On 13 March 2024, I appeared on The Duran with Glenn Diesen and Alexander Mercouris. We had a lengthy discussion about the many problems facing the West, which show no signs of going away and are likely to get worse.
I watched the full show. Bravo to the three participants but I have noticed that something Macron said has been conveniently "forgotten" in the western press. Macron said in categorical terms that Donald Trump would not be elected president of the US. Whatever your political affiliation in the US, this is an unbelievable statement for a foreign leader to make. Some are saying in France that Macron is totally unhinged.
Actually TOO TOO TOO much diplomacy. As Obama stated when asked, "Why didn't anyone (the USA) do anything about Crimea when it was first annexed/captured in 2014?" He stated, that, " . . . . I think that western countries have gotten too fat . . . " I interpreting that as saying "The West" got to comfortable, complacent, easy to deny, etc all those years we were in "The Cold War". I mean, how farsical, after nearly 2+ years of war, the EU just goes ahead and signs these purchase orders for more weapons manufacture and delivery - and only after Trump stated he would NOT support any NATO member who has not met their minimum of 2% of their GDP into their NATO commitments. What was the EU thinking? That putin was just out for a Sunday stroll and would soon return home? Totally unbelieveable. As it is, their own arms stocks are somewhat low for their own defense.
You seem to be forgetting that none of this would have happened in the first place, if the US had not orchestrated the Maidan Revolution in the Ukraine in 2014, and then started training and building up Ukrainian troops and weapons to attack Russia.
In addition there is the NATO membership continually moving Eastward since 2007, and the invitation tp the Ukraine to join, contrary to the undertaking given to the Soviets in 1991.
The only country which has a credible and justifiable standing in the conflict, is Russia.
This NATO thing has been somewhat overplayed I think - Look at the fundamental purpose and reason-for-being of NATO - it is a DEFENSIVE organization - solely in existence to prevent what exactly russia is doing now. If you are a law abiding citizen, then why would you lose sleep is a police station was built in your neighborhood, even next door to you.? I wouldn't. But if I started to object, many would question my ethics, morals, etc.
This is oddly inverted "reasoning," especially if you think of developments chronologically, rather than in reverse order, as this author seems to. In this case, we know the egg came before the chicken.
I also note that you have No Response to the US orchestrated Maidan Revolution in the Ukraine, which exposes further, your groundless and idiotic argument!
Besides if the "NATO Cops" weren't Corrupt, and didn't intend becoming aggressief, why did they breach the undertaking given to Russia,....Fifteen Fucking Times, You Asshole!!!
Have you forgotten that NATO was responsible for the attacks on Libya, when Libya had attacked Nobody, as well as the attacks on Bosnia and Herzegovina???
NATO is an immanent threat from Corrupt Cops you Fool!!!
Alas - a fool I may be for thinking about replying to any of these comments ;) - going back to Libya, was much younger then - and even more foolish - but I thought it was purely a USA venture & not anything with NATO mandate - I may be wrong - we may have not slid into the realm where anything the USA does, will be connected to NATO for the convenient propaganda of russia and justification for invading Ukraine - and now with the latest terrorist attack in Moscow, any negative short coming that hits Russia will now always be blamed on Ukraine, NATO, the USA, the EU, wether these terrorist attacks, a bad crop year in russia, their weather, etc, etc - will further stoke russian "anti-west" propaganda and be used to justify anything russia does - and let's not forget that russia has also seeded it's own enemies in Iran, Syria, Africa, to warrant why these terrorists attacks occur "outside" of the ukraine-russia war - so russia, like any other country in a battle, has to take responsibilities for its own actions, and not keep blaming everyone else - past actions by russia speak for themselves, their brutality and disrespect of international rule - a war is one thing, but why bomb every single house a civilian senior lives in? - that is all they have - battle the soldiers - remember how this war started with the rhetoric russia kept repeating? that it doesn not bomb civilian buildings? but with 2+ years of history, that is all they have bombed - all civilian infrastructure - comments? unless someone is an oligarch fearing for their life, they should agree with some of what I said above ;)
Watched part of this interview and will watch the rest later today. That being said not one expert is raising the possibility this war has absolutely nothing at all to do with Ukraine winning (which we knew from Day One was an impossibility) but rather intentionally keeping Russia bogged down to prevent it from moving on into the Middle East. Also strictly in my personal opinion this is what Putin is referring to when he threatens using nuclear weapons BUT NOT in Russia but rather in the Middle East. It is blindingly obvious to all this war was never winnable and has actually played right into Putin's hands by depleting both NATO and the USA's armament - simply put there is no better time but the present for Russia to put an end to the crisis in the Middle East region which is the USA's greatest fear.
