if you recall.
21:37
So Khrushchev was a Soviet Union leader after studying kind of in
21:44
the middle of the of the Cold War.
21:47
And interestingly, Khrushchev has many similar features to to
21:52
Trump and America right now because he pursued the policy of
21:59
he called it peaceful coexistence with the West
22:05
because again, Stalin was all about, you know, global conquest
22:11
of communism and so on, on the overextended the the Soviet
22:18
Union in in a way that was unsustainable.
22:27
And So what Khrushchev said is imposed here because that's not
22:31
sustainable. Let's not overextend ourselves.
22:35
Let's let's focus on, on us, on the Soviet sphere on on agreed
22:42
to sort of pose the ideological struggle against against the
22:48
West to sort of regain our strengths within within the the
22:53
Soviet sphere. And so he posted that, but that
22:59
was very badly seen on on the Chinese side.
23:05
In fact, Mao's reaction was to call Trump, Trump, Khrushchev, A
23:12
revisionist traitor. That's actually what triggered
23:17
the Sino Soviet splits. And they really hated each
23:23
other. In fact, there is a funny story,
23:26
I think around, I mean the, the they, they came to blows.
23:34
They even killed each other soldiers in several battles.
23:38
At some point, I think you had the I think it was the Soviet
23:42
minister of Defence who called the hotline in Jangdan High to
23:48
to to to negotiate on the attendee of the hotline was like
23:55
like with without even calling Mao or Joe and liar.
23:59
He immediately replied, we don't speak to revisionist traitors on
24:03
here. I got the phone.
24:04
So that was the of we're saying, OK, you know, that's stupid
24:16
because you know, together, united, you're much stronger.
24:21
You don't want to do that much like we're saying that for for
24:26
Trump on on Europe today. But but it's just, you know,
24:31
seeing the world differently now.
24:34
So to Europe, Trump is a revisionist traitor.
24:37
Basically. It's it's I think, somewhat
24:40
similar similar dynamic. That's fair.
24:45
That's fair. Although, OK, I, I, I mean, I
24:51
think Sino Soviet split, it's like a whole different
24:56
dimension. Like we can spend hours just on
24:58
that. But right now with US
25:03
recognizing that it's lives in a party polar world, as Marco
25:07
Rubio himself have mentioned. And you know, it's now it's
25:12
focusing to be the regional hegemony in West Hemisphere and
25:15
then Europe and Canada are trying to find their own way
25:19
post Trump. Where does this leave us?
25:23
You know, where, where is this? So I mean, China obviously is
25:28
sitting pretty because the the the mean is that Xi Jinping just
25:33
do nothing but win. And, and because a lot of the
25:37
problem faced by US empire is self inflected.
25:43
And, and, and so, so interestingly, at this
25:47
particular juncture, you know, we're getting that Wall Street
25:52
Journal reporting. I'm supposedly Xi Jinping purged
25:56
his top military guy for leaking nuclear secrets to the United
26:03
States. What's your take on that?
26:10
Yeah, So I looked into it. And so first of all, this, this
26:14
article in the world story genre is by Ling Ling Wei, who is kind
26:19
of infamous for bad reporting on China.
26:25
I mean, there are many instances of stories that were later
26:29
proven to be to be made-up. So the latest example, for
26:34
instance, is if, if you record Trump and XI had a phone call
26:39
during the whole Japan row where afterwards Trump called, called
26:44
Japan to tell them to turn it down on, on her article on that
26:52
was that for the first time, she initiated the call, which was
26:57
extraordinary and so on. But literally within a few
27:01
hours, both sides, the Chinese side and the US side said no,
27:06
the US side initiated the course.
27:08
So, you know, that's, that's quite typical, typical of of
27:13
her. And how would she know if
27:17
because she said it was, you know, according to Chinese
27:21
sources, like, you know, those people don't don't leak this
27:28
type of stuff or don't click period.
27:31
Like what advantage would there be for it up, you know, someone
27:39
with knowledgeable of the stuff to leak to to to the Wall Street
27:43
Journal. It's I don't know.
27:45
It makes little sense for me on the on how would you know?
