Transcripts For CSPAN Trump Administration Foreign Policy 20170506

During the 2016 campaign. Speakers included joel pollak and former officials from the obama, reagan, and clinton administration. From the university of southern california, this is one hour and a half. All right. Managinghe assistant manager for los angeles times. I am a berkeley grad, i come here all the time. Thanks everyone for being here. Have been on maternity leave. Have been on maternity leave. Im finishing it up and going back next week so it has been interesting for me to absorb President Trumps first 100 days and looking at not just what the l. A. Times has been doing, but what my colleagues have been doing and the analysis here. It has been important for everybody. Without further ado, we introduce this esteemed panel. A la try to keep this quick. I know who a lot of these people are. Robert english. He is an associate professor of International Relations and a policy analyst for the department of defense. The senior, hes editor at large for breitbart. And that is called how trump won, the inside story of the revolution. Lori grand, the professor of International Studies here. John emerson, a former u. S. Ambassador to germany. Won,hes working with the clintn aste house from 1993 to 1997 deputy assistant. Todd, former journalist, Senior Writer for politico. He served as the l. A. Bureau chief. So, i think it makes sense if you talk about a grade for President Trump. How do you grade president s first 100 days on fer Foreign Policy and something he has done exceptionally well and something that could have been handled better . My gosh. Judgeded i would try to the question you put it when it was sent to me in advance it is easy to say it is too early to give grades. But, obviously, we do have some initial steps. Dont think wei agree on the template for grading. What i have in mind is simply if, as probably most of the political elite believes, a good grade movement in the right direction would be a return from expressing admiration for who and optimism about working together and skepticism about traditional policy alliances and so forth to turn away from that and come back to the center. Then, what we have seen so far, although it is ephemeral and demo from is nothing but protean and consonant, it should be reminding the audience, there has been less praise of putin, although never much besides him being a strong leader but that irritated people greatly. There has been some criticism especially with regard to his support of assad in syria. There was the declaration that nato is not obsolete after all. Indeed, following through with policy under the Previous Administration of reinforcing and upgrading these fo brigades. What else . Missile strike on syria, fairfield from which it is alleged the chemical weapons attack occurred earlier. Something that seems to heaven. The russians and that assad is their allies. Interb escalating vening. The denial of a waiver where exxon mobil can proceed with this joint exploration project that had been signed and begun before the outbreak of in ukraine. D you grade t they are heartened by the parts are of general flynn. Steve bannon. Beyond that, i dont know what to make of it. We have 5 of the course work in here. Probably will should not go a lot in great length. What should come on in the Senate Investigation and the ongoing fbi inquiry into potential the possibility of collusion with russian intelligence with the russian government in the election itself. The hacking and timing of release of email to maximally embarrass the clinton campaign. You have been following it. Without prejudging what might come out of them, although i would say lots of smoke and not much fire, everything hinges on that. Never before in my memory has russia policy in the u. S. Been so intimately tied to what happens in americas domestic policies and in washington. It is impossible to assess what he is doing out there. If those investigations were a smoking gun, then everything changes. If in fact all we find our that general flynn did not declare somepeaking fee and honorary him and Cayman Islands took money from this shady guide it is scandals from the magnitude lets say of the stuff we saw q invasion and the reconstruction. That is bad but it would not necessarily tied trumps hands in seeking in a later date to change direction with russia and try to find some accord on syria , some kind of deal to end the ukraine conflict. If they are compromised that deeply impeachment , and not much will change with russia policy i will be quite. Nice groundwork for what we will be discussing today. A lot of issues with trumps Foreign Policy. We will also be taking your questions from the audience. Joel, a slightly different assessment . Ini would give trump an a foreignpolicy. He has do that because been singularly effective in Foreign Policy in the way he has been in no other area of this president. Cy. If you look at the things he has do which has been stifled by congress, lack of preparation, discourse or by the courts where there has been a lot of foreign shopping in the opposition and so he has been running against the other branch. President policy, the hand. Free and appear it is important for the next president to restore americas strategic advantage which has declined over the course of the obama years. Also, somewhat over the bush years. There was diplomatic decline and but obama, the iraq a calculated declined with the slow attrition of military. The leading from behind strategy. The restoration of relations with rogue regimes. All of this undercuts americas effectiveness in the world stage and trump, remarkably in the first 100 days, has reestablished the leverage of the United States dealing with great powers. Not just small countries but adversaries. There have been some surprises. Towardseen friendlier china but it is easy to do that if youre a bombing syria. He has used different aspects like the syrian airstrike to advance the policy under china that is about much more than the middle east and about trade and north korea. I think he has been very effective there. That unpredictability is the back some oflaw that strategic advantage that was lost. When you cannot build up your military and navy quickly, like he said he wanted to do. It takes a long time. Thesewhen you cannot build up yr military and Navy Procurement ce a long time to do. Regainmeantime, we can some of the advantage by being unpredictable. There are some criticisms from his foreignpolicy from conservatives. Falls into two categories. The one criticism is that he starting to follow the path of george w. Bush by engaging the middle east. That was an early criticism. A contingent of Trump Supporters felt that he is being swayed by various devices. Is very difficult to know what the advisors are saying. I know steve van very well. His views line of very closely the Trump Administration specific actions. You can point to one or two fights he probably lost. On Foreign Policy, i have not seen anything that is at odds with steves own beliefs. It is hard to know who is having this gushing. Discussion. Continuing certain aspects of previously existing policies so the Trump Administration was careful to say we are not using lots of ground troops. The other issue is from the proisrael community. There was this sense when Trump Took Office of the anything was possible. This terrible relationship that had come about over eight years with obama, the deterioration of ties between the governments, could be reversed. More than that that reset thed really chessboard in the middle east. There is some criticisms that he has fallen back on patterns, by prioritizing in israelipalestinian peace accord. That is something they have failed to achieve. Ets not have that to the list who is this person that works for Condoleezza Rice and so on. Is Trump Administration relying on others. Lost some of the initial edge, some of that initial power of surprise he had. When he came to office, he didnt