I would love nothing more than for John to elaborate on this probability as continuing this war as he and so many experts have stated, is beyond futile. Therefore it makes the most logical sense while Israel not only continues to poke the bear but refusing to heed the warnings of the entire world which also makes no rational sense. They have destroyed both the USA and Israel's reputation throughout the entire world not to mention exacerbating the hatred of Jews also throughout the entire world.
Someone else mentioned this before; I wish I could give them credit because it is a very good point.
Russia possesses surplus weapon systems, including both newly manufactured and older Soviet equipment retrieved from strategic reserve depots, aligning with their strategy of attritional warfare.
Once the conflict between Russia and Ukraine concludes, or at least once Russia establishes a favorable position of dominance, there’s a high probability that Putin would authorize the sale of these weapon systems to Middle Eastern partners such as Syria and Iran.
Since the beginning of the conflict, Russia has demonstrated two key points: firstly, the effectiveness of their weapon systems on the battlefield and their superiority over their Western counterparts; secondly, the ineffectiveness of economic sanctions.
Putin has the prerogative to protect Russia's naval port in Syria and would not tolerate Western presence in Iran.
A good note to end on: NATO is in no position to continue this war, so it will most certainly end with a Russian victory. And in my humble opinion: Any defeat for NATO is a win for that part of humanity who wants peace. And with a little luck our politicians will be replaced with more reasonable persons, who is capable of learning from their predecessors' mistakes. Okay, with a lot of luck, I should say, as most opposition politicians here in Europe seem to be just as belligerent as the people in power. But at least, the material preconditions for NATO waging a war against Russia is non-existent, NATO don't have the weapons, nor the manpower, so even if our politicians really want to go to war, they will not be capable to do so.
John (or John's admin), please indulge my share as the list of those who attended the Munich Security Conference was interesting, and I see that USA/NATO is giving my country of South Africa special attention (being the gateway to Africa, and a lovely spot of bother with the ICJ) - https://www.mikehampton.co.uk/p/fake-munich-security-conference-2024-emma-powell
It's over a half million but the Israel's would never report the truth. The bottom line is every plane LEAVING Israel headed for Europe or the USA continues to be completely full and certainly no one is visiting Israel these days. Tourism has come to a screeching halt.
I was looking at one of Israel's 'NGOs' yesterday, and they were bragging that they had helped 3.5m immigrants, and that they also helped 'rural settlement'. I'm pleased that their 'mission' is dented.
Can you do me a favor: Right around 1:11 Glenn Diesen does a short monologue paraphrasing Morgenthau and Lipman on the problem of framing conflicts in terms of good and evil. This would make a great short standalone clip I would love to share.
This issue is precisely the problem I run into when discussing the Ukraine conflict with others. They don’t understand Realism because they are Idealists and do see everything in terms of their own personal morality. I also suspect the Western media might be framing the conflict this way DELIBERATELY as propaganda.
The Realist case is so clear and convincing to me (Burns memo, etc.), that I can’t figure out why more people don’t agree with it. (Heck, I cant even get people to consider that Russia might view NATO on its border as a threat. Because we’re NATO and we’re the “good guys” I guess.) I suspect a good part is simply years of anti-Russian propaganda.
Toward the end of the interview, the participants list the many notable people who warned, circa 1990, that NATO expansion would lead to war with Russia. Where can I learn more about how and why, despite these warnings, NATO was expanded anyway? Who was pushing for it, and why?
Thank you for sharing that link Daniel. I listened to all of it, including the Q&A. Excellent. I especially appreciate that you recommended a qualified resource like Prof. Mearsheimer and not just any old yahoo on Youtube. Thanks!
Thanks. I am hunting for one by Bush, Cheney, Karl Rove (aka "Bush's brain), or any other qualified resource that would provide an alternate interpretation of Putin's intentions, thus justifying the post-90s NATO expansion. Please share if you find a good one. Thanks.
