Latest / International Flavor: Where the Truth Tastes Better / Munich Meltdowns and Multipolar Math: AOC’s Taiwan Fumble, Kallas vs. Walz, Jaishankar’s Reality Check, Turkey’s Nuclear Warning, Epstein Shadow

Transcript

Munich Meltdowns and Multipolar Math: AOC’s Taiwan Fumble, Kallas vs. Walz, Jaishankar’s Reality Check, Turkey’s Nuclear Warning, Epstein Shadow · International Flavor: Where the Truth Tastes Better

• 0:00
  Hello, good morning. Welcome. I happen to be Samuel Trapp. This happens to be
• 0:06
  International Flavor and it's coming to you live from DAM Radio and damradio.com forward slash
• 0:14
  live. Should you choose to phone in you may do so at 573-746-8020. We are in the Lake Ozark
• 0:24
  real estate of the art studio on the biggest day in radio history. Every Wednesday, people from
• 0:34
  all over the planet focus on DAM Radio and the beauty of the talk that goes on on this show.
• 0:41
  And I get to be the start, the kickoff, if you will, of that effort every farging Wednesday.
• 0:50
  And do you remember Johnny Dangerously? Or was it Michael Keaton? That was pretty funny.
• 0:55
  Jew fargy nice holes, Jew bastards. He wouldn't swear, but you know, he was a mafia dude as an
• 1:02
  old movie from a long time ago. Johnny Dangerously, no swear words, trying to keep it where it's
• 1:09
  visible on TV. Anyway, there is a brutal, brutal events. And I've been talking Monday, Tuesday
• 1:16
  about the big events of the world that went on at the Munich Security Conference. And at least
• 1:23
  in the beginning, and it might take me a while because I'm going to provide you some backdrop.
• 1:29
  And I've been pretty brutal against Rubio and his defending Western civilization and all the
• 1:36
  advertising, trying to get back to the rules based order, globalism, BS crap and all that.
• 1:44
  And there's some realities that he said in there. So I don't mean to beat up on him too much,
• 1:50
  but it's always the same old advertising point. Very little substance in a whole lot of
• 2:00
  advertising watchwords. And it's not just him. Remember, I'd be critical against everybody.
• 2:07
  There was a great moment when Hillary Clinton got slammed because she went there as if she's
• 2:13
  some kind of an expert. And she, of course, tried to turn it all back to rules based in Ukraine.
• 2:20
  We've abandoned them. She's the only reason she went in Sam's humble opinion. The only reason
• 2:27
  she even showed up over there. And somebody put her on a panel with the Czech foreign minister.
• 2:33
  And I'll get to a little bit of that today. But I believe the only reason she went
• 2:37
  is she's trying to distract from what's going on and still be relevant about the Epstein
• 2:44
  investigation, which is going to be brutal when they, you know, there's been some brutal stuff
• 2:50
  in there. They want people to be targeted for this. The rest of the world is, you know,
• 2:57
  somebody over in Europe, I forget who, maybe it was Alex Christopher or Alex,
• 3:02
  the other Alex from England, whose name I don't remember. But I like to watch and listen to him.
• 3:09
  I think he's got a pretty good point of view and he knows England heavy. So he's fun. I was on
• 3:15
  their program one time. So I listened to both of those two. And I think they're highly credible.
• 3:22
  And Alex Christopher usually comes to you live from Cyprus or from Greece or somewhere cool.
• 3:28
  And he comes to you live from Russia. And so you get a lot of good info from those channels.
• 3:34
  And they're good to listen to. You don't have time to listen to him all the time,
• 3:37
  but they give some pretty good points of view. And somebody said that
• 3:46
  the king, the prince, you know, had to give up his title because of Epstein connections.
• 3:53
  There have been people that stepped down in Europe, in France, and in other people who have
• 3:59
  been implicated in Epstein. But nothing happens in the U.S. with these nobody gets removed, nobody.
• 4:06
  Now, I'm not saying I agree with that. I'm just saying that from a foreign perspective of the
• 4:11
  spectacle going on about Epstein here, and nothing ever happens to anyone. Because here, it's all
• 4:19
  about who you know, who you blow. And you've got plenty of that going on in the politics of
• 4:25
  America. And nothing will ever happen to any of these jokers that were involved. You know,
• 4:31
  whether you believe the guy was, you know, hung in prison or he hung himself, you know, there's
• 4:37
  nobody's ever, that's how they hide the ball. You know, they take some other peripheral issue and
• 4:43
  go, yeah, but he can't provide any evidence of that. Well, of course not. You release all these
• 4:49
  documents, but nobody ever pays the piper. So that's where it comes from, from the other points
• 4:55
  of view in the world. Now, all that being said, I am just a commentator on that. I don't like the
• 5:01
  nastiness of it all. I don't like the videos that they showed. There's a video of Epstein's, one of
• 5:07
  the places in Epstein's, and they got pictures. It's a massage table in the middle of a room,
• 5:12
  and they have this massage table in the room, and pictures of naked women all around the room
• 5:17
  that are highlighted, or what do you call it, blacked out portions over the areola. And I could
• 5:24
  give you lectures about areola. Right now, I could do it. And I plan to. Make sure to listen
• 5:31
  to Civic Outlaws come Friday, because our Civic Outlaws new podcast that we started last Friday
• 5:38
  can also be found. We haven't finished up the hosting yet. So I posted it, Friday's
• 5:46
  Civic Outlaws on my internationalflavor.com spot, just because it's easy, and I'm going to continue
• 5:54
  to do that for a while. And when I start my Russian version, I think I'm going to start
• 6:00
  coming in here. I haven't picked a time yet, but I've been talking to the master about bringing my
• 6:08
  Russian language ability, like picking a middle of the night thing, because I never sleep,
• 6:14
  and coming in here into the Lake Ozark Real Estate of the Art Studio, and doing my program
• 6:20
  in Russian, and get some Russian people to come on through the connections we have through...
• 6:28
  What the heck is the name of it? I forget the name of the way we communicate,
• 6:35
  but it's a... Man, I can't believe I forgot it. It's on the tip of my tongue,
• 6:40
  and I could probably open it up if I could find the Discord. That's what it's called. I had to
• 6:46
  go out and get the Discord. So I can get people from Russia to talk it through Discord, or we
• 6:50
  can use my video platform or anything like that. I'm still developing that, but I do plan to start
• 6:55
  at least once a week my Russian speaking channel, and that'll be both on the radio and on video
• 7:01
  being broadcast on my YouTube. So I got some exciting things in the works, anyway, on that
• 7:08
  end. And I'm still focused, though, this week. Here we are on the biggest radio day in damn
• 7:17
  radio history. Well, since last Friday, or since last Wednesday, anyway. But Wednesdays are the day
• 7:25
  that you must be listening. There's a very funny clip, and this clip I have pulled for you is
• 7:33
  Ocasio-Cortez, A-O-C, at the Munich Security Conference. And what's really funny is I went
• 7:41
  and tried to find a couple of times her entire clip, and I didn't look all that hard because
• 7:46
  I didn't want to hear her rambling anyway. I've got an analysis of what she did say,
• 7:52
  and I'll provide that. But I wanted to start with, because I'm going to talk about a couple of good
• 7:58
  points that came out on the new global order and all that other nonsense that we're going to go
• 8:03
  through today, because that's the topic that's been going on for the last few days. And as an
• 8:08
  American, it's good to know these things, okay? And good to know where the rest of the world stands,
• 8:13
  and how they see our new, still globalist, but instead of globalist, we're the globalist king,
• 8:22
  right? We have the globalist unipolar order that is basically Trump's the king, his disciples are
• 8:32
  Rubio and Waltz, headed out to the Munich Security Conference. And they're professing,
• 8:40
  geez, we've done it alone. And there's some pushback on that from a bunch. So
• 8:46
  Clinton's showing up as for two purposes. She knows that Trump is a little bit vulnerable right
• 8:52
  now, number one, because of his I'm the king sort of activities over the last several, well,
• 9:02
  over the last year, since he's been the god emperor of the planet. And he is continuing in that regard
• 9:09
  as are his disciples. You know, you will listen to us, and if you don't, we'll invade your country,
• 9:14
  overthrow your guy and move on. If you don't, we'll bomb the crap out of you, Iran, on behalf of
• 9:19
  Israel, and keep going. And that is the reality of the world right now. And so there's some pushback,
• 9:29
  specifically at the Munich Security Conference. And Callas, Kaya Callas, put some interesting in
• 9:37
  there, we're going to get into her commentary today. But AOC was hilarious. And so this is AOC's
• 9:43
  answering of a question, which I believe I've teed up correctly. She's never any good anyway.