know anything. The palestinians didnt have a phone number. This is the case for many people. I was covering an event with the australian ambassador and they did not know what to make of it. They were trying to put a brave face on it. There were comments made by politicians that were negative towards trump and then they had to walk back. Australia was nervous about the damage they had potentially done to the relationship to the new administration. Given that uncertainty, there was a moment that trump was expected to these things. You can understand his behavior by what he does. It is almost a negotiating process. I write a lot about negotiation and the major he has done everything a good negotiator we do. So, i would give him an a. Incomplete. Still lots to do but i read it less in terms of flipflops and more in terms of Everett Administration be unprepared for the actual Foreign Policy encounters. I think is negotiating in things have got him well so far. Myi think i will fall on professor colleague who has declined to give a grade. You said incomplete, rob. I would prefer not to do that. If we did talk about one thing we think has been done especially well and one thing that has not been done especially well. Say a, replaced it and couple of things where there has from positions that were staked out during the campaign in the pullback with the revision has been a positive. Primary ones. The two things that candidate onep promised to do on day although a lot of things were promised and neither has been done and i think that is very important one, the promise to move the u. S. Embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. This is not uncommon. It is one that is always backed away from. The last was 1994 which required the transferral of the embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem but it offers the president , the sitting president a sixmonth waiver. He can exercise that waiver if fails be inomeday, the u. S. Interest. This was one of the things that proisrael supporters was important that he was making his claim and something he backed away from. I think proisrael supporters ws that is an important change because i dont think i contribute at all to improving u. S. Relations in the region. No attempt to discussions of future palestinianisraeli relations t particularly good starto. Think that is an important shift. He promised was tearing up the Nuclear Accord with iran. It was interesting in the lead up to the inauguration and immediately thereafter is where we learn to his appointees would for major foreignpolicy bus and heard them as they began to make a public statements that there was a real difference, clearly, among the various Foreign Policy actors. Tillerson for major foreignpols and heard them as they began ane needed to wait and see. Mattis said the United States has defined an agreement and show people that they United States when i back away from the agreements. We will watch the iranians. There was no Movement Therapy agreement. That has happened in consummation of saudi arabia and eau. Mattistrump himself made a stat that iran was not keeping in the spirit of the accord but he will back away from the tearing it down. Nothing that could have been handled better a laundry list. Has to do with the president s decision to congratulate erdogan in turkey for winning the election. The recent referendum. For those of you who follow turkey, for those of you who may not, it is a referendum on gutting whatever remained of turkish democracy. Turkey for the last several for those of you who follows turkey, for those of you who may , increasingly severe since last january. What can only be called purges have been taken place in the turkish state and the Civil Service and universities. Hollowing out of turkeys best and brightest. People dismissed from positions, many people cannot travel because their passports have been canceled and they cannot work. All sorts of human rights violations. The muscling or complete crackdown on turkish press. It has been dreadful. Thing for thee administration to decide it will not use human rights ethics the as one of its positions, it is another thing that someone is turning into a police state. The second thing i would mentino is the middle east. It concerns the consecutive order that the president signed for money going to international groups. This is stressful. This is it handicaps organizations abroad brought in a way that is not true in the united dates and organizations cannot even talk to a woman about abortion. The its impact president was moved by the site, the dreadful sight of the syrian men and women who had been gassed with seran. We also need to think about the number of women who will die from a legal or unsafe abortions from the direct impact and there are plenty ofwe studies from ths executive order. [applause] a followup question. That was Barack Obamas first action of president. Is there a demonstrable effect that was there when obama signed it reversing what bush had done . Studies conducted show what the impact is of the lack of access to this kind of information and services abroad. Ambassador. Thank you. And hisant to thank bob team for putting this all together and inviting us here today. Ok, two things he has done well. Mcmaster, mattis and the two key elements of the National Security team have proven to be terrific appointments. And have really begun to move the National Security apparatus arkpositive direction in st contrast to what we were looking transition transition with the three weeks when general flynn was in charge. The second thing is i think after a disastrous start with regard to his relationship with foreign leaders the stumbling over the two china policy, incendiary comments and insult s towards angela merkel, yelling at the australian Prime Minister and hanging up on him on the phone. I think donald trump is beginning to do a pretty good job of building good personal relationships with foreign leaders. I will tell you that angela confirm top people will that that relationship is being built and they see that as an important and valuable thing. Those a relatively small items when you consider the concerns. To try to build upon or take advantage of americas strategic advantage but you need to have a strategy to do that. Indicated, everything donald trump does is part of a rocess. Ted p transactional. This could lead to problems. An example of this is when you have on a monday, rex tillerson, the secretary of state, who has not been heard of until this point, gives a speech outlining what was a clear departure from the consensus in the Obama Administration, but also the consensus with our allies the only solution to the civil war in syria as a political solution that does not have assad in charge of the country. Tillerson says if he is involved or not, it will be up to the syrian people. This comes in the wake of all fuzzies up until that time had been directed towards Vladimir Putin which is russia and iran, assads major patrons. Should we be shocked that four days later that assad violated the agreement he made to destroy and not used chemical weapons then drop chemical weapons . Assad is a bad guy. I will not give him an excuse because he has been dropping barrel bombs and cluster bombs and all that forever which are war crimes and crimes against humanity. I am not trying to give him that excuse. The point is the day after, you have tillerson getting up and saying he has to be gone. They wanted out a little bit. In any event, this is a problem. When you dont have any kind of Strategic Thinking and everything is being done on the ad hoc casebycase basis, you run into problems like this. Isther illustration of this a complete lack of understanding of the power and the necessity for diplomacy. Budgett that the trump represents the issue will be 30 and now 18 cut in the budget of the state department and the agency for International Development which candidly so much of the work of they do alternately helps to stabilize this