27:51
So that that general, I think the way the nuclear weapon
28:02
nuclear weapon organized in in China is actually decorated to
28:12
to I mean the, the, the general in question, the the vice
28:17
chairman of the Central Military Commission could not have had
28:21
access to, to those to the secret.
28:23
There was a great thread on it by I can't remember.
28:27
Let me let me look at his name. A a, a think tanker that who
28:39
basically said it would it was just impossible for him to even
28:44
have access to, to this information in in the 1st place.
28:50
There you go. Neil Thomas, who said, yeah, the
28:57
the Chinese nuclear secrets are within the China National
29:02
Nuclear Corporation, which is decorated to, to the army
29:10
apparently. So, yeah.
29:13
So it it doesn't make sense for for plenty of reasons basically.
29:19
Yeah, now I already seen some social media, hot social media
29:25
takes. They're saying, oh, This is why
29:29
Chinese China will not invade Taiwan because we, we, we were,
29:35
we were so awesome. Our CIA were able to bribe the
29:38
top one Chinese military guy to leak their nuclear secret to us.
29:43
So now Xi Jinping have to purge his number one military guy.
29:48
That that's why by 2027, China will not be able to invade
29:52
Taiwan anymore. Great props, great, great props
29:56
to our CIA folks. I don't I don't know what to do
30:03
but laugh. I mean, nobody outside of, you
30:06
know, Beltway bubbles would think, you know, there's serious
30:10
threat of military action in Taiwan Strait in 2027.
30:14
But now they already have come up with excuse why that didn't
30:17
happen. It didn't happen because China
30:20
didn't intend to do it, but because the CIA did such a great
30:24
job able to hack. Into, I mean the top let let
30:32
them believe that if the, if they want to, yeah.
30:38
On, on, on, on the topic of, of Taiwan, actually the, the, the,
30:46
the latest National Defence strategy and, and the national
30:50
security strategy is, is, is quite interesting.
30:55
And I, I just wrote an article saying that Taiwan should read
30:59
the writing on the wall. And, and in fact, they are
31:04
reading the writing on the wall because so first of all, Taiwan
31:07
is not even mentioned in, in the latest National Defense
31:11
Strategy, which I think is, is, is the first time ever that's,
31:16
that's the case. So in and of itself, that's
31:19
quite, a, quite a signal on, on the importance of Taiwan right
31:24
now for, for the US. So what they do mention is the
31:27
first island chain, but basically it means that for for
31:34
the US, Taiwan now is nothing much more than, you know,
31:40
basically a military outpost, right?
31:43
And this is the the, the, the the triumph of the Elbridge
31:50
could be type of thinking. So Elbridge could be is, is the
31:55
Under Secretary of war right now and he's the guy who wrote the
32:00
the National Defense Strategy. And he's of course famous for
32:04
having written a book called the Strategy of Denial, where he
32:09
basically sees the Taiwanese or Taiwan, as, you know, completely
32:16
dehumanized. Like he doesn't care at all
32:19
about them as as people or doesn't care at all about them
32:24
politically like democracy and son doesn't care whatsoever is
32:29
it's they're basically a military U.S. military pun on
32:36
the their only usefulness is as a geographic feature against
32:40
China. But my point is that you know,
32:46
of course when is to themselves. They are people, sure, you know,
32:53
if they start to be seen that way by, by the US, they should
32:58
be like, this is basically the the the analogy I use is like
33:04
the shepherd sort of, you know, revealing himself as the guy
33:10
who's going to bring you to to the swatter house, right.
33:14
So as soon as they present themselves as the shepherd and
33:18
so on, it's, it's, it's all good.
33:21
You can be fooled. But if they're, you know, black
33:25
and white, black and white rights that no, in fact, they
33:30
don't care whatsoever. But you, the, the, you're just a
33:33
useful pun, then you know that, that that changes the, at least
33:40
it should shift the public opinion in, in Taiwan.
33:44
And you can see that they are shifting.
33:45
I mean, what the KMT is saying is if you, if you look at the
33:50
latest declaration by the new leader of, of the KMT, she's
33:56
saying we, we shouldn't be a poem of the US, we should have
34:00
our, our own voice on negotiate directly with the, with the
34:04
mainland. So, so you're seeing quite,
34:06
quite some changes on that as well.