• 9:50
  And then JD fans got to beat up on her afterward. This is pretty funny. Actually, she's asked a
• 9:58
  question. And I think it starts right at when the question is finished. You don't even get to hear
• 10:02
  the question. And this is from a YouTube cut that is more focused on JD Vance and his takedown of
• 10:13
  her than it is upon her response to the question. But her response to the question was also pretty
• 10:19
  idiotic when you get to it, you know. But the question had to do with what are you going to do
• 10:24
  if China attacks Taiwan? What are you going to do? And here is the beginning of her answer. This is
• 10:34
  good stuff. I think that this is such a, you know, I think that this is a, this is, of course, a
• 10:49
  very longstanding policy of the United States. And that's it. That's the beginning of her,
• 10:59
  of her, I think this is a, you know, and you know what? I've been muddled for words under pressure
• 11:11
  before as well. But go to a public speaking class or something. Go to something where you feel
• 11:17
  comfortable. Or at least somebody said to me once that I had, I've always had what they call diarrhea
• 11:24
  of the mouth. Like you wind me up, you got to sometimes shut me up afterward. And at least,
• 11:31
  though, I will have an opinion. And by the way, if I don't have one, you know what I'll do? I'll say,
• 11:37
  well, I wasn't prepared to answer that question. I really couldn't answer intelligently on that.
• 11:41
  But that's an experience thing. Or if I gave you my initial points of view, I would qualify
• 11:47
  them somehow and say, listen, I'm going to tell you what I think just off the top of my head.
• 11:52
  However, I don't have any concrete convictions on that. And you can convince me another way. But it
• 11:59
  would seem to me X. What are you going to do if China, you could ask me that today. What are you
• 12:04
  going to do if China and force attacks Taiwan? I would say, well, this is me. And I don't know enough
• 12:10
  about it to be an expert on it, which clearly she's not either. But for me, I would answer it as
• 12:16
  such. Well, we would consider it with the variables at the time, how it happened, why it happened,
• 12:23
  the circumstances, whether it was in response to something. We know there's been pressure going on
• 12:29
  for years in that area. We also know that Taiwan is historically a part of China. And all of these
• 12:38
  things are accurate. But I could be convinced otherwise. Now, I'm not a leader in the government
• 12:44
  either. I'm just a political commentator or a guy with his own point of view. But that is has been
• 12:52
  all over the Internet, you know, beaten up on the old Ocasio-Cortez, including, of course,
• 12:59
  at Fox News. And here's J.D. Vance responding to it. Here he goes.
• 13:04
  Martha, you bring me on your show. You show me the most uncomfortable 20 seconds of television
• 13:08
  I have ever seen. My takeaway from that. What do you think? Well, I think it's a person who
• 13:14
  doesn't know what she actually thinks. And I've seen this way too much in Washington with
• 13:18
  politicians where they are given lines. And when you ask them to go outside the lines they were
• 13:23
  given, they completely fall apart. Because, look, does AOC, does anybody really believe
• 13:28
  that AOC has very thoughtful ideas about the global world order or about what the United
• 13:35
  States should do with our policy in Asia or our policy in Europe? No, this is a person who is
• 13:41
  mouthing the slogans that somebody else gave her. And all of that is very true. And I'm not going
• 13:47
  to go further into that, but he basically mocked her, you know, and rightly so, because
• 13:54
  taking a person like that who wouldn't be able, when she started in Congress, you could have
• 14:01
  handed her a map and said, where is Taiwan? Point it out for me. Show me Ukraine on the map. And
• 14:08
  odds are, at least in my humble opinion, she wouldn't be able to do that. Now, that's nothing
• 14:13
  to be ashamed of. There are tons and tons of Americans. Hell, I miss countries, you know,
• 14:17
  you point them out to me and I am pretty well versed. There's 200 countries. Anybody that
• 14:23
  at them all and gets them all right, I'll have a huge respect for. But the fact is,
• 14:28
  Americans are all over this blue and yellow flag crap, and they don't even know why.
• 14:32
  They couldn't even point out Ukraine on the map. They'd say, oh, there's Russia,
• 14:37
  so it's got to be next to there. But half of them would pick Belarus. The other half would pick
• 14:41
  Turkey. You know, it's nonsense. And I don't mean that. It's just reality. It's not important in
• 14:48
  people's lives where these countries are located. And but for Ocasio-Cortez, it should be. And
• 14:54
  J.D. Vance, of course, as a vice president, he's got a little bit different role. If Ocasio-Cortez
• 14:59
  is really doing her job, she's defending the people of her district in New York. That's what
• 15:05
  she's doing. And but she has higher higher ambitions. And so that's what's actually
• 15:11
  happening. I don't want to beat up on her too much, but I thought it was hilarious.
• 15:14
  And I've always thought she was just, you know, way too young to have any opinion on anything
• 15:22
  anyway. But she got the job, you know, more power to her if her constituents are ready
• 15:28
  to put it out there. I also think that the old Clinton monster showed up there
• 15:36
  for like I told you earlier to do that. And I don't know if I should share that next. I think
• 15:41
  no, I'm going to switch to the. So there's a good clip. There was an interview, a panel
• 15:48
  discussion and two people. There were five, six people on it. And one of them is I can't remember
• 15:56
  she's foreign minister if she's something else from Denmark. OK. And she is she's a riot,
• 16:02
  you know, watch watching her. You know, her views are so solid on Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine,
• 16:07
  that part of you wonders, you know, why Ukraine's not winning. And all of them are so pro-Ukraine.
• 16:14
  Much of the much of the rhetoric and much of the discussion at the security conference was all
• 16:21
  about this. And so we have Miss Collis speaking. And I'm going to I'm going to turn that down and
• 16:27
  make sure we get to the proper points. And there Walsh is on there, too. Mike Walsh. And he's
• 16:32
  clashing over these Trump discussions. And this is a long it's probably a 15, 16 minute cut. And
• 16:40
  I don't want to play all of it, nor will I. But this is a pretty good couple of pieces. And I
• 16:48
  definitely want to get to them. And and I'm trying to decide if I'm going to give you my commentary
• 16:52
  on them first to kind of prep it for you. And I think I'll do that and then play it for you,
• 16:59
  because she all the Europeans were given their typical a lot of more. Pissed off or or upset or
• 17:09
  didn't care for maybe is probably a better term. Rubio's speech. Now, I didn't care for Rubio's
• 17:15
  speech either. I think he's, you know, well, all this I don't like this rules based order
• 17:22
  BS that everybody throws out because the rules based order only applies to the people that are
• 17:29
  in your club. And that is what was certainly put out by Waltz, even by callous and by I watched
• 17:39
  another interview between Jai Shankar and the I can't remember something pool. I can't remember
• 17:47
  his name, but we'll get to it because he's on my list to talk to the German foreign minister.
• 17:52
  And they all talk about this, this we have partners, we have orders. And Kala said something
• 17:58
  when she got started in this because she was taking down Waltz and taking down Rubio.
• 18:04
  And her initial comment was, look, Russia goes when Russia goes to war, they go alone.
• 18:14
  But when America goes, basically, you have friends and allies that go with you. Now,
• 18:20
  I don't believe that statement, but it's a it's a decent thesis to start with. And there is some
• 18:27
  reality to it of perception. You know, if you perceive that, I don't believe it's true,
• 18:33
  but it's a good perception to have. And what her point was, and she said it, too. Well,
• 18:39
  we die on your behalf, too. We send people out, you know, and right now, remember what Trump,
• 18:45
  what Waltz, what Rubio, what they're all doing. They're all bitching about money and they're
• 18:49
  about financing all of this and who has to pay. That's what they're doing. And so they've gone
• 18:55
  over and they've done it consistently for a year. You know, you you jokers, you never pay,
• 19:01
  pay up. You know, here we are all by ourselves defending the planet. Now, I don't believe with
• 19:09
  that. I don't agree with that either. But that's what that's what they say. Or it's a good thesis
• 19:15
  statement, but it's not accurate, you know, and and you're pissing off the world by saying those
• 19:22
  things. And probably rightly so. I'm willing to listen to that. You know, a caller yesterday
• 19:29
  called in and was wanted to tell me that, geez, you know, the world of dominance comes up. And
• 19:34
  they were talking about the law of the jungle in this specific clip. And I may let it get there,
• 19:39
  but they say even in the jungle, you know, people work together, you know, people,
• 19:43
  people work together. So anyway, the law of the jungle is starting to bite back. And here here it
• 19:49
  is her her take. And I've never respected this woman. She's she's got some famous gaffes that
• 19:58
  she isn't on. But but and she's from one of the Baltic states. So extremely anti-Russian,
• 20:05
  extremely. I don't even think she knows why. Probably because she grew up in that system,
• 20:09
  you know, and then she's decided that Russia is the world's dominating view. And that's the
• 20:16
  unfortunate part of the entire security conference. It didn't say anything about security at all.
• 20:23
  All it did was give platitudes and same old crap. We're fighting for global dominance of the West
• 20:29
  and we're fighting for rules based order that we apply to everybody else, but not to ourselves.
• 20:34
  So here she is. And I'll let it go as far as I decide to let it go.
• 20:40
  So I don't really buy this argument that we are not doing doing anything. You know,
• 20:46
  in the beginning, you said also that is it that actually the rules of jungle and the might makes
• 20:52
  right actually has always been there. And and one might say that is true that those who have the
• 20:58
  power have had different rules. But even in jungle, you know, animals cooperate.