unstable world in which we are living, to the point that general mattis, the beneficiary of these cuts because most of this money will go to the military says that is fine, you will have to buy me more bullets. And rex tillerson, the secretary of state, embraces these cuts which demonstrates to me that as a betteris understanding of the role of secretary of state in the current secretary of state does, this is a better understanding of the role of secretary of state in the current secretary of state does, this is a problem. That reflects and lack of broader, Strategic Thinking. The final point i will make which i thinkthe final point i e which i think is a significant problem for the administration i believe in the first three months that donald trump has done a very good job of squandering what is literally aspect thatortant any president of the United States has when it comes the Foreign Policy and that is president ial credibility. When you start tweeting about and promoting far out conspiracy unproven or flatout false statements and accusations , you undermine the credibility of your office and you undermine the credibility of what you say. Lets say we werent going to talk about this was about the nuclear deal lets talk about iran doing what it simply does. All typically walk almost the way to the edge of violating that and that we have to pull them back. This happens on a weekly basis. It is a lot of work to keep that going and moving forward as it has been which is good. Lets say they violate it. It is a six country deal. You have a chinese, russians, germans and brits and the americans negotiating with the iranians. You have the other allies that like this deal. President trump, who by the way, spent a good deal of his transition denigrating the Transition Community and the quality of the information they get and spends time that the press of the enemy. And that anything he does not like his state is. How is he going to go to his allies and show that he has intelligence that the iranians are violating this agreement and we need to walk it back . Will they believe him . That is a problem. Would have given him a d a couple of things that happened that robert topped about i personally agreed with the action that was taken in syria. One of the mistakes obama made was announcing a redline and not following through on that. I was glad to see that happen. Im very pleased to see that the work mattis and mcmaster has been doing. . Be he is up to a d of any comprehensive strategy, everything is not transactional. We have to be thinking more broadly. The absolute deterioration of president ial credibility are two very serious problems. Todd, your grade. It is always great to go last because everybody has on your answers. I would say general mcmaster and mattis. Mcmaster wrote a marvelous book about vietnam. In response to the question about the great, we are taught several things which is at all costs of avoiding analogies. We are also taught to avoid things like better grades for all editions politicians. Say President Trump has incomplete because i think the policy has been anecdotal, responsive to daytoday events. It is hard to see what is consistent about it. I would agree with the professors bat from a perspective of mainstream 60, 70 years of Foreign Policy, the changes he has made has been to the good as been the broad range of the bipartisan since the end of world war ii. We can all be grateful that he has adopted a policy tone overall. ,n general, the personnel National Security team which would include people who worked in the george w. Bush administration. Planee in a far superior to the personnel in the dutch domestic policy staff, or internal. Plus 1020 years i think general masters or general mcmasters or mathis could have worked for president obama. Thats a good sign for the continuity and stability of the policy. I agree with john that the state Department Budget and for diplomacy in general are alarming as the secretary tillersons seeming lack of interest in defending his own you like to say that the personal to state department does not do not do a Single Division in the army. He was outgunned and outmanned around the role in terms of being able to do the work he was trying to do in the aftermath of 9 11, especially handling the situation in an up to the iraq war and aftermath. Said,as general mattis powers more important than ever. It doesnt make you soft on Foreign Policy to be an advocate for soft power, does it make you soft on National Security interest. It makes you smart. To be brief, a whole range of other disappointing things involved the Trump Administration and President Trumps and his familys unwillingness to untangle, disentangle the complicated web of obvious conflicts of interest they have all over the world, including the rampant uptick in the number of trademarks china and other places. Theres a story in the New York Times about Jared Kushners families ties the diamond interests that are under International Investigation in multiple countries. I dont know jared kushner, he seems like a fine person, but whats he brings to the table, or knows to being able to solve mideast peace ordeal is the point person on International Relations or china or you name it, and places where his family might have complex commercial interest is, should be troubling to any american. Thats one thing that has also undermines the president credibility. Why is he doing what hes doing . Is it because benefits him . The country . Visit the right thing to do with the for the world . To continual refusal disclose his taxes, to disentangle himself from his own Business Affairs i understand its hard for him. He is the business. Its not as if he is the chief executive of a Public Company and if he were by the way, or even if he were a chief executive of Something Like when hank paulson became the treasury secretary, he told me that if he had understood what it was going in terms of resolving conflicts of interest, making huge financial sacrifices, future earnings and payout, he probably would have had a ride back to wall street. By that time he said yes to president bush. I will grant you its complicated President Trump is his whole business, his whole brand. He cant just walk away from something. If he walked away it would cease to exist because he is it. Theyre easily could have been and yet might be a creative, thoughtful way in which he and his family, if they are willing, can make a cleaner break with some of these questions, and make people have greater confidence in whats happening in his dealings around the world. Touched the question of whether theres a strategy coming from the Trump White House right now and the administration, the state defense and all of these seemingly unrelated things, the motherlization of the of all bombs in afghanistan, what we are seeing in europe right now. We could go on and on. I would like everybody to mix it up. Doing think President Trump is orroaching with a strategy are these the series of unrelated events happening all at once . You heard me on it. Anybody else can counter that may be. Butts the same question that that reagan faced was asked what strategy was. He said, we when they lose whatever you have to do. Is therewing us are many more tools and tool box than we previously thought. I agree with the comment about soft power. The Obama Administration took it to such an extreme, we have dashcam. It became a joke. This administration has shown remarkable flexibility in terms of willingness to use elements of soft power together with hard power. The fact that it is constantly unpredictable is good. You want to simply be unpredictable, you need to be effective. But i think that that is part of the strategy of getting the United States to a position where we succeed in reducing threats to our security, succeed in improving our access to foreign markets. Economic gainse and some of our trade relations towards the United States. The problem with we win, they lose which sounds great, who