There are diplomatic solutions to the war, only available once the Zelenskiyy regime is no more, and the US stops believing its own propaganda. One thing is certain: if the war continues like this the danger of a sudden collapse of he Ukrainian armed forces becomes very real. In a bizarre way this will pose problems for the Russians in the very short term. Ukraine squandered its independence from day one. The country was debt free with an aviation industry, fertile farmland, ports and so on. Instead it became the capital of corruption and is known in Europe as the capital IVF. Electing a comedian didn't help and finally they refused to recognize that geography is the master of all things political and that they were living next to a 600 lb gorilla.
I think west is in a precarious situation USA national debt 34.5 trillion , Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. This is only possible with regimen change in Russia. If possible to install someone like Yeltsin who can sell resources to the west for Pennies.
I think Israel is a military outpost of the west. So oil wealth keeps flowing to the west.
Professor Mearsheimer: A question for you: It is obvious to us sane Americans that the election of Trump will be an umitigated disaster and lead to the loss of our democracy. And it will do nothing to help the Palestinians. Assuming we are not in WWIII by then already, must we nevertheless vote for Trump because that will be the only way of ending the slaughter in Ukraine and reaching an understanding with Russia that will designate whatever part of Ukraine is left by that time as a neutral buffer state between Russia and NATO. (Or even the dissolutipn of NATO and its replacement with a new mutual defense treaty among European states that will include Russia and give it the respect it deserves, in order that we can proceed with focusing our attention on China, our oeer competitor)?
Trump is also crucially far better - at least rhetorically - on the massive illegal migration surging across our southern border and exacerbating the already shockingly huge mess in most of our bigger cities. That alone will lead to his election, unless they can succeed in locking him up before then - in the interest of "saving our democracy," of course.
I've the luxury of not being American but I wouldn't vote for Biden or Trump, because I'm sick of the manipulation that expects us to choose. Secondly, what's the value of a life - is a Palestinian life worth more than a Ukrainian or Russian, and vice versa.
You have identified the crux of the problem for me. In addition to his other loathesomeness, we have no reason to think that Trump would not be even worse than Biden when it comes to Israel; Netanyahu is on his BFF list on account of the latter's contempt for democracy. Yet Biden has grabbed onto the idea of preventing a Ukrainian loss of the war by any means necessary, "for as long as it takes." So it seems that Biden is actually more likely than Trump to precipitate World War III, a position that would have astonished me in 2016.
But not voting is for Americans a copout. It essentially is half of a vote for Trump. So I would like to know for whom Professor Mearsheimer recommends that we vote.
One problem is that Americans think evangelism is Christianity, and the more uneducated/insane think Israel is a Christian state. This madness flavours politics into religion too. It's not ideological, its medieval democrats versus medieval republicans, fighting for control of a church, the politicians/priests tapping into a flaw in the American psyche. Trump is Ayatollah Khamenei, the way his 'flaws' are forgiven. Biden may as well be the Holy Ghost, 'cause they're praying to someone not there.
Much enjoyed this show Professor Mearsheimer. I am a fan and reader of your works.
I did have a general question that I’ve been hoping to hear you address.
I’d love to hear you discuss what your expectations are of how Trump would likely handle the horrible situation in the Middle East.
This situation strikes me as far more complex and dynamic than Ukraine at this moment, and simply because event-trajectory in Ukraine appears to be more determined relative to the Middle East.
It seems “fair to say” that Bibi would like a regional war and that Trump is
the Likud bloc’s preferred candidate.
While I tend to view Schumer/Biden’s pressure as ultimately a change in optics, the obvious suggestion of removal will invariably have an impact on Bibi’s conduct. Ironically it may provoke Bibi to escalate to preserve his status. I don’t think the US public would welcome that. But Republicans?
All this to highlight the unpredictability - for me at least- of the situation and its ultimate impact on Trumpian foreign policy.
It may be more betting than analysis. If I put a baby in a room with 100 toys, which one would it throw first? Except in trump's case, it'd be 100 mirrors, and a reaction to one of his egos.
So True. Many moving parts, with the significance of each part’s movement compounded by being part of a larger crisis. And each part a mirror for that impulsive narcissist.
The Prof. realistically acknowledges that his theory about great powers is probabilistically constrained by simplifying parameters that exclude domestic politics’ complexities. I still hope that his intimate awareness of US foreign policy can lend clarity.