• 21:05
  We're asking that the rest of the world to be there with us in a fair way financially,
• 21:12
  because there is a cost to the status quo and the status quo was not sustainable anymore.
• 21:19
  And that's, I think, on behalf of our constituents, a fair question to ask.
• 21:23
  That's how do you respond to that? It's a reasonable point.
• 21:27
  Surely. No, of course it is.
• 21:29
  But if you if you look at also to the United Nations and all the contributions, then
• 21:35
  when it comes to the development aid, Europe is doing the biggest share.
• 21:42
  So so I don't really buy this argument that we are not doing.
• 21:46
  The questions that we are all asking ourselves is the old system at a big picture system of
• 21:52
  multilateral rules, engagement, alliances is changing.
• 21:57
  And we are wondering what the United States, where it wants to go and what it wants to do.
• 22:02
  And is it a world of might is right, great power politics unconstrained?
• 22:07
  Because and this is the question to you. Does the president believe in a multilateral system
• 22:13
  where there are rules that would constrain the United States or not?
• 22:17
  NATO is stronger because of our leadership and push for the reforms that were badly needed,
• 22:24
  namely the contributions. The U.N. will be stronger at the end of this process.
• 22:29
  The status quo was unsustainable and not working in places like Gaza or Azerbaijan, Armenia.
• 22:36
  You have to ask yourself, why were we 18 months ago in so many active wars around the world?
• 22:42
  And I think it's a fair question for the president to say, why hasn't the U.N. been
• 22:47
  able to resolve issues like a border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand or
• 22:54
  or Azerbaijan, Armenia, or we could walk around the world or Kashmir
• 22:59
  and India and Pakistan, where we faced a very serious nuclear escalation.
• 23:04
  So what I'm hearing outside of forums like this privately.
• 23:07
  You got to see Kaya Collis's face on this. She's rolling her eyes and breathe.
• 23:14
  Oh, here we go. It's all you, you, you. It's all we've done, we've done, we've done.
• 23:21
  You know, it's all the U.S., every bit of it.
• 23:24
  Is thank you for American leadership. America has to lead.
• 23:27
  If we have to have more focused plurilateral or focused multilateral
• 23:32
  organizations to do so, I think that should be perfectly acceptable.
• 23:35
  If we're getting the results that results and in peace and security.
• 23:41
  Yeah, yeah. OK, thank you. I think that was actually very clear.
• 23:44
  Questions. Lady here in the fourth.
• 23:46
  Yeah, well, that is it was right after that where she said and I may have to go back to my history
• 23:52
  because I want this quote of what she said. And I think let me I'm going to turn it down here
• 24:01
  because what it's important to get two quotes from her, two clips.
• 24:06
  And she said, you know, that was her her law of the jungle.
• 24:09
  And basically, she said, well, of course, it's the law of the jungle.
• 24:13
  But they're reacting to the continual U.S. commentary over there, which, by the way,
• 24:18
  is true. None of this, not a word of it is is incorrect and not.
• 24:22
  But but it's from a from a perspective of me, me, me, mine, mine, mine.
• 24:27
  Now, now, now. And this is what the U.S. has gone out under the Trump administration
• 24:33
  and said, this is what we're selling. Well, you know, you guys you guys aren't
• 24:38
  doing anything. You know, you're you're doing you're doing nothing.
• 24:43
  And Kala says, well, we funded most of the development projects.
• 24:47
  You know, that's EU. And we're also saying we just want some money, but
• 24:51
  we're doing it on our own anyway, that that change is coming.
• 24:55
  But it's either going to be us making the change because might makes right.
• 24:59
  And there were a lot of focus on that from a lot of different points.
• 25:02
  And Hillary Clinton had to go through the same the same analysis.
• 25:06
  Wouldn't some with the four? I think he was the foreign minister of Czech Republic.
• 25:11
  So let's see here. Let's get to what Kala said, because I think I got the right one pulled up
• 25:16
  here. Hang on just a second. And in the in the global, if we if we take the superpowers,
• 25:23
  what is actually the difference? You know, when when, for example, Russia goes to war,
• 25:29
  they go alone because they don't have allies. When America goes to wars, then,
• 25:35
  you know, a lot of us go with you and we lose or lose our people on the way.
• 25:40
  So so that means that you also need us. Now, that's the first time I've ever heard her get,
• 25:48
  you know, some applause, because usually she's all she is, is platitudes and, you know,
• 25:55
  Russia bad, we're good and rules based, you know, and rules applied to somebody else,
• 26:01
  but never equally. And she's always been that way. The whole EU is that way.
• 26:06
  The US is that way in many respects. But now under the Trump thing, it's like, you know,
• 26:10
  the rules screw it. We don't even have to justify it anymore. We're doing what we want.
• 26:16
  And they got really scared over the Denmark thing. There's, you know, some long discussions.
• 26:20
  I watch so much of this. It's like there's a lot of good things in this conference,
• 26:26
  but it's the same old, same old platitudes from the West and completely ignoring the issues.
• 26:32
  OK, and they completely ignored the issues here with as far as dominating the world from this
• 26:38
  global order. All of them are still saying rules based order. But everybody knows
• 26:43
  these rules do not apply to everyone. And that is the problem, is the structure.
• 26:50
  They talked quite a bit about reform in reforming the U.N. Jaishankar, which I definitely am going
• 26:57
  to get to today. And so I don't want to spend too much more time on Miss Kalish. But let's get
• 27:02
  through what she's got here, because this is about I might let the whole thing play, but it's only
• 27:07
  like three, four minutes in your, you know, to be this superpower, because if we look at the bigger
• 27:13
  picture, I mean, in terms of economic might, I mean, China is a very, very powerful country
• 27:20
  in terms of military might as well. So what is the difference between you and the other superpowers
• 27:28
  so far is the allies. So but I'm coming to this point that, you know, of course, we are willing
• 27:36
  to fight for the world where there are some kind of rules because majority or actually all the
• 27:43
  European countries are small countries or those who haven't realized that they are small countries.
• 27:48
  Some kind of rules. Well, people in India have been talking about that for the longest time.
• 27:56
  People in Brazil and other parts of the global south have been talking about it for the longest
• 28:02
  time. The rules based alleged order always is dominated by people like her West, West, West,
• 28:12
  West, West, West. And they completely forget the rest of the world, which has a far greater
• 28:19
  population. India and China are never treated as as real parts of that. They're just ignored in the
• 28:29
  U.N. and in other places. They don't count. They are they are a level below. They may exist,
• 28:38
  but they exist so long as you know, she said her and she's going to talk about democracy here in a
• 28:44
  minute. And let's let her do that, because they look down upon them because you don't support
• 28:51
  our view of the world. And they'd said several people said it. And including the Germans,
• 28:57
  the Germans and the Czechs. And here it goes. So they had their talking points ready yet. But
• 29:04
  we are small countries, so we need rules based order. And it is clear that the current rules
• 29:10
  based order, you know, it is it has been put in place after the Second World War, considering all
• 29:16
  what was happening there. What were the powers fighting then? And it doesn't serve the world
• 29:21
  right now. But what serves the world is, you know, the the rules really that are protecting
• 29:28
  everybody so that, you know, nobody's above the law. And I think that is the difference
• 29:33
  that we actually want partnership. Nobody's above the law except those we decide are above the law.
• 29:41
  We pick who's above the law. And it's usually the EU, the U.S.. You know, we do what we want
• 29:46
  and we apply the rules to everybody else. And so this rules based order, nobody's buying it anymore.
• 29:54
  Certainly not me. And and it's just it's just been a an advertising phrase, at least since
• 30:03
  Clinton's and probably since the Bush one. And for this rules based rules based my ass,
• 30:09
  it's it's rules based for as long as you are the one who gets to decide who the rules apply to.
• 30:16
  But nobody else. That are based on dignity, where we actually listen to the other party and we care
• 30:23
  also what the other countries are thinking about. Do you? Do you really? Who has listened to Russia?
• 30:30
  And I sorry to bring that up, but but who's listened? You know, you you've you've you've
• 30:35
  provoked that down there by specifically not listening to Russia or their point of view
• 30:43
  at all. And you haven't listened to India for 30 years and you're scrambling now because of well,
• 30:50
  we'll get to Jaishankar in a minute. Let's finish up with her. So it's not like, you know, we make
• 30:56
  decisions in this, you know, border peace charter, for example, that, you know, you don't have to
• 31:01
  actually take into account anybody who is who is on that organization, because one person can make
• 31:08
  the decisions. And that is, I think, the difference, how we see the world,
• 31:12
  because if countries are treated equally, I think there's also less chance for war and tyranny.
• 31:19
  So I realize that I have. And that's the problem. They're not treated equally. And so the problem
• 31:25
  is that none of these people acknowledge reality. Now, there was a lot of discussion about Mark
• 31:34
  Carney and his discussions at Davos, too, which I played for you in their entirety way back when
• 31:39
  what way back when it was that that Davos was only three weeks ago, I think. I don't remember
• 31:45
  exactly, but he his speech was a bit of a bombshell when he when he was the only one. And he still
• 31:54
  people have tap danced up to the line, but he's the only one who has come out and said,
• 32:02
  listen up here. We remember the sign in the window stuff. We haven't really
• 32:10
  applied those rules equally. And we kind of looked the other way when they weren't.