doesnt like that . The problem is, what happens after we win . So we won the war in iraq. Saddam hussein is gone. Did we really when . When you look at what is happened subsequent to that . Broader to have a thinking about the ultimate consequences of things, which, by the way i am an equal opportunity criticize her. We didnt have that when the Obama Administration and the allies went into libya. There was not enough thought which is why president obama decided not to going to syria. He said, i dont know what happens the day after and we need to understand that. To effectively win the peace, or win the victory, or consolidate the three whatever phrase you want to use, you often need very proactive, thoughtful diplomacy, working with our allies to accomplish that. So one question i am often asked, people are assessing whats happened right now we live here in los angeles. Should we be concerned about whats happening in north korea right now, particularly given that trump is in the white house . Because we are closer to a nuclear alaska is a lot closer. [laughter] we will suffer less from begun quick there will be suffered prolonged radiation effects. [laughter] perhaps to put it with at my way of saying theres nothing special if it gets to that we are all in bad shape. Im sorry, iy dont have a great deal to say about this. I just dont have expertise. Thinking, its fancy footwork if i can answer different question. Is, i wasnt clear at the outset. When i said, the grief you give depends on a template that we might not all agree on, visavis russia. Im not necessarily in some was clearly not with the. Ainstream the tougher we are in putin, the better. The more we are like Hillary Clinton would have done, the better with russia. I see the need for and opportunities for greater cooperation, a senior relationship that has broken down to the detriment of the come andld, that has our political debates, become atmospheric rousseff phobic extremes that are a clean state slate. Theres little as little faith as i had that trump could execute it nonetheless in the basic principles he enunciated, very bracing, refreshing. Seenfore, if what we have as i apparently seem to suggest was trump going back to that mainstream. I didnt necessarily mean i thought that was good. But again, where it leads to thanks to these investigations, we will take it out of everyones hands. On the clarify that by asking us to think ahead. So often we have these simple five black and white issues views of issues, which are much more complex, and also we wake up to them very late. What i mean by that is, sort of unnoticed maybe in a common time we would have paid more attention. If there is a new member of nato, country called montenegrin that senate voted 972 to ratify that member of the treaty organization. This requires ratification a people who are experts in the reason we can have concerns about that. With the mainstream approach, again. Another member of nato, great. Nato should be stronger, it stands up to russia. Montenegrin is nowhere near russia, theres no russian threat there. The idiocy about attempted serbian russian who is crazy. Up why a local dictator, who is more corrupt than putin ever could be, who is more likely to kill or imprisoned lyrical opponents then put never has been, mildew cottage my god, speaking of double standards, if the whole reason we want so strongly in support of the ukrainian revolution, push, or rebellion back in 2014 was because even though he was democratically elected, he was so corrupt that, how are we jumping into bed supporting him, for whom getting into nato was a way of launching his stranglehold 25 years and counting, on the country . Its a bad idea. Montenegro israel by a thug and gangster. We have closed our eyes he has is indicted all over largestor running the human trafficking, tobacco, and drugs across the adriatic. Its unbelievable. We are walking into bringing this guy, this country to nato when it has nothing to contribute to nato and has no need for nato. And the rest of the world those who arent part of the nato diplomatic elite look at that and say and we take you seriously when we say you are fighting corruption . It was ok to undermine a government because it was corrupt . Anyway, why my going off on this tangent . This could be the issue two years down the road. We were sleepwalking as things evolved in the ukraine, then we discovered we were crossing the russian red line, we were thoughtless about that. Toy close by connecting this unintended consequences, having a strategy, not merely reacting. You are stopped and thought that ukraine was being subsidized by russians to the tune of at least inemaybe 8 billion a year belowmarket gas prices, purchasing ukrainian Industrial Products that nobody else would. When we maneuvered so that the ukraine would leave the russian orbit and joined ours, we also in a sense, took on it steps as possible before it. It turned out to be expensive. Its mark rutte today than it was before. Look at the opinion polls. More people in ukraine today regret the e. U. Association agreement that was extensively the reason they came out of the series in the first place. Theill have that around, west, especially the eu. Around regardless of the separatists in the east, any trouble that putin stirs up. Again we have made it so easy for him to do that by what we did in ukraine. Montenegrin could be a tiny version of ukraine but theres a lot of not thinking through dishquences, or going on purely tactical part of the mainstream. Maybe an this 1 i havent heard President Trump speak about montenegro, express any opinion probably he has never heard of it. But some of his instincts suggest he would have been more cautious. This policy was in place it was well advanced before. Long, i have gone on too but there are things happening, perspectives that we are considering that dont make it into our normal media. Theyre part of a debate that they should arent part of a debate that they are to be. Such a good panel. No expert on montenegrin but i think we should stick to nato for a second. Given what President Trump said during the campaign, that nato was obsolete, sort of his i dont want to use flipflop, but retraction of that, reprocessing it. I asked joel, what you think about how his Campaign Supporters are reacting you said this in your opening answer a lot of his changes of his decisions, does america need to be involved in other places . That was something a lot of people appreciated. He said a lot of things about different issues. On iran for example, he did say that hee that he said would enforce the agreement. I remember writing at the time, this was a remarkable response. Most other republican candidates he said, were talking about tearing it up. He said, were just going to enforce it harshly. What members of the administration are saying. It looks ago flipflop he said both things during the campaign. Similarly on a variety of issues was firm,h korea, he but also did Something Interesting not just north korea, other countries as well. 2007hing obama didnt his 2008 campaign, which pre a big target for republicans in the 2008 election. Trump said similar things about russia, other countries. There was apparently a covert attempt to contact the present tips of north korea a few months ago. Nothing ever came of it. Effort by was an trump to repeat some of these things obama did, perhaps on the belief that obama just wasnt confident doing them, but he would be more successful. That was one of the things i criticized when writing about trumps Foreign Policy during the campaign. I dont think his supporters whathat interested in happens week to week in minor ways. Well find some supporters who dont like any kind of foreign intervention at all. Thats a small minority. You will find more who were encouraged by the show of american strength. They are not simplistic in that they think, just blowing up the mother of all bombs is a great thing to do regardless of where you are doing it or how or