34:09
I think more and more people in Taiwan are are realizing that
34:15
it's in their interest to sort of also deris from the US and
34:21
negotiate on their own directly with with the mainland for their
34:26
own interests rather than having the the US do that.
34:31
Yeah, She actually said she's going to go to mainland China to
34:34
meet with Xi Jinping, which I believe might happen this year.
34:39
And this, so this we, we live in interesting times, Arnold.
34:45
But what do you think? Where does that leave, say,
34:49
cooperation between China and Europe?
34:53
You know, China very much would like to invest in Europe.
34:56
I mean that they have expressed interest to invest in Europe for
35:01
a long time, except, you know, Europeans on American beheaded
35:08
on behalf of United States, you know, have really put a straw a
35:11
wrench in that relationship. We talked about that last time
35:15
when the Dutch government sees a Chinese 100% owned Chinese
35:19
company Nesperia and I is that going to change?
35:27
I mean, like UK just approved, you know, construction of a big
35:32
new Chinese embassy. Is this, does this signal signal
35:36
a shift in the wind in Europe, I think up to China?
35:41
I think it will take time, but I think bit by bit we're we're
35:48
going to see more and more of a of a shift.
35:52
I think Carney is leading the pack.
35:55
So with his, his, his policy on the, on EV on so on.
36:02
And that's, that's just the sensible thing to do.
36:05
Like of course we don't want to shift everything to China, but
36:12
right now the relationship is very unbalanced.
36:14
Like they're, they're basically only in America and I'm quite
36:19
distant from China, especially on, on, on, on technology, on
36:23
the, on, on sort of high value added stuff.
36:30
So it it will make sense to to rebalance somewhat, which is the
36:35
geopolitically smart thing to do when you're in a multiple world.
36:40
You don't want to depend only on one part.
36:43
You want to be in a position where you if if one part is
36:49
being too cursive on you, you can always say, well, we have
36:53
the other guy, right? So that makes sense.
36:56
But I think what makes even more sense is, is for Europe to try
37:05
to be a, a port in its in its own in its own way.
37:12
And so I think that the smart thing to do for Europe would be
37:16
to actually learn from China more than you know, be like just
37:25
buy Chinese goods on, on, on, on, on, so on.
37:27
So basically do what China did when it comes to to the West,
37:34
learning from the West in order to to become, you know, to grow
37:40
in power and so on and and to become the way China is today.
37:45
So on on China is? No, no, I have to remind you
37:49
that took China a whole century of humiliation before there's a
37:54
vibe shift, before there's a there's a, there's a change in
37:58
mentality. Europe, we're not quite there
38:01
yet. You know, we're not, we're we're
38:03
just, you know, we're, we're nowhere near the century of
38:07
humiliation in Europe. Yeah.
38:08
I mean, there might be some humiliation from Trump, but it's
38:11
nothing compared to what China has experienced.
38:14
So I don't know, you know what that means.
38:18
For yeah, I complete I completely agree.
38:21
It will take time and I really believe in the in the sentence
38:26
that, you know, good times create weak men, weak men create
38:31
bad times on the so we're in the weak men create bad times era.
38:36
We haven't been released through the the bad times yet on the
38:41
strong men are definitely not here.
38:43
So that that that we we completely agree on.
38:49
But yeah, medium to to long term, that is what I wish for
38:55
for Europe. I wrote another article
38:59
advocating for goodism because Europe needs an ideological
39:06
shift first and foremost, which is all about, you know, having
39:11
strong men emerge. So it was in that that kind of
39:16
beautiful world of the end of history where everyone will
39:21
become liberal democracy and so on, that they're still kind of
39:24
the in in this mindset. They're sort of starting to see
39:28
that makes zero sense anymore. So they're realize they're
39:34
starting to realize that the old ideology is is dying.
39:39
So it means they will need a new one on, on when Europe needs a
39:42
new ideology. You know, it, it can be very bad
39:46
news historically, right? So, so we, we, we, we always
39:52
like to call others extremists, but we're the ones who started
39:57
both world wars. We're the one who started the
40:00
the Crusades, the Inquisition and all of this stuff who had
40:05
Auschwitz on So it it can be prey ban.