• 32:16
  And we've allowed that to happen. And look what it's given us. He was a realist. Okay. And he put
• 32:22
  that out there. And he said, and now we have this was important. Now we have to deal not with the
• 32:28
  world as we want it to be, but the world as it really is. Now, you could argue that that's what
• 32:34
  the U.S. is doing, too. And I like the fact that the U.S. is now looking out for us more than the
• 32:41
  rest of the world. But I also think there's a tendency in the next three years is going to be
• 32:45
  an interesting period of time because dictatorship dictating what the rest of the world will do
• 32:52
  is starting to piss off the rest of the world. They don't like it. You know, Carney is we're in
• 32:56
  a fight with Carney over whether he's going to succumb under the U.S., Canada, Mexico trade
• 33:02
  agreement, which replaced NAFTA. And all the talk is that he's his talks in Davos, that he's sticking
• 33:09
  it to his guns and you want to put tariffs on it. Great. It's going to hurt you more than it's going
• 33:13
  to hurt me. And he's creating alternative routes with China specifically and others. And Trump is
• 33:21
  doesn't like that. And so the tariffs are to force him to stop because that's the way that
• 33:27
  things have always been done. And Carney ain't buying it so far. And Carney is pretty smart man,
• 33:33
  by the way. And so I'm keeping my eye on that dispute as much as possible. I'm keeping my eye
• 33:39
  on the disputes between the EU and the Trumpster and they're developing relationships with the
• 33:46
  global south and talking about it. Jaishankar, I'm going to get to. But let me finish up with
• 33:52
  what I've got here, because Walsh was there talking to her and he's basically the U.S.
• 33:59
  underwrote the post-World War order, you know, the rules based order that we created and spends
• 34:07
  more on it, the rules based order, than more than 180 countries all combined. And, you know,
• 34:17
  like I said, the first time she said something that landed with me that didn't make me laugh at
• 34:23
  her was this one. Contrary to what some may say, you know, she's trying to get Europeans. We need
• 34:33
  to get together as Europeans. We need Europe as a European Union all together is a pretty
• 34:40
  serious organization. And she's basically cheerleading. Europeans unite, you know,
• 34:45
  because you can't necessarily bank on the U.S. anymore. So to narrow the point, she's right.
• 34:50
  America doesn't fight alone. Washington usually builds coalitions. Sometimes they're genuine,
• 34:56
  most time they're cosmetic, and they drag their allies into it politically and militarily.
• 35:02
  One clean example of that is Afghanistan, you know, where allied participation under the NATO
• 35:10
  umbrella did occur, but it was mostly the U.S. But her framing is very, very self-serving. Europe
• 35:16
  didn't join those wars out of brotherhood. It joined because the alliance is structured that
• 35:23
  way. And because if you stand with Washington and Washington's little boondoggles, then you
• 35:30
  get to buy influence, protection and access to NATO. Right. So this is what it's always been
• 35:37
  like. So in blunt terms, the allies come with invoices and, you know, the invoices, obedience
• 35:45
  they've had to obey. And that's Walsh Trump's point. Rubio, you got to obey us. We're doing it
• 35:53
  anyway. And they're like, wait a minute. You know, we have we have options, but we're all fighting
• 35:59
  for rules based order. Let's go back to the way it was. Wasn't it great when we had the rules based
• 36:04
  order and that, you know, it wasn't her Russia fights alone line. It's definitely propaganda.
• 36:10
  Russia has partners. They got depth. They got alternative markets. And in the Ukraine
• 36:14
  conflict specifically, Russia's argument is that it's facing a U.S. NATO backed coalition by proxy.
• 36:22
  That's what they're facing. And, you know, Western weapons, Western intel, Western training,
• 36:28
  Western finance. This would have been done two months later if it wasn't a proxy war would have
• 36:36
  been over. You don't have to endorse every Russian claim to see the basic structure. This is not
• 36:42
  Russia versus Ukraine. It's Russia versus Western backed system, which is exactly why the rules based
• 36:50
  order talk keeps showing up. Only the rules will keep Russia in line. Yeah, but you don't follow
• 36:56
  them, especially with Russia. And you don't follow with anybody else either. It's whoever you decide
• 37:03
  is a is a nonsense is is nonsense. You don't want to put up with. Right. So what I'm reacting to
• 37:11
  this multipolar reality is where, you know, she's trying to keep this old world order on life support,
• 37:21
  but admitting indirectly that the old storylines aren't really working. So the part nobody wants
• 37:28
  to say out loud at Munich, America really doesn't fight alone. They fight and require, you know,
• 37:34
  a receipt book. You know, Russia fights alone. America doesn't. I don't believe that. But
• 37:41
  she is correct. That's why Americans are irritated. Allies don't come free. They have transaction
• 37:48
  costs and Americans want you to pay that hypocrisy. You know, the first one's a reality check.
• 37:54
  Second one is hypocrisy of it all that I outline all the time. Europe helped in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• 38:00
  Sure. But Europe also spent 20 years pretending that it had moral authority, you know, with
• 38:06
  everybody else. But while following Washington into disasters, the moral authority now comes out
• 38:14
  later in hindsight to be, well, we shouldn't have done that. And then multipolar, her best
• 38:21
  accidental truth that she came up with, because I don't believe she planned it. The world doesn't
• 38:26
  accept Western sermons as universal anymore. They don't accept this rules based order. Hell,
• 38:33
  I don't accept it. And the typical American doesn't accept the rules based order global
• 38:39
  dominance, at least not from that point of view. They might reflect that the U.S. has always been
• 38:44
  lord of the jungle anyway. And but now it's a reality. And now people are starting to confront
• 38:51
  that instead of the Clinton, Bush, Bush, two years of world and even Obama rules based order, folks.
• 39:00
  But they only apply to other people. Nobody believes it anymore. And that, you know,
• 39:04
  we're all treated equally. What a joke. They are not. The global south, for its part, heard
• 39:11
  rules based order pitch and watched it, you know, get violated anytime it was convenient for those
• 39:17
  who created the rules and the alleged order, you know. So Russia's posture has always been
• 39:24
  we can go it alone if we have to, which they've said even against all the allies. And they've
• 39:30
  said that and they're doing it. And America's posture is, well, we prefer to outsource the
• 39:35
  costs. Like Walt said, we want you to pay the costs. But it's our leadership that makes it
• 39:41
  possible. But you got to pay, you know, pay to play. And so this is why Munich is getting or was
• 39:49
  pretty spicy, because the marriage counseling session is happening right there on stage.
• 39:56
  Walt's in college talking about it. It's it's pretty comical. So there you have it. I
• 40:04
  think that that exchange was pretty important. You know, it's it's, you know, Russia fighting
• 40:13
  alone. Those these are important framings that they gave there. And she's admitting that,
• 40:21
  you know, the rules based order. She she gave Iraq and Afghanistan reference. And
• 40:26
  basically, we helped you invade places and our people died, too. So you owe us now.
• 40:35
  That's not a very proud pitch. You know, it's a it's an IOU that she's claiming that the U.S.
• 40:42
  owes to Europe because we've always been your willing lackeys before. And it reminds people
• 40:48
  that Europe wasn't a helpless bystander. They were a willing participant. They signed on to
• 40:55
  these adventures and they're paying for it. And then everyone is shocked when the world calls
• 41:02
  it what it really was, you know, a scam. You know, we went in there just to keep funding war
• 41:09
  and to make this done. And America would have done it anyway. And you only joined in because
• 41:14
  you wanted to be on the side of good, you know, and follow the right rhetorical guidelines.
• 41:20
  So it's pretty funny. Every once in a while, somebody from Brussels says something true by
• 41:25
  accident and call us did it. And it's not a compliment to Americans, an admission of what
• 41:31
  the system always has been. And so listen to the exchange. You know, I played it for you. And,
• 41:37
  you know, she admits what the alliance really was for. She didn't say America's fighting for freedom.
• 41:45
  She said America's fighting with a team. And she said Russia doesn't have that kind of team,
• 41:51
  not because it can't, but because it refuses to be owned by anyone. And Jaishankar is the same.
• 41:58
  And I'm going to get to him next. He refuses to be owned. And the kicker is she brings up
• 42:02
  Iraq and Afghanistan like it's a, you know, a star she gets to put on her forehead or a badge
• 42:09
  she gets to, you know, sew on to her sash. You know, it's not a badge. It's a confession.
• 42:15
  When Washington lectures the world, the real message is join our coalition, pay the costs
• 42:22
  associated, and we'll call it your democratic virtue. Those are the Clinton Bush years. And
• 42:29
  in part, Waltz is calling that out too. You got to stay with us. But we've always decided
• 42:34
  what happens. We've always decided the path. That's our leadership. And you never paid for
• 42:40
  our leadership. So we're sending you a bill. And people are pushing back. That's Rubio. That's
• 42:46
  Waltz. It's everywhere today. It's the domineering type of, you can't call it diplomacy.