what the concert as is our i think the idea that they were doing that above a Tunnel Network when it is next door to Irans Nuclear tennille network wasnt lost on people. People like showing strength, making them feel stronger. Point, in los angeles we are sitting in a community, or among the people who already have been targeted by north korea. It was a sunny hack a few years ago. North koreans hacked feast of soon euros. Through intimidation, they basically forced the cancellation of the screening of a film in the United States. Thats remarkable, but he couldnt get this interview that was about assassinating kim jongun. You couldnt get anyone to post this film. Its like what happened in berkeley were and culture has been forced to cancel her speech. North korea undermined the constitutional freedoms of the United States. Im not saying we should have launched the carrier as a result it certainly was an act of war. With rdc north korea pose a interest our economic our freedom. They have not been reluctant to attack us. What trump is doing today, meeting with the entire senate to brief them on what is tends to maket one think that he intends to remove the north korean regime somehow, or to have the chinese do something. They want the North Koreans not to do anymore Nuclear Testing because they would reach a point of no return. Thats a very strong language. That means the integrity of the regime. Thats what we are talking about. Now thats on the table. Glenn beck, a conservative critic of trump said, he liked this idea i heard him on the radio talking about one Million People will die in the first two days of a war with north korea. There will be conservative push back if it has in that direction. But i think trump has artie shifted to thinking, and a president ial way as opposed to Campaign Mode hes presented with new realities everyday is every president is. Think its uniquely trump the them to have this variety of responses to things as they come up, whereas obama was more ideological, had a clear plan to reach him says i want tell you what ill do. Obama was clear about what he was doing and as a result our adversaries and allies adjusted. Over time they rubbed some of our interest and positions. Trumps position is not going to be as clear. He will reserve his overall strategy. Other than comic make America Great again. Going to be flexible and agile with the use of different tack. Korea, theres something more important happening then we have seen in the past two decades. Anyone else want to weigh in . Efore return to afghanistan there are three possible solutions to north korea. Decapitation, which is complex and difficult to accomplish. You could, ship that you have no idea whats going come after her what the consequences will be a military conflict which i would agree with back on that i dont know about the numbers but you got sold within whats, 10 Million People live in so within mortar shell range of north korea. There be serious repercussions and loss of life from that or working with the chinese to put a squeeze on them, get them under control. They arese conflicted. On the one hand, they do not want to see north korea develop further develop and have the ability to deliver nuclear weapons. On the other hand they do not want to unstable regime, dont want to see reunification of the peninsula. Its a challenging situation there. Most things in washington, we will be reading soon about what that strategy is and what was discussed with senators today. The one thing that concerns me throughvertently andter and and tweets comments, inadvertently establishing red lines that may be, you dont want to establish. Are stuck in that situation about, they do something or they cross a red of, that is short successfully testing an icbm, then how do you response particularly given those three options, two of which are very unattractive. So i think thats concerned. The other concern is, with someone who is clearly so unstable and volatile as kim from a is, and who comes culture where saving face is important, dont want to go so far with the facing that you end up a listening some kind of a first strike attack. Balance. Very careful i am not saying this is a criticism, im just saying this is a concern i have as i look at that situation. One is what john said about senators meeting at the white house. It remains to be seen how congress will react overall to the trump for policy as it emerges. You see people like senator mccain who have been a stiff critic of trump throughout much of the campaign approving of his action in syria, because it smacks of something thats opposite of what i like to call, Barack Obamas feckless photo op Foreign Policy. I think congressional opinion and involvement in this question printing jewels notion that they of the greatest unilateral syria there is no doubt about that, thats why the president has come to like Foreign Policy but what happens in congress will be important. The second thing to johns point about listening action you dont want to prompt. When Vice President pence was in the developer he militarized so last week, he kept saying, patience is over. He could not say what it would be replaced by. What be replaced by strategic inpatients . [laughter] im not sure what. Think its interest to declare the end of something if you dont have in mind what comes next. The early hallmark of the Trump Administration has often been to say, this is the end of that, but what comes next, we are not sure. Court. Ike a lawyer in you shouldnt ask a question you dont know the answer to. Transition to the middle east. Professor brandt we start with syria or afghanistan. But i think we talked about the mother of all bombs. Theyre going to be sending more troops to afghanistan. Now is the situation there and what should people be expecting from the next 100 days . One interesting thing following rhetoric or pronouncements about the middle east afghanistan is on the edges of the region that i follow, but theres nothing about afghanistan virtually during the campaign. There weres because so many hot areas, certainly contentious areas. Its also something that has been referred to since the inauguration. In some ways, this the dropping of this i dont like the term, this huge bomb. Of net not know where, because we do have this ongoing this is the want us military conflict in which the United States has been engaged. The attempt was under the Obama Administration to bring this to a close. That was not as that was not successful and the first time that major powers have been sucked into afghanistan and drawn out conflicts there was that experience of the 19th century. Obviously this is a different ordinance available, but still. , i dontt we dont know what the strategy is for afghanistan. In the case of syria, we were told during the campaign and this seems to be followed through on it was going to be, the obama policy on steroids. In other words, the u. S. Is targets inbing isis there was some patients on the part of the military that they wanted to take a more effective. A we do not know what the strategy is for afghanistan. Billions ofpent dollars in afghanistan. I think mcmaster was there recently, mattis was there on monday. They are clearly looking into what the followup is to the dropping of this huge bomb. I dont know how to what the strategy is going forward. This seems to have come out of almost nowhere. I agree withyria, what was said earlier about the fact that the reason that the Obama Administration at the time of following the pronouncement of this redline, and the fact that the government used chemical weapons and obama chose not to strike militarily, that this was part of bombs view of the world. Stressfulme through experience with iraq, no plan for the morning after. Think them at a great deal of sense at that time. Were much farther into this disaster, the gradual destruction of syria. Now, then we were at the time. The impact of that kind of bombing is not all clear to me exactly what that accomplishes. It