Imagine we’d agree that while Trump could be expected to shut down the Ukraine disaster; the opposite is suggested given his past conduct in Middle East.
But what also confounds, is the interrelationship of all the crises; beyond common US role and mis-leadership.
So for instance, regional war in the Middle East could conceivably be exploited by Trump to “take the oil” as he said in past about last Iraq war. Syria and Iraq are easy oil-rich targets. But Iran? Israel’s interest would obviously go beyond to Lebanon and Iran. And Yemen given its strategic location?
And with what result and impact on Russia and Europe?
Could Trump’s hostile indifference to NATO ironically reconfigure Russian/EU relations in conjunction with his shutting down Ukraine war? And if do, with what reciprocal impacts if a Middle Eastern oil war to “save Israel”?
Very hard sorting out projections from rabbit holes given lack of data about unfolding events. Though growing crisis-anxiety naturally urges consideration.
Everything you say is possible. Trump will be caught between not wanting to be remembered for someone else's mess, possibly getting into a mess because he threatened the wrong state in order to look alpha, and wanting to support his shrieking supporters. An easy win for him is to fix the border with Mexico. An easy disaster is to be over zealous with his Sinophobia.
Would that our "elites" in the US cared as much about sovereignty and democracy for and in the United States as they purport to care about it for and in Ukraine. The public appeal of this insane expenditure of American resources on this unevitably losing proposition in Ukraine seems to be the unconscious recognition by Americans that we will NEVER be allowed by our elites to have either here in our own country, combined with the inchoate wish/need for something like both, in our miserable lives here. ("Long Live Ukraine!" Death to America... Hahaha.)
I watched the full show. Bravo to the three participants but I have noticed that something Macron said has been conveniently "forgotten" in the western press. Macron said in categorical terms that Donald Trump would not be elected president of the US. Whatever your political affiliation in the US, this is an unbelievable statement for a foreign leader to make. Some are saying in France that Macron is totally unhinged.
It's an era of diplomats without diplomacy.
Actually TOO TOO TOO much diplomacy. As Obama stated when asked, "Why didn't anyone (the USA) do anything about Crimea when it was first annexed/captured in 2014?" He stated, that, " . . . . I think that western countries have gotten too fat . . . " I interpreting that as saying "The West" got to comfortable, complacent, easy to deny, etc all those years we were in "The Cold War". I mean, how farsical, after nearly 2+ years of war, the EU just goes ahead and signs these purchase orders for more weapons manufacture and delivery - and only after Trump stated he would NOT support any NATO member who has not met their minimum of 2% of their GDP into their NATO commitments. What was the EU thinking? That putin was just out for a Sunday stroll and would soon return home? Totally unbelieveable. As it is, their own arms stocks are somewhat low for their own defense.
You seem to be forgetting that none of this would have happened in the first place, if the US had not orchestrated the Maidan Revolution in the Ukraine in 2014, and then started training and building up Ukrainian troops and weapons to attack Russia.
In addition there is the NATO membership continually moving Eastward since 2007, and the invitation tp the Ukraine to join, contrary to the undertaking given to the Soviets in 1991.
The only country which has a credible and justifiable standing in the conflict, is Russia.
This NATO thing has been somewhat overplayed I think - Look at the fundamental purpose and reason-for-being of NATO - it is a DEFENSIVE organization - solely in existence to prevent what exactly russia is doing now. If you are a law abiding citizen, then why would you lose sleep is a police station was built in your neighborhood, even next door to you.? I wouldn't. But if I started to object, many would question my ethics, morals, etc.
This is oddly inverted "reasoning," especially if you think of developments chronologically, rather than in reverse order, as this author seems to. In this case, we know the egg came before the chicken.
I also note that you have No Response to the US orchestrated Maidan Revolution in the Ukraine, which exposes further, your groundless and idiotic argument!
Besides if the "NATO Cops" weren't Corrupt, and didn't intend becoming aggressief, why did they breach the undertaking given to Russia,....Fifteen Fucking Times, You Asshole!!!
Are you that Naive, and or Ignorant???
Have you forgotten that NATO was responsible for the attacks on Libya, when Libya had attacked Nobody, as well as the attacks on Bosnia and Herzegovina???
NATO is an immanent threat from Corrupt Cops you Fool!!!