• 42:56
  It's, I don't know, I don't want to call it a dictatorship. That's a bad way to go. But it's,
• 43:01
  you know, that's not what it is. But it's we're going to do what we're going to do.
• 43:05
  Do what you want. And that's the view many, many countries are taking. And so that brings me into
• 43:13
  the broad multipolar theme. This is why the multipolar world order looks like what it looks
• 43:20
  like. Because this is true. And more and more of them are doing it. If you play Jai Shankar,
• 43:26
  you play the foreign minister of China. There was a interesting clip I watched with a Chinese
• 43:31
  reporter confronting the lady from Denmark and the premier or the foreign minister of Greenland,
• 43:41
  I think he was, about Greenland and saying, what's this threat to China, you know, about China? And
• 43:46
  they're, oh, we have the info. And stopped. I hope to get to that clip, you know, because
• 43:53
  she's the Denmark lady goes, oh, we have the info. But didn't say what it was like, you know,
• 44:00
  we know China's got submarines underwater or something is the way it sounded when you watch
• 44:06
  it. It's like, yeah, we know China wants Greenland. What? Where's the data on that?
• 44:13
  Nobody has said that until Trump one day said, you know, Russia and China want to take Greenland.
• 44:21
  Nonsense. It is not true. They have a very strong presence in the in the Arctic,
• 44:27
  Russia, especially Russia's impressive, according to one person that on this video on a video,
• 44:33
  which I might get to, but only if I get through the Jai Shankar clip. And so, you know,
• 44:40
  Collis is still foolish and she's still, you know, she's number two in the EU, basically.
• 44:46
  And I don't know. She's she's never impressed me. And her little truth bomb where she actually
• 44:53
  pushed back, you know, the basically pushed back against Rubio and against Walt saying we carry
• 45:02
  everybody. And, you know, she's like, you really don't carry everybody. And Walt's. And then let's
• 45:09
  get a little bit of Rubio sent Rubio actually beat up on the rules based global order anyway.
• 45:17
  He called it an overused term and the borderless end of history idea was foolish. And he pushed a
• 45:25
  civilizational Western revival dominated by the United States. So he trashes the rules based
• 45:32
  order. This is Rubio and then uses the same Western world's based order. You know that.
• 45:40
  And I may I say that facetiously. He uses the same little sanction coercion. And we decide
• 45:48
  America decides realism. But he is doing it to the exclusion of the rest of the people that were
• 45:56
  joined in, because that's the Trump path. And we're going to have three more years of that.
• 46:02
  I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying that's what it is. My thoughts on it are still out.
• 46:07
  But the reality exists. That's the system. So it's not replacing hypocrisy.
• 46:13
  It's not replacing it at all. It's swapping slogans with while keeping the hammer.
• 46:19
  You know, you keep the same old hammer and you keep beating the same old nail.
• 46:23
  Now you're just doing it for a different reason. And you're going, yeah, it's globalism,
• 46:27
  but we're not calling it that anymore. We're calling it globalism from a Trump point of view.
• 46:32
  We're in charge of the globe. You get on. And Walt said it. Basically, Rubio said it. That's
• 46:38
  what they were saying. We're doing it anyway. Get on board or get off and push, you know,
• 46:44
  something like that. So the most revealing brag from Rubio, the U.N. couldn't constrain Iran's
• 46:51
  nuclear program that required bombs from U.S. B-2s. That's the confession
• 46:59
  from everyone that order, this rules-based order, is force first. Force first posture.
• 47:08
  We're going to destroy you if you don't do what we say. Same thing. It's evident, you know.
• 47:15
  Let's talk about green. Let's talk about Venezuela. Let's talk about everything
• 47:19
  there. The India angle is, you know, they get together and, you know, I said a couple of days
• 47:26
  ago that they get together and basically yank each other's chains up there with whatever slogans
• 47:31
  they're going to get was rules-based order. They're all still talking about rules-based order,
• 47:37
  but just from a different point of view. Well, you know, there's Rubio with rules-based order,
• 47:43
  Walsh with rules-based order, but only as we dictate it. The Europeans are all saying,
• 47:49
  well, there's rules-based order, but we've always participated. You don't do it alone in the U.S.
• 47:54
  What about us? We're realizing we're small countries, and all the smaller countries are
• 47:59
  now going, wait a minute. We used to be included, and now we're not. So his brag was there. India
• 48:07
  says Rubio claimed a commitment from India to stop buying additional Russian oil. That's not true.
• 48:16
  And he reported immediately, and Jaishankar talked about, and I'll get to that, the Jaishankar
• 48:22
  strategic economy, and I really want to play that. And AOC, when she finally did get to talking,
• 48:29
  her core line is Trump is tearing up transatlantic partnerships and calling into question the
• 48:35
  rules-based order, and she wants a return to it without hypocrisy, and argues that hypocrisy
• 48:43
  is the vulnerability. When she finally said something, well, it's acknowledging that we've
• 48:51
  always only applied them to other people. She talks like the world's a morality play
• 48:56
  with cartoon villains and assigned hemispheres. You know, that's it. You got Boris and Natasha
• 49:03
  on one side from Rocky and Bullwinkle, and you got Pinky and the Brain on this side, you know,
• 49:09
  with the Brain being Trump and Pinky being Rubio and Waltz. So Putin's saber rattles, you know,
• 49:18
  this is the unipolar mindset. You just picked a different villain. You know, she's preaching the
• 49:24
  same old sermon too. And the Czech slammed down of, this guy was, his name is Macinka, M-A-C-I-N-K-A,
• 49:32
  and he was against Hillary, and I hope to play some of that, but I really want to get to Jaishankar,
• 49:38
  because that was kind of interesting, and I'm going to play parts of it for you. And this was
• 49:50
  a guy named Wadepol, who is the German foreign minister. His pitch was rules-based order
• 50:00
  and partner shopping, you know. He wants the rules-based order, and so it was him and
• 50:09
  Supramaniam Jaishankar on the dais being interviewed by a moderator, just the two of
• 50:15
  them, and they had this moderator, so it was a small thing. And it was really talking about
• 50:20
  what happened in India, or what India's perceptions are on a lot of the things that
• 50:28
  are going on in the world, especially about the commentary of Rubio that said,
• 50:33
  you've been told what you're going to do, right? And you made an agreement. And Jaishankar's saying,
• 50:41
  no, that's not true. Basically, he said, no, we always have looked out for our own interests.
• 50:49
  And so Wadepol, the German guy, first of all, as a side note, he rubbed, rubbed, hugged Rubio
• 50:56
  when he first showed up, which is a little bit weird. And then he claimed later that was a
• 51:02
  reassurance. He says, Rubio's speech was basically what he expected. He says, the US is our true
• 51:09
  partner, and he romanticizes the Cold War success story. We did it once, Europe and America. Let's
• 51:17
  do it again. Translation, Germany is trying to keep Washington close, but is hedging its bets.
• 51:24
  And he has new global partners, because a lot of the EU is switching to China and India focus as
• 51:31
  well. And Kala's saying that China is powerful economically and militarily too, and they really
• 51:39
  are. But that doesn't mean they're trying to take over the world. It's still trade-based.
• 51:44
  Nobody can point out to any war that, very few anyway, that China's even involved in,
• 51:51
  or has been. They had a dispute with India over a small strip of land that came to a head in 2021,
• 52:00
  but they're not out creating world wars over it and bombing the crap over each other.
• 52:05
  But the sermons never stopped, never. The rules-based order, the UN is a board of peace,
• 52:13
  my ass. It has to be reformed. Many people, including Rubio, talked about UN reform. India's
• 52:22
  been talking about that for 20 years. India's not in the security... They're now a participant in
• 52:29
  the Security Council, but they've never been in there. And they're the most populous country on
• 52:33
  the planet, and pretty modern these days. And Jaishankar is a very good... I was going to
• 52:38
  download his history for you, because that's an impressive dude, and you got to listen to him.
• 52:43
  About what he is saying, and he was very coherent. So the German guy gave a big admission on BRICS,
• 52:52
  okay, when he was talking about it. He said, we alienated ourselves by applying these Western
• 52:59
  rules-based orders improperly, is what he's saying, and that was wrong. He says Europe
• 53:05
  used to treat countries as BRICS members, and that alienated Europe from them. And so Germany
• 53:12
  wants to focus on common interests and common values. He specifically mentioned with India,
• 53:18
  with Brazil, but still carving out their fundamental differences with Russia and China.
• 53:25
  He actually said, if you're a democracy, if you maintain our values, our values, what are they?
• 53:32
  Nobody knows, because those values only apply to certain people, right? So India respects those
• 53:40
  values, Brazil respects those values, but China and Russia do not. And he praised India as predictable,
• 53:47
  and that's a real compliment. That's a big compliment. India is predictable. The biggest
• 53:53
  complaint people have about the US is the unpredictability of it all, and it changes every
• 54:01
  four years. So all they're doing is trying to keep it quiet, whilst they muddle through
• 54:09
  these next three years, and somebody else hopefully comes along. And he said, Jaishankar
• 54:16
  said that predictability carries a huge premium, that it's a big plus, and then uses that to
• 54:23
  contrast India versus China, because Germany says India is a stable hedge partner,
• 54:32
  and China is a risk partner. I don't know that I agree with that, but that's the way that he
• 54:39
  couched the term. His own Europe project is, you know, German's project with Europe, is such that
• 54:46
  the qualified majority voting, and qualified is a relative term, whoever we decide we like,
• 54:56
  you know, and they got to be arguably democratic, you know, but even Ukraine, they argue is democratic.