doesnt need to be a different strategy other than intensification. The United States has introduced troops, not lots but somewhere around 1000. In syria that is. This just it appears to be it is an extremely complicated situation. There are multiple parties on the ground. This is an intersection of a civil war and multiple proxy wars. No one wants to see people gassed, but this kind of response to me, seems to be not exactly gratuitous, but im not sure that it has more than the mallick impact. Its interesting to me, during the last two years, the Obama Administration there was debate on capitol hill about the authorization of ella terry horse. Military force. And if there was nothing that should be issued for isis. The white house believes the 2001 authorization following the september 11 attacks give them broad leeway. What is the status of that debate now . We havent heard very much about it from President Trump. I dont think you your but if congress either candidate, my sense candidly, everybody just rushed into voting for the iraq war. Threehat vote successive president ial campaigns now. These guys congress for the most are, starting with paul ryan, are perfectly happy to not have to take responsibility for what does or doesnt happen in that complicated, unstable region. The Trump Administration this is well within following the cheney doctrine. So russia. Tested english, you testified on this in the beginning. Theres a lot to impact here. The status of this fbi investigation. Going to affect trumps Foreign Policy . Anybody that would like to weigh on this. Something you said earlier struck both john and me john, feel free to weigh in even if it doesnt rise to the level of a constitutional crisis, something directly linked to candidate trump, the death by 1000 cops distraction can still be paralyzing for any administration. Said other one other thing, which is that it is involved in russia to mr. Politics. Except 6570 years ago it was very much involved, mccarthyism, the debates about espionage, whatever you want the rosenberg case, on and on. Debates,ays, those which effected our internal domestic politics, were crippling for both president s truman and eisenhower in different ways and different times. If the relationship with russia becomes freighted, not only with Geopolitical Realities and consequences, but with a potential kind of explosive personal and or domestic political ramifications, we would be looking at something pretty volatile, even if the worst doesnt happen. It strikes me Conspiracy Theory, how fast with automotive. Some kind of a better relationship with russia in the way that has been suggested by this theory . Awaywas there left to give after Hillary Clinton and barack obama . They gave way Missile Defense in europe. The giveaway crimea. They give away a new start treaty which hurts our Nuclear Arsenal and rebuilds theres. Votes away various what was there left to compromise on . The Previous Administration wakes up and realizes that russia is not our friend and the reset did not work. I cant find any reason for the russians to believe that Hillary Clinton would have been tougher than trump. I cant find anything left for truck to give them that they would want. What has happened now is that iraneality of syria and has frustrated every other aspect of trumps foreignpolicy. Russians are trying to see how far they can push trump. I think what will happen is the russians will dialback their foreignpolicy to try to consolidate the middle east. They will leave europe alone whoeverouse back comes back i digress has frustrated america overall ambitions. They can find ways to work with us in different times and circumstances. Any way that we could solve the problem with russia, it can be believed. Trump thought he would have a better relationship with putin, by speaking to them, as other was unlikely. I think this Conspiracy Theory to say that there was one active effort, i can see any shred of evidence for a. I cant see what putin would have wanted to gain from it other than finding evidence through hacking that heard Hillary Clinton under the assumption that she would be president. This came out in the hacking james comey was aware of in a mill that russians had recovered up democratic democratic is speculating that Loretta Lynch would never let Hillary Clinton face prosecution. They were satisfied that this New York Times story suggested that his wife james comey went public with his reopening of the investigation. Having already been undercut by Loretta Lynch in her negotiations with bill clinton and calling the matter a criminal investigation, she thought she was reaching into the investigation and self and compromising the position of the fbi. That is the only significant evidence of any kind of impact on the election. It was countered to the direction that one might think. One might think the great crime that the russians have committed was showing how the democrats were hacking the election. Showed that the Democratic National committee had colluded with the clinton campaign. All the other hacking had turned this up in the memorandum. I think this was a useful distraction for the democrats to rile updated rile up their base. I agree with todd that this could be a Public Relations problem for the Trump Administration just as mccarthyism was a problem for eisenhower even though it ended up producing nothing in the and. I think this is a political cause. To do believe it even though obama administrators say there is nothing there. I think the behavior of the of Trump Administration has already overwhelmed anything that might have come out to show anything at all about the 2016 campaign involving trump and russia. Here is what we know. Bothow the russians had the dnc and the rnc. They chose to expose the embarrassing emails from the dnc but nothing from the rnc. My guess is that nobody in the rnc wrote anything remotely embarrassing. That is why they didnt have anything to show. Can you believe that . That, we know. Secondly, we know that the trump campaign, starting with the candidate himself was dancing very happily over these lakes. Encouraging russia to find those hidden emails. He was barely joys about the joyous aboutly the leaks. That doesnt suggest collusion but it suggests that we have in germany, we would call that a gift. Lets see if we can take advantage of that. Putinw that vladimir believes he has had it on multiple occasions that the of the 20thgedy century was the dissolution of the soviet union and the soviets fear of influence. Influence. Phere of the incursions into eastern putins Approval Ratings and russia were in the mid 40s. After he did that, they shot up into the 90s. 0s. 0s to 9 65 to 85. I saw things suggesting they were in the 90s. Point is from 40 that this pride in russia and russian strength powerful,was a domestic, political gasoline for Vladimir Putin. We know that a strategic objective of putin is to drive a the nice it your. The United States and europe. Just to keep things royal and unbalanced. Frozen he likes to have conflicts, particularly in areas that he believes are part of the zone of influence of russia. Is we know he hated Hillary Clinton. When she was secretary of state she said some pretty tough things about Vladimir Putin. His back really got up when he called barack obama a regional power. Assume thato far to with the releases, at a minimum, russia was trying to undermine in the result of the American Election which they presumably thought would result in a Hillary Clinton victory. They may bes handicap or what you wish for, you may get it. Because we have seen them do it, they continue to do it. They fund they are a significant funder of the national front. Afd e a funder of alternative for door slam. They have spent tens of millions of dollars on very competitive for internet trolls and through the media and rt and radio. To put outrying alternative facts in europe. The New York Times calls of the weaponization of information and misinformation. It occurred