Alas - a fool I may be for thinking about replying to any of these comments ;) - going back to Libya, was much younger then - and even more foolish - but I thought it was purely a USA venture & not anything with NATO mandate - I may be wrong - we may have not slid into the realm where anything the USA does, will be connected to NATO for the convenient propaganda of russia and justification for invading Ukraine - and now with the latest terrorist attack in Moscow, any negative short coming that hits Russia will now always be blamed on Ukraine, NATO, the USA, the EU, wether these terrorist attacks, a bad crop year in russia, their weather, etc, etc - will further stoke russian "anti-west" propaganda and be used to justify anything russia does - and let's not forget that russia has also seeded it's own enemies in Iran, Syria, Africa, to warrant why these terrorists attacks occur "outside" of the ukraine-russia war - so russia, like any other country in a battle, has to take responsibilities for its own actions, and not keep blaming everyone else - past actions by russia speak for themselves, their brutality and disrespect of international rule - a war is one thing, but why bomb every single house a civilian senior lives in? - that is all they have - battle the soldiers - remember how this war started with the rhetoric russia kept repeating? that it doesn not bomb civilian buildings? but with 2+ years of history, that is all they have bombed - all civilian infrastructure - comments? unless someone is an oligarch fearing for their life, they should agree with some of what I said above ;)
It doesn't matter if there's malaise, or if there's war for victory, or a fucked up conflict with inevitable failure. All make profit.
Let's not forget that Macron was a drama student, and is married to his drama teacher.
Was that a nice score, or what?
On a more serious note, it's what Jerry Brown once called, "The Theater of False Representation."
Meaning What Exactly???
Brilliant as ever. The professor is an invaluable source on Ukraine and has been since as early as 2015.
Watched part of this interview and will watch the rest later today. That being said not one expert is raising the possibility this war has absolutely nothing at all to do with Ukraine winning (which we knew from Day One was an impossibility) but rather intentionally keeping Russia bogged down to prevent it from moving on into the Middle East. Also strictly in my personal opinion this is what Putin is referring to when he threatens using nuclear weapons BUT NOT in Russia but rather in the Middle East. It is blindingly obvious to all this war was never winnable and has actually played right into Putin's hands by depleting both NATO and the USA's armament - simply put there is no better time but the present for Russia to put an end to the crisis in the Middle East region which is the USA's greatest fear.
I would love nothing more than for John to elaborate on this probability as continuing this war as he and so many experts have stated, is beyond futile. Therefore it makes the most logical sense while Israel not only continues to poke the bear but refusing to heed the warnings of the entire world which also makes no rational sense. They have destroyed both the USA and Israel's reputation throughout the entire world not to mention exacerbating the hatred of Jews also throughout the entire world.
Someone else mentioned this before; I wish I could give them credit because it is a very good point.
Russia possesses surplus weapon systems, including both newly manufactured and older Soviet equipment retrieved from strategic reserve depots, aligning with their strategy of attritional warfare.
Once the conflict between Russia and Ukraine concludes, or at least once Russia establishes a favorable position of dominance, there’s a high probability that Putin would authorize the sale of these weapon systems to Middle Eastern partners such as Syria and Iran.
Since the beginning of the conflict, Russia has demonstrated two key points: firstly, the effectiveness of their weapon systems on the battlefield and their superiority over their Western counterparts; secondly, the ineffectiveness of economic sanctions.
Putin has the prerogative to protect Russia's naval port in Syria and would not tolerate Western presence in Iran.
A good note to end on: NATO is in no position to continue this war, so it will most certainly end with a Russian victory. And in my humble opinion: Any defeat for NATO is a win for that part of humanity who wants peace. And with a little luck our politicians will be replaced with more reasonable persons, who is capable of learning from their predecessors' mistakes. Okay, with a lot of luck, I should say, as most opposition politicians here in Europe seem to be just as belligerent as the people in power. But at least, the material preconditions for NATO waging a war against Russia is non-existent, NATO don't have the weapons, nor the manpower, so even if our politicians really want to go to war, they will not be capable to do so.
A great discussion…and so depressing! Thank you.