• 55:03
  It isn't. Nonsense. And he wants to talk about new centers of sovereignty. People have admitted
• 55:11
  quite a bit that the sovereignty idea, and especially in the UN, needs to be
• 55:21
  revisited, improved. Many people, Kyla said that, you know, we have to improve our,
• 55:30
  our people, of course, people don't support what we've done in the UN, and don't support what
• 55:36
  we've done in NATO or in the EU. All of those things need to be modified, need to be revisited,
• 55:46
  and fixed, basically. So, what the German, her German counterpart said,
• 55:53
  what, well, it's not really a counterpart, arguably is a tiny bit subordinate. You know, if the EU
• 56:00
  is all the countries, he's just acting on behalf of Germany. And he argues that Europe has to
• 56:05
  become a tighter, faster block, more capable of acting in foreign policy together, because the
• 56:12
  US is no longer predictable. That's what he's saying. And so are many of the others. So how do
• 56:19
  you, you know, but he's selling, all of them are still doing the same old thing that I think is a
• 56:25
  mistake. They're out there like used car salesmen, selling values, Western values. That's what
• 56:33
  they're saying. But the behavior is always been pure power and power management. Germany is
• 56:40
  repositioning because the world power structure has changed. The US changed it, like they do
• 56:47
  basically every four to eight years. And this time, it's changed in the direction of Donald Trump
• 56:52
  as the global czar, you know, the God Emperor, as I like to call him. Europe has misread the map
• 56:59
  and is now trying to buy back its access to get in. They, in my opinion, and so Jaishankar,
• 57:07
  let's get to him, his doctrine of multipolarity. And I think I can get to the beautiful part of
• 57:15
  the clip. I watched the whole exchange, the whole, it's like 17 minutes of exchange that I watched
• 57:22
  with them. Damn it. I had my watch history and it's not quite where I want it. There's Collis.
• 57:31
  Where's all my history? Scooby dooby doo. Well, my history is here and I want to get to the Germany,
• 57:42
  the shock, when he talks about this from the point of view of where they are with,
• 57:49
  and this is 31 minutes, the whole session that they were talking about, which was this
• 57:57
  German foreign minister. His name is Johann Wadepoel. And he, and they had a discussion
• 58:06
  with Subrahmanyan, Jaishankar, and they're talked about cooperation with India. And I think I can
• 58:14
  get to the points that were important to me without screwing up the entire thing because
• 58:24
  Jaishankar is the one that I really am interested in hearing. And he was being lectured a little bit
• 58:32
  and I'm going to get to his first part. Hopefully I've got it right for the cut because he's
• 58:37
  important. And here we go. So this must be music to your ears, but then you've been hearing for
• 58:49
  many, many years that there has to be a reform of the UN and particularly a reform of the UN
• 58:55
  Security Council. Do you think that that is a more viable or a more likely outcome? I think it's a
• 59:04
  more urgent outcome, urgently needed outcome. But I'd like to kind of walk back a little bit to
• 59:10
  your question to Johann. You know, look, all said and done, we have, we've had an order,
• 59:18
  we still have an order. It's messy, it's imperfect, it has a lot of room for betterment,
• 59:26
  but it's still there, you know. And we've seen that change happening. I mean, at one level,
• 59:35
  you know, some parts of it have been very gradual and progressive. But the last five years,
• 59:40
  there have been a series of shocks which have accelerated that. I think COVID was a shock,
• 59:45
  the conflict in Ukraine was a shock, what's happening in the Middle East was a shock.
• 59:49
  So, and in, you know, even in Europe, some years ago, Brexit was a shock. And now the change
• 1:00:02
  in the stance of the United States, I think, you know, as the most powerful country and
• 1:00:10
  the rise of China and the impact that it's had on international systems and practices.
• 1:00:17
  I think all of this, it's like it's building, it's building, it's building. And suddenly,
• 1:00:22
  the cumulative impact of that is hitting us all. So, we are today, you know, it's not,
• 1:00:30
  I know the last year has been a very dramatic year. But I would still argue it's not just last
• 1:00:35
  year. It's really been building over the last decade, particularly over the last five years.
• 1:00:43
  And we don't have an answer. I mean, what we are seeing is the impact of it on the international
• 1:00:49
  system. And now we are saying, okay, how does it take the shock? What will happen? It will take
• 1:00:56
  time. But to the extent I can give you a kind of an analytical concept to deal with it, I would say,
• 1:01:04
  you know, its world is heading towards greater multipolarity, that there will be many more
• 1:01:11
  independent or autonomous centers of decision making. Probably the most interesting for many
• 1:01:19
  of us is Europe, because we have seen in some ways a sort of a strategic reawakening of Europe
• 1:01:27
  in the last few years. So, what Europe does with itself, how does Europe relate to others,
• 1:01:34
  is very important. So, this, you know, in that context for us, when we looked at all the big
• 1:01:41
  polls, I think the one which was most under-realized was our relationship with Europe.
• 1:01:48
  And within Europe, in fact, in many ways, our relationship with Germany. And if I were to say
• 1:01:56
  what has changed in the recent past, we've had really two big back-to-back events in India.
• 1:02:04
  The visit of Chancellor Mertz, I think it was his first visit to Asia. And then the India-Europe
• 1:02:14
  FTA, which President von der Leyen described as the mother of all deals.
• 1:02:18
  So, I think the two of them actually are creating a new landscape between us. And
• 1:02:27
  we hope to take it forward. But I would just add one last point, that, you know,
• 1:02:33
  relationships don't happen just by visits and agreements and headline news or even discussions
• 1:02:38
  here. They need a lot of comfort building. You know, at different levels in the systems,
• 1:02:45
  people need to know each other, call each other, discuss with each other,
• 1:02:50
  throw ideas at each other. And we need India and Europe and India and Germany to work to build that
• 1:03:00
  Okay. Well, we're not going to go too much further in him, but that guy is a freaking genius. And
• 1:03:07
  I'm telling you that continually, every single time, every time that someone tries to trip him
• 1:03:16
  up, and this is what I like, is the consistency that you get from leaders in other countries.
• 1:03:22
  And he's talking specific agreements. He's talking specific deals that they make. He's not in there
• 1:03:30
  trying to pump some sort of rules-based order. He's saying that the system itself, in his first
• 1:03:35
  part of that dialogue, he was saying, look, the system itself has needed reform and it's got
• 1:03:43
  problems and it's got this. And so, you're going to see a lot more small events like BRICS, like
• 1:03:51
  what's going on. He talked about another one called, oh, what's the name of it? I forget.
• 1:04:05
  It'll come in my notes because I know it's in here. And, you know, Merz, not Merz, Waltz was out
• 1:04:12
  there selling new world, or same old new world order, same old global order. And the German
• 1:04:22
  person, this Wadepol that was just speaking with Jai Shankar, was basically kind of mirroring that
• 1:04:28
  and trying to put it in. And he was selling values, right? But the behavior is power management.
• 1:04:34
  Either they have to reposition because of what the power management, the lord of the jungle,
• 1:04:41
  Trump, is doing. And Jai Shankar is talking about multipolarity, coalitions, strategic autonomy.
• 1:04:50
  And he refuses to talk about being forced away from Russian oil. He didn't try to make a scene.
• 1:04:57
  He said, instead, we're seeing an era of greater multipolarity, autonomous decision-making centers.
• 1:05:04
  And he talked about the series of shocks. And one of them he listed. Now, this is a big shock.
• 1:05:10
  I mean, when you're on the same stage as war in Ukraine and COVID, the big shock, he said,
• 1:05:17
  is the U.S. change in direction under Trump. That the lord of the jungle instead of just,
• 1:05:25
  you know, another, you know, the leader of the rules-based order, you know? And so the West
• 1:05:33
  isn't the sole control room anymore. And so everybody, including Germany, is recalculating.
• 1:05:39
  They're talking about China. They're talking about Russia. And so he frames Europe as the
• 1:05:45
  most interesting because Europe itself is reawakening to the fact that it's a mid-power
• 1:05:51
  level organization all by itself. It's subtle, but it's important. India looks at Europe as
• 1:05:58
  kind of a swing actor, not a master. They want Europe to be more independent because it'll widen
• 1:06:06
  India's room to maneuver. They can have deals with just Europe, with just Germany. And he's
• 1:06:12
  saying, you know, relationships aren't headline visits. They were building comfort with each
• 1:06:18
  other. The first time a German minister has visited India in decades was Mertz this year.
• 1:06:25
  And, you know, the being forced, he talked about, we haven't been forced off of oil. Rubio claims
• 1:06:32
  they're forced off oil. He said, you know, we look out for India. Our deals are our deals.