over these periods of time. There may not have been i havent seen any evidence that there was collusion but there alot theref their that is worthy of exploring. If there was an intentional element of this, somebody call this a attack an attack on sony and the United States. Just to follow up and not disagree with you, joel. It seems to me that the real question that people are trying to get at is whether the russians have or had some kind of compromising information related to mr. Trump, his business dealings, his financial indebtedness to russian oligarchs or european banks, they could have used to hold over him and whether his themning in favor of finding hillarys emails, it was somehow enacted to that. Connected to that. It was much in doubt and much disputed. Allegation at the bottom of the rest of the possibilities. I grant you that there is no concrete proof that that is the case. If that is what theyre are trying to get at in this question, these investigations have their own momentum and they go on and on and on and there is no limitation statutorily or any other way to see where those people might fall. I think that is why the store has gotten legs in the popular imagination. To my mind, that is a even more unlikely scenario and even more fanciful. Where obamaondering when obamasr real birth certificate will turn up. Had defaulted on certain debts, all of that is in the Public Record and people still voted for him. Will crawl naked across broken glass to vote for the guy. It is a different question about whether it would show theirve to financial dealings and platforms. People with drug convictions or alcohol problems are generally not given security clearance. They are susceptible to behavior that could be used in blackmail. There is a legitimate security interests there. You could have said the same thing about barack obama. He had a history of drug use, he wrote about it himself. I dont know if anything more compromising would come out. He said if my high School Pictures had come out, nobody would have voted for me for president. If people vote for you then you are the president. I brought up this book earlier today, a team of rivals about abraham lincoln. He was a great admirer of lincoln and talks about how he very likely visited prostitutes when he was a single man in springfield. He considered it very likely. On theone or number two list of great president s. I dont know how much this information even exists if it exists, how much it would compromise trump. There is evidence that people in the trunk campaign were talking to people in russia. Some of that was normal conversation, some wasnt. Aside from this dossier, it doesnt incredible. If there is something out there, presumably our electoral process will flush it out in 2020. Probably sound i am on both sides of the issue but let me turn to joel and say that there is Something Else that russia wanted. You said that hillary and barack have given away everything that the russians could have wanted. Sanctions relief. We can go into some detail about that, there is no doubt that it is sanctions. European ones. American leadership is important in maintaining this. They have hurt the russian economy a great deal. Without going into the specifics of banking and the energy and so forth. We riskther side, interpreting this i am reminded of a saturday night live episode where trump is trying to be tough on russia and there is there chested putin showing of sex tapes and suddenly he is soft again. I agree with you, farfetched. It is really farfetched. I could be proven wrong and the investigations will show what they show. Even if you believe that putin had financial or personal information on trump, to deployed in this fashion was silly. It doesnt make sense. Think it through. That leads me to my final point which is that putin isnt 10 feet tall. Example, his influence over european politics, i think we do ourselves a disservice and we misunderstand and miss respond to problems and politics such as the populace right wing nationalistic turn in europe. If we keep focusing on putin, putin is 1 . I have to disagree, he isnt a significant source of money for the national. Look at these finances, these are not a significant source of support. Look at the history of the national front. Look how it has grown in recent years. That has to do with 20 other things. It doesnt mean they are not trying. That they dont invest a little germany. In hungary and if we focus on putin, if he can marionette master and yet the strings and chip european politics, we will take that pay less attention to the real problems that are added to the support of movements for the liberal currents that we dont like. With the to do aftermath of the global recession and so much else. It is not to disagree with you that putin is doing these things but rather to say are they where we should focus our main attention if we want to solve these problems and prevent directions in politics that are to everyones except russias this advantage. I think we have turned him into somebody 10 feet tall. The thought of him invading another country, ukraine is a russian population, a deep history with primary criteria. Crimera. We would have known that is a redline. Attacking nato countries, look at russias of economy it is at the absolute limit of its capabilities. Some of the things that trump could have offered are real gifts. Im not saying there was a deal there but hillary and barack did not give everything to putin that he might have wanted. Lets keep this all in perspective and yes, wait and see if there really is fire or just a lot more smoke and unreported tax income. Untaxed income rather than real collusion or something bordering on high crimes, misdemeanors or even treason. Before we turn it over to the audience, there has been breaking news, something we thought that might happen. There are reports that President Trump will sign an executive order formally withdrawing the u. S. From nafta, this anybody want to weigh in on the consequences of that russian mark that . That will shorten the stock rally that we have had in the last couple of days. Nafta was a treaty that was enacted by congress back in 1993 when todd and i were both bang around in the white house in different roles. Thatot sure how you do without having congress. I think that requires an act of congress. By the way, he will get the votes for sure. The democrats will vote for that. Answer. Ve the now we will turn it over to the audience, there are people with microphones. We will start here in the middle. Please make sure your question and with a . Stion mark. Wide, if montenegro is covered by a corrupt individual, you didnt mention he had applied for nato, but if he did, what would be his purpose . That is to make i guess. On the montenegro file. Military upgrades, new arsenals, training, all of those programs will be a gusher of income for him. It would be in any case. A huge bold most to him and his party. Master, a clan. Frommore than his ordinary big Foreign Investment and big business deals. Number one, he stands to profit directly in ways that enrich him in his work. Two, he almost lost power, he was on the verge of being voted out of his democratic socialist party. This rushing to attempt, there were more keystone costs, they were cooked up at the last minute, an october surprise if you will to change the election twos to change the whole terms. I know it is montenegro but it is omatic up much more. We talk about democracy and the will of the majority. It used to be that the countries joined the eu or nato held a just adum it wasnt book by a parliament that might be voted out tomorrow and was corrupt because it doesnt take any payment, it was a nationwide referendum. It was for the Czech Republic and for poland and force and so forth. Montenegro never held a referendum and all of the Public Opinion polls show that 36 or 37 supported. This is a very Christian Country who is whose corrupt leadership is joining the middle line for their own