I think it's obvious there's basically one deep state party, and that is the party of Cheney, Harris, Biden, and Victoria Nuland, my colleague at Columbia University now. Nuland is kind of the face of all of this because she has been in every administration for the last 30 years. She was in the Clinton Administration, wrecking our policies towards Russia in the 1990s. She was in the Bush Administration with Cheney, wrecking our policies towards NATO enlargement. She was then in the Obama Administration as Hillary's spokesperson first and then making a coup in Ukraine in February 2014—not a great move, started a war. She was Biden's Under Secretary of State. Now that's both parties. It's a colossal mess, and she's been Cheney's advisor, she's been Biden's advisor. It makes perfect sense. This is the reality. We're trying to find out if there's another party—that's the big question.
It's very important to understand that starting in the late 19th, early 20th century, given developments in the American economy, it was imperative that we develop—and this was true of all Western countries—a very powerful central state that could run the country
In a very interesting interview of Putin in 2017, published in Figaro, he mentioned that he had dealt with three U.S. presidents. He observed that they come into office with certain ideas, but then the men in dark suits and blue ties come in and explain the way the world really is, causing those ideas to vanish.
Trump hired John Bolton, who represented the Deep State, and Bolton explained in his memoirs how they would trick Trump when he didn't agree with them.
American foreign policy aims to maximize power and to be a global hegemon.
With no rival great power left post-Cold War, the U.S. decided to utilize its power to remake the world in its own image.
U.S. is more interested in strategic advantages like military bases and NATO enlargement rather than state-building.
game on the board is power-seeking.
there are smart and dumb ways to pursue power, suggesting that containing China is smart while what the U.S. is doing in Ukraine is dumb.
We have a mindset that everything is a challenge for survival and that escalation is always the right approach. A little bit of prudence could save the whole planet.
Understanding perspectives from both sides can lead to deconfliction.
While I admire India's policies, the notion that India will ally with the United States against China is a delusion. Washington needs to understand the global dynamics better.
This approach is power-seeking. Even if you're safe as a regional hegemon, you're never safe if another regional hegemon does what you do.
In the nuclear age, you don't get a second chance. We are now in a direct war with Russia, which has 6,000 nuclear warheads. I can't think of anything more imbecilic than that. We got into this mess because we thought we had to meddle, including putting NATO into Georgia and Ukraine. If we do the same with China, there will be a war.
The agreement is two states, maybe with a big wall between them, on the 4th of June 1967 borders, with a state of Palestine being the 194th UN member state, and its capital in East Jerusalem and control over the Islamic holy sites.
Israel faces three big problems aside from problems with centrifugal forces inside the society. One is the Palestinian problem, which is both in Gaza and in the West Bank. Two is Hezbollah, and three is Iran.
Iran is the really dangerous flashpoint because, as you know, the Russians are now closely allied with the Iranians, the Chinese are moving in that direction as well. If Israel gets involved in a war with Iran, we’re going to come in in all likelihood.
The Israelis are the ones who want us to get involved in a big war with Iran. That’s the escalation flashpoint.
If you believe that it matters who leads the next administration, that’s true.