John (or John's admin), please indulge my share as the list of those who attended the Munich Security Conference was interesting, and I see that USA/NATO is giving my country of South Africa special attention (being the gateway to Africa, and a lovely spot of bother with the ICJ) - https://www.mikehampton.co.uk/p/fake-munich-security-conference-2024-emma-powell
Thank you so much for this great all round discussion. Please keep doing this so we can follow up on events as they unfold.
Thank you for this thorough discussion. Does anyone have any clear idea of how many Israelis have left Israel since October 7?
It's over a half million but the Israel's would never report the truth. The bottom line is every plane LEAVING Israel headed for Europe or the USA continues to be completely full and certainly no one is visiting Israel these days. Tourism has come to a screeching halt.
I was looking at one of Israel's 'NGOs' yesterday, and they were bragging that they had helped 3.5m immigrants, and that they also helped 'rural settlement'. I'm pleased that their 'mission' is dented.
Thank you so much for sharing another exceptional discussion with Glenn and Alexander, on The Duran.
Hi John. Great discussion.
Can you do me a favor: Right around 1:11 Glenn Diesen does a short monologue paraphrasing Morgenthau and Lipman on the problem of framing conflicts in terms of good and evil. This would make a great short standalone clip I would love to share.
This issue is precisely the problem I run into when discussing the Ukraine conflict with others. They don’t understand Realism because they are Idealists and do see everything in terms of their own personal morality. I also suspect the Western media might be framing the conflict this way DELIBERATELY as propaganda.
The Realist case is so clear and convincing to me (Burns memo, etc.), that I can’t figure out why more people don’t agree with it. (Heck, I cant even get people to consider that Russia might view NATO on its border as a threat. Because we’re NATO and we’re the “good guys” I guess.) I suspect a good part is simply years of anti-Russian propaganda.
Thank you for your work.
War propaganda is a manichaen art
Toward the end of the interview, the participants list the many notable people who warned, circa 1990, that NATO expansion would lead to war with Russia. Where can I learn more about how and why, despite these warnings, NATO was expanded anyway? Who was pushing for it, and why?
This is excellent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qciVozNtCDM
Thank you for sharing that link Daniel. I listened to all of it, including the Q&A. Excellent. I especially appreciate that you recommended a qualified resource like Prof. Mearsheimer and not just any old yahoo on Youtube. Thanks!
YouTube is full with amazing content on what you ask
Thanks. I am hunting for one by Bush, Cheney, Karl Rove (aka "Bush's brain), or any other qualified resource that would provide an alternate interpretation of Putin's intentions, thus justifying the post-90s NATO expansion. Please share if you find a good one. Thanks.
There are diplomatic solutions to the war, only available once the Zelenskiyy regime is no more, and the US stops believing its own propaganda. One thing is certain: if the war continues like this the danger of a sudden collapse of he Ukrainian armed forces becomes very real. In a bizarre way this will pose problems for the Russians in the very short term. Ukraine squandered its independence from day one. The country was debt free with an aviation industry, fertile farmland, ports and so on. Instead it became the capital of corruption and is known in Europe as the capital IVF. Electing a comedian didn't help and finally they refused to recognize that geography is the master of all things political and that they were living next to a 600 lb gorilla.
By capital IVF I think you really mean the capital of surrogacy.
I think west is in a precarious situation USA national debt 34.5 trillion , Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. This is only possible with regimen change in Russia. If possible to install someone like Yeltsin who can sell resources to the west for Pennies.
I think Israel is a military outpost of the west. So oil wealth keeps flowing to the west.
Professor Mearsheimer: A question for you: It is obvious to us sane Americans that the election of Trump will be an umitigated disaster and lead to the loss of our democracy. And it will do nothing to help the Palestinians. Assuming we are not in WWIII by then already, must we nevertheless vote for Trump because that will be the only way of ending the slaughter in Ukraine and reaching an understanding with Russia that will designate whatever part of Ukraine is left by that time as a neutral buffer state between Russia and NATO. (Or even the dissolutipn of NATO and its replacement with a new mutual defense treaty among European states that will include Russia and give it the respect it deserves, in order that we can proceed with focusing our attention on China, our oeer competitor)?
Trump is also crucially far better - at least rhetorically - on the massive illegal migration surging across our southern border and exacerbating the already shockingly huge mess in most of our bigger cities. That alone will lead to his election, unless they can succeed in locking him up before then - in the interest of "saving our democracy," of course.