financial interests. It could blow up in our faces. We are supporting a gangster, that is have the benefits, he stays in office and enriches himself and his clan further by what is essentially a big investment deal and militarily on both sides, it is nonsense. I think we have one in the back here. Climate change is something that hasnt come up in detail yet. I was hoping that maybe investment emerson and professor english might want to touch on how that might figure into your grading of the president s Foreign Policy and its silence on the issue, if it is something you can grade as well, how might this figure look in the next four years in terms of a strategy. What are the three things that you are most worried about in leaving office . Obama put Climate Change at the top. He thinks that the science shows us i know we dont believe in science these days, the size shows us that the science shows us that we are at that point where it will be really hard to reverse where we are today. Climate change, i can only say one or two things, i think we got caught on some of these that would be part of a low grade. The unitedhing that states cant address by itself. Other nations cant address it by themselves, they have to be addressed globally. It is something that we worked for six years in particular. I think that is a huge problem and a huge risk that i used to say in germany. If you dont like the flow of refugees today, imagine the flow of refugees when we have climate refugees and people moving inhabitableiously, land has become area. Turn on the news and ecb cbs morning news and there are beautiful pictures of all the glaciers icebergs in thenorth atlantic which are most ever at this point since they have been measuring the stuff. There is issue after issue that comes up and suggest that that is a huge problem. That Climate Change is not only a foreignpolicy issue, it is a National Security issue. So did the leaders of the military. I spent a lot of time with the leaders of the military, nato and all of our forces in europe. They see Climate Change as a significant National Security issue. It isnt just a nice diplomacy thing. Thank you for bringing it up. That, moretag onto of a question than a comment. In the category of breaking news, maybe i am the last to know i subscribe to odd things. 410 parts per million of carbon in the atmosphere, another horrible milestone and still rising. What doesnt mean it we are going to back out of treaties and no longer be a leader . China steps in . China is ramping up green technologies. Do we lose economically . I am sad to see American Leadership as mixed as it was on that, banishing. I think it shows great American Leadership in prepared and andout of paris this balance with pseudoscience. Angela merkel understands its eyes a little better than you do, she has a phd in physics and chemistry. I do have a ba in harvard from for environmental science. I do know a little about what it talking about. You can accept every alarmist hypothesis. The economics dont work. It is fundamentally against the that india, without china, they are not going to do what needs to be done under Global Governance that would reduce emissions. We have solve the Climate Change problem, we just dont allow ourselves to say that. The United States is the only civilization to have expanded its economy while reducing its Greenhouse Gas emissions. It did this by switching to cleaner burning fuels. I the wishes of the Obama Administration which didnt want to see drilling expand on federal lands. The technological advances are enabling this. The parts per million will keep going up and because Carbon Dioxide has a halflife of a thousand years. Use of we cut off our fossil fuels, we do not have the science and technology to control the weather or remove carbon from the atmosphere in that rapid fashion. Itare possible impacts is cheaper and wiser to focus on mitigating the impact of those things. Rather than shutting down our economy and costing hundreds of thousands of millions of job losses. Undermining our international strength. The greater International Threat as converting our navy two green fuel which costs 26 dollars per gallon which rather than using sensible people which will allow our navy to do what it needs to do. We have undermined our National Interest because of this. We undermined our own constitutional working for some of these things. The United States should be leading a push back on this and leaving a march toward technological improvements which can solve these problems while creating an economic growth. They want to see the economy is and for whom the quickest way to develop is fossil fuels. This could be a debate for another day. We have time for one last question, lets keep it brief. My question is for mr. Pollock. You thinks as to why america should discontinue the use of the word resistance. You should use the word revolution to sell books and also, you made analogies associating berkeley with north korea. Sex toociated paying for be the same as sexual advances without consent. I might be leaving somehow but i unpack yourou to point in those terms. What is the point . You dont like what i said. If you could unpack why the left should disembowel resistance. But if you would like to use it, you can. You can go on offending republicans whose votes you need in seven states you need to carry if you want to when the senate back. You can go on targeting them. When feel free to use them. I was speaking in the context of what advice i would give the democrats if i wanted to win. My advice is look at one of the six democratic voters unhappy personalps characteristics but given the better alternative. Occupiedve them nazi europe and riots on campus and putin 2016, not my president. That is all about giving voters a better november. He might not like the vision. Americans like to look forward they like economic growth. Candidates in elections point and negative picture of where the incumbents are taking us. What people liked about trump was the idea of greatness. Democrats have that in their arsenal. Shelvedately, they have them. Terms that ing in think are alienating voters, certainly alienating that some of these counties that trump won went to obama as well. You will not win those people that. I have this argument with journalists quite often. I have a lot of friends who work publications but i think to them if you want to write my paycheck, keep doing what you are doing. If you want trump to keep governing, keep doing this but if you want to grow the base, expand, and expand the map, nuels advise and find candidates in the district. Thank you note, everyone for a great policy panel. Professor robert english, jill pollock, john emerson. Again, thank you very much. There will be a 15 minute break and refreshments on the courtyard. Have a great rest of the day. Unfoldsn, where history daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies. And is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. Here on cspan, washington journal is next. Followed by Airline Executives aboutying before Congress Airline Customer Service after recent incidents on domestic flights. Coming up on todays washington journal, Marion Levine talks about the latest jobs report. That saw unemployment dropped to its lowest level in a decade. And a look at the fccs attempt to roll back certain internet regulations. And later, a Washington Examiner reporter talks about President Trumps recent executive order. Host good morning, its 2017. Ay, may 6, the headlines were dominated by health care, with the house finally making good on their yearlong promised to repeal and replace the Affordable Care act. Know the action moves to the senate. President donald trump attempts to overhaul the Health Care System but faces a far more perilous fate, the moderate republican senators that have already come out a case out against the legislation. Senator say they are crafting their own bill and working at their own pace. They could take weeks or longer