40:10
So that's why. I, I, I was thinking about what
40:14
European ideology can be positive and what suited to a
40:19
time like this. And to me God ISM is, is the
40:23
only one because it's very positive, it's constructive.
40:26
God ISM is all about grandeur, greatness, which is very similar
40:32
to the change concept of national rejuvenation, but it's
40:38
not at all about hatred. So it's, it's not about, you
40:44
know, hating on, I don't know, foreigners hating on, based on
40:48
religion and so on. It's, it's, it's about loving
40:52
yourself much more than it's about hating others.
40:55
So it's, and it's about strength as well, which is exactly what,
41:00
what Europe needs right now. So I if if, if I advise anything
41:04
it will be a shift to to this rather than fascism or God knows
41:09
what. But Arnold, can we even speak of
41:12
Europe as a whole? Because, you know, I, I think a
41:15
lot of time we're talking about Europe.
41:17
We're thinking about what Donald Rumsfeld calls the old Europe,
41:22
you know, France and Germany, and then there's what he calls
41:26
the new Europe, which is, you know, the Baltics, the Poland,
41:29
etcetera. And right now, you know, they,
41:34
especially the Baltic countries they have a vested interest in,
41:40
continue like the standoff with Russia, right?
41:45
Like they for their own reasons that, you know, for historical
41:48
reason, whatever. And like this, can Europe really
41:53
stand on its own as a Pole without resolving this 10 this
41:59
the current conflict with Russia?
42:01
I mean, like, cause 'cause it was the whole reason they
42:03
thought the European leaders thought they needed United
42:06
States is because they thought they needed US to contain Russia
42:10
in Ukraine, right? And and, and, and, and, and
42:15
some, I remember some commenter put a comment in our, our
42:20
interview last time says can we even call?
42:23
There's one Europe, you know. Apparently the Baltic countries
42:26
have very different priorities than, say, France or Germany.
42:30
Or Spain. And, and This is why actually
42:34
girlism is also something that I recommended is because he has a
42:39
radically different view on Europe than the current Europe.
42:43
So his own vision of Europe was a Europe of nations rather than
42:51
a supranational state Europe, which is, I mean, right now we,
42:58
we kind of have a weird mix of both.
43:01
Europe is both supranational for, you know, some stuff like
43:06
they're quite like nations don't have sovereignty on a lot of
43:11
topics anymore. So it, it went at the
43:13
supranational level for, for Europe.
43:16
But nations still have some power, right?
43:20
So a nation like France can still do it's pursue it's
43:25
independent foreign policy to some extent.
43:29
So the goal was much more on the let's not have any of the
43:35
supranational aspect. Let's, let's create a Europe of
43:39
nations where as sovereign nations we collaborate on on
43:44
some topics. So he's not anti European, but
43:47
he's very much pro national sovereignty, if that makes
43:51
sense. And he's, he wanted to build a,
43:57
a Europe of, of defence, for instance, a European army to
44:00
some extent, but not as a European army, but more as you
44:05
know, national armies having some sort of European alliance
44:11
much more than, you know, an army at the upper level.
44:18
So I think that vision is still very relevant today because
44:25
Dagorski insight is he really believes in peoples.
44:29
So he says that, you know, there is such a thing as a, as a
44:33
people, as a, as a French people, as a German people,
44:36
Polish people and so on. And you're not going to change
44:40
that. In fact, there were some
44:43
projects in in the past, in Euros past to, to, to change
44:47
that. You know, Napoleon, the Roman
44:51
Empire and sun and Europe kind of always re vaticanized to, to
44:58
re become different people. So it's very, very hard to
45:01
change that. So his point was, let's not even
45:05
attempt it. Let let's just acknowledge the
45:07
basic fact that peoples exist. So the nation will always be a
45:12
thing, but let's agree to cooperate as sovereign states
45:17
for our common benefits. I think that makes that makes
45:23
much more sense on when there are some countries to your
45:26
points where you know that that disagree on some topics like
45:32
like they will probably always do, like the Baltics on, on
45:38
Russia and so on. When you know, France, for
45:42
instance, which is much further away from from Russia, sees them
45:45
as much less of a, of a, of a threat.