• 1:06:39
  Coalitions, not alliances. He dislikes the agenda-driven, and he talked about it, the
• 1:06:47
  statement. Then he talked about IMEC. And I forget what the acronym means, but I know I have it here
• 1:06:55
  because he separated economics and logistics from political question. He was pretty careful.
• 1:07:01
  He said, I'm, and it was a Palestinian lady that asked him a question. And he said, and she asked
• 1:07:07
  him specifically about IMEC because, and I've been through some of these areas. And what's happened
• 1:07:12
  is these trade routes have been around, he said. I mean, it was really an awesome clip. And if you
• 1:07:19
  get a chance to go out and find the clip of the German foreign minister, Wadipur, and
• 1:07:27
  Subramanian Jaishankar, it's well worth the watch, the entire half hour of it. It is definitely
• 1:07:34
  worth it. He's, and, you know, I like watching him anyway, and you got to watch him. And I'm
• 1:07:40
  not sure how politics in India, where he would be, seated on the line of successorship to another
• 1:07:50
  a very capable Modi, you know, Modi's pretty capable over there. And Modi's done a great
• 1:07:57
  job while he's been in power. And this guy has been along for the ride. And he is a pretty powerful.
• 1:08:06
  India's definitely on the rise. China's definitely on the rise. Russia is definitely on the rise.
• 1:08:11
  And those three entities need to be dealt with, not like the wicked stepchildren anymore,
• 1:08:21
  regardless of their ideologies. India's ideology isn't the same as ours, not remotely. China's
• 1:08:28
  isn't, of course, and neither is Russia's. And realizing that helps with how you deal with them.
• 1:08:35
  And India isn't, even though they're in Western alliances, they're not joining the West. They have
• 1:08:44
  their own regional things as well. They're building, what are they building? An operating
• 1:08:50
  system, an infrastructure system, and a multipolar reality. He's consistent on this. He always is.
• 1:09:01
  That these are multiple coalitions. We align ourselves selectively based on the issue.
• 1:09:07
  There are different issues for defense, different issues for providing internal
• 1:09:14
  fuel and oil, which we're going to get at the lowest cost, because that's what's best for us.
• 1:09:19
  We don't just immediately, and that's what pisses the West off so much, is that India won't just
• 1:09:27
  jump on board and say, you know, we're condemning Russia. They're consistent. They say, you know,
• 1:09:33
  the Ukraine thing, China says the same thing. The Ukraine thing, it needs to be resolved,
• 1:09:38
  and they all need to address their issues, but we're not going to condemn Russia for it. There's
• 1:09:44
  reasons for it. They aren't getting in the middle, the same as we aren't getting in the middle
• 1:09:48
  of a China-India dispute that's been going on for 25 years. They're very political and very
• 1:10:00
  pragmatic, and especially Jaishankar. So the moderator tries to push him. Shows Rubio's speech,
• 1:10:08
  uncertainty in New World Order. She pushes the sphere of influence and tried to get Germany to
• 1:10:14
  define the sphere, and Wattepoel says Europe is the sphere, and he says that others seek to get
• 1:10:21
  such a resilient and powerful sphere and partner networks with that, but now she's talking about,
• 1:10:30
  you know, they're talking about coalitions, and she brought up the Carney and Davos angle,
• 1:10:36
  and Germany says, what did he say? We heard that part, that they misread BRICS and alienated
• 1:10:43
  themselves by misreading BRICS. Now we want to work with India and Brazil. Yeah, but you didn't
• 1:10:50
  before. You didn't until they finally started creating structures of other, you know, from
• 1:10:57
  other countries, and actually it was pretty funny because there were a decent amount of people
• 1:11:00
  talking about BRICS, and India has said what it always says, Jaishankar, multipolarity is real,
• 1:11:09
  and our autonomy to deal with whoever we're going to deal with on whatever issue we want to deal
• 1:11:14
  with is non-negotiable, you know, and Russia's, or the moderator says you can't deal with Russia.
• 1:11:24
  You've been forced not to. It's not true, but she said that, and he said, no, we always analyze
• 1:11:31
  our market cost and risk, and we choose independently. So what's the big takeaway
• 1:11:37
  that you take from these guys then? Europe wants its partners. They want new partners.
• 1:11:43
  They're starting to develop them. Everybody was talking about, you know, India, China, Brazil.
• 1:11:50
  Maybe they aren't working with the whole BRICS, you know, but they're creating new organizations.
• 1:11:56
  This IMEC, India, the Middle East, and China is a pretty big deal, you know, what they're
• 1:12:03
  trying to do, and he said most of it is technology-based, and there's plenty of big events
• 1:12:10
  going on that do not include Western dominance. So strongest tell, this off of Russian oil,
• 1:12:21
  the question was, you're now forced to wean India off of Russian oil. Does that not impact your
• 1:12:29
  strategic autonomy? It's an attempt to say that India is really a vassal of the West in denial,
• 1:12:37
  you know, that they're really subordinate, and he said it's not a party position. He said,
• 1:12:44
  you know, and they hate this. He took it back to the market. He said, look, it's a complex market.
• 1:12:50
  We'll have different oil companies. We look at the availability, the cost, and the risk.
• 1:12:55
  The translation, stop pretending you can dictate our energy policy with talking points,
• 1:13:01
  that you're forced away from Russia because they're not and haven't been, and he didn't want
• 1:13:06
  to relitigate that propaganda, he said, and he said, I don't want to rehash the polemics.
• 1:13:13
  That phase has passed. We're going to do what's best for India, and India doesn't choose sides.
• 1:13:22
  India chooses India. That's what he's saying. India always chooses India and what's best for
• 1:13:30
  India. So there you have it. Well, those, you know, I like those topics, and I think they are
• 1:13:41
  fun. There was something that I saw in an article that I wanted to cover as well, because
• 1:13:49
  I believe it could be the next big, big problem, and for those of you who aren't aware,
• 1:13:59
  I worked in nuclear arms control as a Russian interpreter, and I, in the 90s, participated
• 1:14:10
  in this stuff. We did our underground nuclear testing at the Nevada Nuclear Test Site.
• 1:14:15
  I was on site for some of the last tests that were conducted in the United States
• 1:14:22
  underground, and the big deal was trying to figure out how to do, what do you call it,
• 1:14:37
  nonproliferation and force, you know, force that. Russia, when I was still in there, it was Russia,
• 1:14:43
  or the Soviet Union in the United States, and the INF Treaty, limiting short range,
• 1:14:48
  intermediate range nuclear weaponry, and then long range. We got into START. We got into the
• 1:14:54
  threshold test ban treaties that came about, and I've gone through that numerous times
• 1:15:00
  with the details on all of those, and all of these the U.S. is starting to back out from.
• 1:15:05
  Russia has backed out of a couple of them, but it's more ignoring it all post-Soviet Union
• 1:15:13
  collapse, and the nonproliferation, so nuclear entities that the U.S. does not like, okay,
• 1:15:22
  that they treat totally different, and never has Israel acknowledged that they have nuclear weapons,
• 1:15:29
  but they do, and they aren't a signatory to nonproliferation. If they choose to give them
• 1:15:35
  to somebody or take over a country and move them in there, that's exactly what they're going to do,
• 1:15:40
  and they don't take subordination from anyone, and they have the knowledge that we have
• 1:15:51
  their backs, regardless. It doesn't matter whether we like it or not. It doesn't matter
• 1:15:58
  whether Americans like it or not. They will always be covered, okay? We will always support.
• 1:16:06
  We will never condemn, and that's that. Well, let's put into that the people that we don't like.