I've the luxury of not being American but I wouldn't vote for Biden or Trump, because I'm sick of the manipulation that expects us to choose. Secondly, what's the value of a life - is a Palestinian life worth more than a Ukrainian or Russian, and vice versa.
You have identified the crux of the problem for me. In addition to his other loathesomeness, we have no reason to think that Trump would not be even worse than Biden when it comes to Israel; Netanyahu is on his BFF list on account of the latter's contempt for democracy. Yet Biden has grabbed onto the idea of preventing a Ukrainian loss of the war by any means necessary, "for as long as it takes." So it seems that Biden is actually more likely than Trump to precipitate World War III, a position that would have astonished me in 2016.
But not voting is for Americans a copout. It essentially is half of a vote for Trump. So I would like to know for whom Professor Mearsheimer recommends that we vote.
One problem is that Americans think evangelism is Christianity, and the more uneducated/insane think Israel is a Christian state. This madness flavours politics into religion too. It's not ideological, its medieval democrats versus medieval republicans, fighting for control of a church, the politicians/priests tapping into a flaw in the American psyche. Trump is Ayatollah Khamenei, the way his 'flaws' are forgiven. Biden may as well be the Holy Ghost, 'cause they're praying to someone not there.
Much enjoyed this show Professor Mearsheimer. I am a fan and reader of your works.
I did have a general question that I’ve been hoping to hear you address.
I’d love to hear you discuss what your expectations are of how Trump would likely handle the horrible situation in the Middle East.
This situation strikes me as far more complex and dynamic than Ukraine at this moment, and simply because event-trajectory in Ukraine appears to be more determined relative to the Middle East.
It seems “fair to say” that Bibi would like a regional war and that Trump is
the Likud bloc’s preferred candidate.
While I tend to view Schumer/Biden’s pressure as ultimately a change in optics, the obvious suggestion of removal will invariably have an impact on Bibi’s conduct. Ironically it may provoke Bibi to escalate to preserve his status. I don’t think the US public would welcome that. But Republicans?
All this to highlight the unpredictability - for me at least- of the situation and its ultimate impact on Trumpian foreign policy.
Would love to hear your thoughts on this puzzle.
Thank you for the read
It may be more betting than analysis. If I put a baby in a room with 100 toys, which one would it throw first? Except in trump's case, it'd be 100 mirrors, and a reaction to one of his egos.
So True. Many moving parts, with the significance of each part’s movement compounded by being part of a larger crisis. And each part a mirror for that impulsive narcissist.
The Prof. realistically acknowledges that his theory about great powers is probabilistically constrained by simplifying parameters that exclude domestic politics’ complexities. I still hope that his intimate awareness of US foreign policy can lend clarity.
Imagine we’d agree that while Trump could be expected to shut down the Ukraine disaster; the opposite is suggested given his past conduct in Middle East.
But what also confounds, is the interrelationship of all the crises; beyond common US role and mis-leadership.
So for instance, regional war in the Middle East could conceivably be exploited by Trump to “take the oil” as he said in past about last Iraq war. Syria and Iraq are easy oil-rich targets. But Iran? Israel’s interest would obviously go beyond to Lebanon and Iran. And Yemen given its strategic location?
And with what result and impact on Russia and Europe?
Could Trump’s hostile indifference to NATO ironically reconfigure Russian/EU relations in conjunction with his shutting down Ukraine war? And if do, with what reciprocal impacts if a Middle Eastern oil war to “save Israel”?
Very hard sorting out projections from rabbit holes given lack of data about unfolding events. Though growing crisis-anxiety naturally urges consideration.
Everything you say is possible. Trump will be caught between not wanting to be remembered for someone else's mess, possibly getting into a mess because he threatened the wrong state in order to look alpha, and wanting to support his shrieking supporters. An easy win for him is to fix the border with Mexico. An easy disaster is to be over zealous with his Sinophobia.
Would that our "elites" in the US cared as much about sovereignty and democracy for and in the United States as they purport to care about it for and in Ukraine. The public appeal of this insane expenditure of American resources on this unevitably losing proposition in Ukraine seems to be the unconscious recognition by Americans that we will NEVER be allowed by our elites to have either here in our own country, combined with the inchoate wish/need for something like both, in our miserable lives here. ("Long Live Ukraine!" Death to America... Hahaha.)