45:50
The goal stake was we should have a core European countries
45:55
like the big powerful states like France and Germany, for
45:59
instance, try to put their pressure to convince others, not
46:05
not force them, but convince them.
46:09
And if that doesn't work, you know, then we can also agree to
46:12
disagree on on some topics on on.
46:15
That's fine. That's fair, that's fair that
46:20
that is. This has been a very fascinating
46:24
conversation. Is there any topic that you wish
46:26
to cover? I mean, I think we covered most
46:35
of the most of the latest, latest stuff this morning.
46:44
I was just writing on the on the 9 dash line because for some
46:49
reason the the South China Sea issue is, is is trending again.
46:55
And the reason uses me how people completely misunderstand
46:59
this this question. But it's not that's that current
47:05
topic. Right.
47:09
Yeah. I, I, I, I don't trust these
47:10
social media training anymore because it, it seemed it, it's
47:14
easily manipulated, right. I mean, like, because I remember
47:18
when even back in 2018 or so when Israel were bombing Gaza,
47:25
they, they are all the big news media like New York Times coming
47:31
out with headline like Xinjiang is the largest open air prison
47:35
in the world, right? I mean, it's, it's almost like a
47:38
blatant attempt to gain the search engine.
47:41
If you, you know, because everybody knew the largest open
47:44
air prison is Gaza. But now, now they, they have,
47:47
they're pumping out all these articles trying to, trying to
47:50
gain the search engine results. So I, I, I, I, I don't trust
47:54
these. I I don't, I don't think how you
47:56
know I don't, I don't trust the organicity of all these trending
48:01
topics on social media. Because I mean, yeah, 11
48:07
interesting topic on that is TikTok because that makes it so
48:11
obvious, right? The fact that TikTok was just
48:16
handed over, TikTok US was just handed over to the new NLS and
48:22
everyone can see that actually they had much more freedom of
48:26
speech under Chinese ownership than under US ownership, which
48:34
which is, it's quite funny. It's completely comprised to the
48:38
the narrative they've always been told.
48:40
To your point, it shows the extent to which you can censor
48:46
on on game game social networks with the algorithm.
48:50
And so I'm like, apparently as soon as you start to speak about
48:55
some, some topics like Zionism in a in a negative fashion or
48:59
something like that is just completely or Epstein or yeah,
49:03
it's just completely blocked or, or ice.
49:07
Yeah, yeah. I mean, a lot of big account
49:11
have reported problems where they their view sketch their,
49:15
their their new latest post just get 0 views.
49:18
I mean, it doesn't say they're blocked.
49:20
It's just nobody can see them. Even people go visit their
49:23
profile won't won't see their latest post.
49:26
You know, maybe because they talk about Epstein or ICE or any
49:30
anti Trump topics. And this, this is goes to show,
49:35
you know, like all the accusations is like confession,
49:39
you know, whatever they accuse China of doing is what they plan
49:43
to do themselves. And and you know, like, like one
49:48
guy, I think under my comments. Oh, yeah, yeah.
49:51
Of course. You can also go to Tiananmen
49:53
Square and Yao down with Reagan. But again, this is completely
50:00
besides the point. TikTok US is a American
50:04
platform, you know, where it's mostly American users who air
50:11
their views, right. And right now with American
50:15
ownership, your freedom of speech has been limited on that
50:19
platform, which wasn't the case when, when Chinese, Chinese had
50:24
ownership because why would China care about political
50:28
topics in United States? Exactly.
50:31
So that's why you had the freedom to discuss it.
50:34
And, and this is the, the point I make repeatedly, you know,
50:37
like whatever you, whatever your opinions of Chinese government,
50:42
you know, the Chinese government policy primarily effects Chinese
50:46
citizens residing in China. I have no reason to, to be
50:51
worried about Chinese government, even, you know, to,
50:54
to, to read, to, to, to, to somehow spy on me through my EV,
50:59
because I do own a Chinese EV, because Chinese government has
51:02
no jurisdiction over me. We're asking if it's Uncle Sam
51:07
is completely different because they do have jurisdiction over
51:11
me. You know, I will be much more
51:12
afraid if the US government have that kind of power over me.
51:17
But you know so somehow. I, I, I think it, it goes even
51:22
beyond that because I, I China, I mean, the, the, the China
51:30
owned TikTok in the US actually used to respect U.S. law.