• 1:16:13
  We don't like the fact that Pakistan has nukes. Nobody likes that. I don't believe they're a
• 1:16:20
  signatory either of nuclear nonproliferation. We don't like the fact that North Korea has
• 1:16:26
  nuclear weapons, and nobody will touch them. Why? Because they have nuclear weapons,
• 1:16:32
  and trying to get involved with these, you know, rivals between these type of
• 1:16:37
  individuals go a little bit differently. Well, there's been a big push lately for,
• 1:16:43
  well, everybody knows what's going on in Iran, and that is the big push. We got to keep Iran
• 1:16:50
  from getting nukes. I think eventually, and I said this probably six months ago when we were
• 1:16:56
  talking about this, is that people are, you know, it's going to come about that especially
• 1:17:03
  when people aren't reliant or can't rely upon stability from the United States,
• 1:17:12
  and there's been problems on the European theater for a long time because they want, you know,
• 1:17:18
  Russia has always, allegedly, they want to still have these treaties, and people are talking about
• 1:17:27
  nonproliferation, and the two big actors still have been Russia and the United States, well,
• 1:17:33
  you know, China, France, a couple other ones as well. But put against that backdrop right now,
• 1:17:39
  and I got to push it along because I want to get through this segment, Turkey has now come out
• 1:17:44
  with a position that says, wait a minute, you've got to do things a little differently, world,
• 1:17:55
  because we want nukes, you know, if you're going to continue what you're doing, we want
• 1:18:03
  nukes. Erdogan wants nukes, and that has been reported. In Ankara, the idea of Turkey one day
• 1:18:11
  seeking nuclear weapons, it's never been gone from strategic conversations, but in the recent days,
• 1:18:19
  as the region around Turkey is sliding toward a logic where deterrence looks like the only
• 1:18:27
  dependable language left, and deterrent is get your own nukes. Turkey's foreign policy has
• 1:18:35
  expanded beyond cautious status quo that wants to find it. It is positioning itself as a mediator
• 1:18:43
  on Ukraine and Gaza. It's pursuing hard security aims through sustained operations in Syria, Iraq,
• 1:18:50
  and Libya, and has inserted itself into theaters from the eastern Mediterranean to the Horn of
• 1:18:56
  Africa. President Erdogan has long framed his activism as corrective of a national order that
• 1:19:04
  he says is structurally unfair. He has always said the world is bigger than five countries,
• 1:19:14
  referring to the UN Security Council. India says something similar, and it's a statement of a
• 1:19:21
  grievance against a system where a narrow group of powers, this is what the dispute was all about
• 1:19:27
  at the security conference. They retain permanent privileges, an exclusive claim to ultimate
• 1:19:35
  capability militarily in telling people what they will do. Nuclear inequality occupies a special
• 1:19:44
  place there, and Erdogan repeatedly points to the double standard of the global nuclear order
• 1:19:49
  and argues that some states are punished for ambiguity while others are insulated from
• 1:19:54
  scrutiny. Here he's talking about Israel, and this is because Israel is central here because
• 1:20:00
  they have, and everybody assumes they do, but they've never openly declared it. They are undeclared
• 1:20:08
  nuclear status, and that's an open secret that doesn't trigger any sort of enforcement instinct
• 1:20:15
  at all, but it's proliferation. They never should have had it, but they do, and so that has long
• 1:20:24
  irritated countries in the region, and especially places like Iran and Ankara, but it is more
• 1:20:31
  politically potent after Gaza because in 2023 Erdogan openly highlighted Israel's arsenal
• 1:20:39
  and questions why international inspections don't happen there. They don't happen there,
• 1:20:45
  but we got to beat the crap out of Ukraine, so for years this is an argument about fairness and
• 1:20:50
  legitimacy rather than intent of the system of non-proliferation. What's changed is that regional
• 1:20:57
  security architecture and the cracks are getting bigger, and every time that Israel decides to
• 1:21:03
  escalate, there stands the U.S. right behind them with their arms folded like some big, you know,
• 1:21:10
  mafia brother. Turkey's leadership is warning that if Iran crosses nuclear threshold, others in the
• 1:21:17
  region are going to follow, and, you know, Pakistan's not far away. Iran, you know, for their point,
• 1:21:23
  they're going, well, crap, Israel's got them, and Israel has no problem threatening us, and nobody
• 1:21:29
  says a word about their nuclear arsenal and why nuclear proliferation doesn't count and why the
• 1:21:36
  IAEA isn't inspecting them. This is the key to understanding the new debate and why. Ankara is
• 1:21:43
  not primarily, it's not just an emotional reaction. Turkey and Iran are still competitors,
• 1:21:49
  but their friction has always been, you know, pragmatic diplomacy. They've talked about it
• 1:21:55
  each other. It's not, you know, Erdogan presented Turkey as a mediator in, you know, talking about
• 1:22:02
  de-escalation. They don't want another war in their area, so the driver of the fear is that rules are
• 1:22:09
  no longer the rules. Enforcement has always been selective. Coercion applied in a way that
• 1:22:17
  disregards the broader stability, and this logic is dangerous, you know, and it always has been
• 1:22:23
  because it's contagious. It turns proliferation into insurance. In an unstable region where trust
• 1:22:31
  is thin and the memory of war is fresh, the idea of nuclear weapons as a shield against interference
• 1:22:37
  from somebody else is rational, brutally. If possessing a bomb raises the cost of intervention
• 1:22:45
  of others to unacceptable levels, like why aren't we bombing the crap out of North Korea?
• 1:22:51
  If they have, you know, it's still an ultimate deterrent, isn't it? It's a guarantee that
• 1:22:56
  outsiders like the U.S. will think twice, but the same logic that appears to promise safety for one
• 1:23:03
  is an insecurity risk for everybody else. So step in Poland, Turkey,
• 1:23:10
  even Germany has stated it in recent times. Poland absolutely wants them. The U.S. has
• 1:23:20
  had its own nukes, I believe, I forget the name of the base, in northern Turkey,
• 1:23:24
  but they're not owned by Turkey, they're owned by the United States.
• 1:23:27
  You think Russia doesn't view that as a threat? And Poland has been, we want them, we want them,
• 1:23:35
  but Poland doesn't want just U.S. They want their own. And, you know, who's going to stand
• 1:23:42
  against that? Is non-proliferation going to be the same for Germany and Poland and Turkey
• 1:23:50
  as it is for Iran? Is Trump going to get bombers together and go and bomb their capabilities away
• 1:23:57
  in Poland? Is he going to say no, no dice? What are we going to do about the treaties that are
• 1:24:02
  no longer functional? They do exist. This is a frightening, a frightening scenario.
• 1:24:13
  And, you know, Pakistan, India, these people have nukes. The whole, you know,
• 1:24:20
  people would think twice, you know, say that Trump tried to force Jaishankar and company
• 1:24:26
  to capitulate on trade. Is that going to work? Can you force it against huge countries,
• 1:24:37
  large militaries? Ability to withstand for a very long time without, you know,
• 1:24:45
  they're not dependent on the United States. And they're not a third world country. None of them.
• 1:24:51
  They have the technology. Iran's not a third world country. Turkey certainly is a beautiful country.
• 1:24:59
  Turkey's very modern. You know, the Bosphorus is incredible channel and has been for centuries.
• 1:25:07
  That's where the, that's where trade comes through the Black Sea into the Mediterranean.
• 1:25:12
  It's good stuff. It's beautiful over there. And I think that the thought process needs to change.
• 1:25:22
  I'm not going to be able to get to the Hillary Clinton take down by the guy from the Czech
• 1:25:30
  Republic, but we'll try to get to some of that tomorrow and get you there. I want to tell you
• 1:25:37
  a little bit about what's coming up because as the show winds down, I want to tell you about,
• 1:25:45
  you know, damn radio and what goes on here without starting all over again. And our schedule
• 1:25:56
  for today is after me, we're going to have Jimmy Tubo, the damn swag 11 o'clock. One of my favorite
• 1:26:05
  guys, Gabby Hayes is going to be here. We have the really big shoe with JR at two o'clock.
• 1:26:12
  Search of solutions with Josh Butterfield that's on at four. And then at six, we have the Ikester,
• 1:26:20
  Ike Skelton. And so on Friday, I may bring up some Ike when we do our civic outlaws, because
• 1:26:26
  I am going to talk a little bit about flock cameras and my research on the current status of
• 1:26:33
  the flock legal issue in Richmond, Virginia. And I want to talk about that and hopefully get some
• 1:26:43
  discussion. You know, we've gotten a very good response to an article I wrote about why civic
• 1:26:50
  outlaws is formed and going. If you're interested in that type of thing, you can go out to my
• 1:26:56
  LinkedIn page, which you can find LinkedIn, Sam trap one is my username, but Samuel trap,
• 1:27:04
  you can find me look up the modern law ecosystem, which is the new legal project that I'm working on
• 1:27:12
  and the civic outlaws web page at civic outlaws.com. We've had some pretty good response to that.
• 1:27:21
  And we're engaging in oversight of governmental overreach.
• 1:27:30
  We're going to have an interesting time. These are interesting times anyway.
• 1:27:37
  And I'm glad we have the platform that JR has provided for us to put out unfettered opinion,
• 1:27:49
  unrestricted, although sometimes he calls in and disagrees with me.
• 1:27:54
  And I appreciate that keeps me maybe somewhat honest. I disagree that the elections were all
• 1:28:03
  stolen by Maduro, though. We'll get into that another day. And although I appreciate the
• 1:28:10
  points that he was making, it's a it's still a small point. It's not anything as huge
• 1:28:15
  as everywhere, you know, that worldwide Maduro stealing elections. And at any rate, that's
• 1:28:26
  these are interesting times we live in. And we have some good shows here on damn radio.
• 1:28:32
  Third Wednesday is the biggest day in radio history every single Wednesday. And I'm winding
• 1:28:39
  down the first show of the huge Wednesday. I hope you continue to listen to us here and the great
• 1:28:47
  music that JR has arranged. And it is always available 24 seven, except when people are
• 1:28:55
  spouting off their personal opinions for your listening pleasure. If you wish to go to
• 1:29:01
  international flavor.com, you will find all of my prior episodes of international flavor and can go
• 1:29:08
  back and listen to them. I started uploading the civic outlaws things there as well. Although I
• 1:29:13
  have created the new site for civic outlaws. I just don't think the link is active yet. So I'm
• 1:29:20
  not gonna give it out until I finalize it. Anyway, that's the show for today. Very glad to have had
• 1:29:27
  you please come back again tomorrow 730 to nine here at damn radio.com forward slash live Have a
• 1:29:36
  good day.