51:34
So they, they even did some, some censorship when it was
51:39
owned by, by China. I, I went on it a couple of
51:43
times on, for instance, even if you compare with X, it was much
51:47
less assertive when it comes to, to topics like Palestine on, on,
51:54
on the, on Zionism and Swan. It was actually quite, quite
51:58
mild compared to acts in, in, in, in, in many ways, because
52:03
they were respecting U.S. law. What, what, what TikTok did in
52:06
each country is that they respect the, the local law.
52:09
So that's the strange thing with this one is the American
52:13
government even going beyond much beyond its own laws, they
52:19
wanted to be even more strict that's than their their, their
52:25
own local calls for. So it's, it's quite, it's quite
52:29
crazy, yeah. And and quite scary that there
52:33
is a very very scary trend in the US towards some sort of
52:39
fascist like states. Yeah, I mean it, it it's it's
52:46
crazy. Like I I never thought I will
52:50
see the day when they're opening, opening openly
52:54
executing American citizens. And there will be a significant,
52:59
I'll, I'll buy a minority, but still a significant minority of
53:03
people cheering for it online, cheering for the government,
53:06
executing American citizens. And that, and this is not,
53:10
they're not even wrong people. They're, they're executing white
53:14
people, you know, like, like white mothers and a white man.
53:17
And, and all these people, you know, all these MAGA supporters
53:21
still openly cheering for it. I mean, like it's, it's, it's,
53:25
it's mind boggling, you know? And the government is, is
53:30
cheering for it, calling them domestic terrorists and so on.
53:33
It's, it's quite scary. It's it's not this dissimilar to
53:37
like the brown or black shirts in in Europe.
53:42
Yeah, and it's like, it's like all these people, all these
53:48
outright or Mogga people, they don't, you know, you, you
53:52
realize that they actually don't care about the so-called
53:56
principle they stand for, you know, because they they decry
53:59
everyday about why genocide, you know, like why white women not
54:02
have enough children. And they're they're they're
54:05
supporting the ice executing a white mother, you know, a white,
54:08
white child. And then you have people, they
54:12
say, oh, they support Second Amendment to carry arms.
54:15
You know what? You know, we need weapons to
54:17
protect us from tyrannical government.
54:19
But now you actually have a case where a registered nurse was
54:23
legally carrying arms and then he was executed by, by by
54:27
government agent. And then they're cheering for
54:29
it. And, and so it's, it's just
54:32
like, it's tribal. These people just like, you know
54:34
what, I, I will support my tribe to execute the other tribe.
54:39
You know, I don't care, damn the consequences, damn the
54:42
principles. I just don't like the other
54:44
group of people and I want them dead.
54:46
And, and that's, that's the level of political discourse
54:50
right now in United States. So I This is why I'm glad I I
54:54
got out, you know, but I didn't plan it.
54:57
But now I'm glad I'm in Bali. I just looking, looking into US.
55:01
It's such a shit show. No, no, no, I completely agree.
55:07
Yeah, it's it's it's very scary. It's it's almost like bit by bit
55:11
you can see it's stepping in some sort of Stevie War like
55:17
like status where there is just so much open hatred between
55:22
between each other and encouraged by by the USI mean
55:27
that's another big feature of the Trump government, the
55:29
national security strategy and so on.
55:32
They reprioritize, you know, domestic enemies.
55:37
They they could them like like that's cutting their.
55:40
Own number one priority now. Terrorist.
55:43
Yeah. Yeah, Latin America is only
55:46
second priority. The number one priority is
55:49
domestic terrorism, yeah. And those people are, Yeah,
55:57
they're not. They're not terrorists at all.
55:58
I mean, the guy was a nurse, right?
56:02
Yeah. Yeah, on that.
56:05
Well, on that happy note, we can wrap it up.
56:10
If people want to follow your work or know, where would they
56:13
go? I mean Twitter or sub stack
56:20
under my name on the Beltran. OK.
56:23
Well, thank you very much, Arnold for making the time to
56:26
speak to us. And thanks everyone for and
56:30
thanks for everyone for tuning in.
56:32
Until next time. Bye bye.