July 16, 2024 • 11 mins
On Monday, Donald Trump announced Ohio Senator J.D. Vance as his 2024 running mate. A recent convert to the MAGA movement, Vance has championed Trump’s “America First” foreign policy vision and vocally denounced NATO and U.S. support for Ukraine. What might his selection signal both for the future of U.S. foreign policy and for the direction of the Republican party? In this episode, Jacob Heilbrunn speaks with Harry J. Kazianis, executive editor of The National Interest. Kazianis previously served as part of the foreign policy team for Senator Ted Cruz's 2016 presidential campaign and worked for the conservative Heritage Foundation.
Music by Aleksey Chistilin from Pixabay
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Hi, I'm Jacob.
(00:24):
Heilbrunn, the editor of the National Interest.
And my guest today is none other than our executive editor, Harry J. Kazianis.
Harry has a longstanding interest in the Republican Party and in foreign policy.
And I'm going to talk to him today about the implications of Donald Trump's tapping of
(00:46):
Ohio Senator JD Vance to serve as his vice presidential running mate.
Harry, let me begin with two quotes.
The first is from William Ruger, who declared on X, the former Twitter, quote, There are
very few ways you could make never Trumpers and neoconservatives, including the ones that
(01:09):
will try to get a job in Trump to hate the Trump ticket more than selecting JD Vance
as VP choice.
Right on cue, William Crystal in the bulwark declared today, quote, In just 18 months in
the Senate, Vance has shown that he's all in on autocracy, on authoritarianism, on an
(01:32):
anti liberal movement to transform American politics and America itself.
End quote.
Harry, what's going on here?
Hey, Jacob, it's good to be with you.
Look, this is this is what I would say.
I think with the pick of JD Vance, I think there's a few things going on.
I think the most obvious before we get to foreign policy is that MAGA has fully taken
(01:55):
over the Republican Party.
I mean, there's there's not a lot of room for people like the Nikki Haley's or the Bill
Cristals or people from that George Bush in generation to rise much further in the GOP.
This is a MAGA party.
This is a populist party.
It's it's you can even make the argument.
It isn't even as much conservative anymore.
(02:17):
It's the rules of the day and that's where we are going forward.
You know, focusing on your queries on foreign policy.
Look, JD Vance isn't going to make everybody happy because if you listen to him, actually
just last night he was on on Fox News and gave a very long interview, detailed interview.
And what he really spelled out was what his foreign policy vision was.
(02:38):
And to be frank, I don't think it's going to make the Bill Ruggers completely happy
or the neoconservatives very happy.
His views on China don't match up with people like the Quincy Institute and others.
He's very, very hawkish on China.
He sees China as the number one principal enemy of the United States.
And he agrees with people like like Bridge Colby, who we both know very well, and others
(03:01):
who are who consider that the dominant threat to U.S. primacy, you know, not just in Asia,
but just globally.
So that's that's where he is on Asia.
He sees Iran as a threat, you know, doesn't want regime change in Iran, but I think is
is focused on containing the growing Iranian power, military capabilities, making sure
that Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon.
(03:21):
He seems to fully back Israel when it comes to Ukraine.
That's when he slides more into the realist camp.
You know, he doesn't believe in giving Ukraine sort of an unlimited blank check.
J.D.
Vance, I think, makes the argument very astutely that, you know, he doesn't want to see Ukraine
fall into into the Russian orbit.
But at the same time, what he's looking for is what is the strategy to keep Ukraine going?
(03:45):
What's our ultimate end goal?
How are we going to get there?
How are we going to avoid escalation with Russia?
I mean, we forget, you know, we see a rotten Russian economy.
We see a, you know, a corrupt state with Vladimir Putin.
But at the same time, they have the military capabilities to do a lot of damage.
And keep in mind, they still have five thousand nuclear warheads under their control.
And the Russians seem to be always making these bail threats about tactical nuclear war.
(04:09):
So I think J.D. Vance has a very nuanced and very smart foreign policy strategy that, again,
not going to make everybody happy.
And he doesn't exactly fit into anybody's exact orbit.
I think he fits more with with like the Will Ruggers and the Koch Institute's probably
about 80 percent with them.
But I think some of the stuff on China, I don't think he's going to make them too happy.
(04:29):
And I to be honest, on the record, I love his views.
I think he's a smart pick.
Let me float another quote by you that I saw on Twitter from Eric Erickson, who said, We
are now witnessing the passing of the Reaganite torch to the Buchananites.
Is this true?
Are we seeing the vindication of the founding editor of the American conservative, Patrick
(04:55):
J. Buchanan, who also ran several times for the presidency on the explicit credo of nothing
other than America first?
In some respects, I would say yes.
I mean, an updated version.
But look, I'm 45 now and back in 1992, I remember watching Patrick J. Buchanan, you know, do
(05:15):
a lot of damage in the 92 primary.
I remember that very well.
I think the Republican Party has changed.
I know there are a lot of folks within the party that have, you know, very subtly changed
their positions and moved from a Bushian free trader, neoconservative, cultural warrior
sort of idealism and moved to a very Trumpian, making sure that trade deals are much more
(05:41):
balanced with other countries that are that are reciprocal.
You know, the United States isn't exactly opening all our markets and not getting a
lot back.
You know, I'll just give you a quick story, Jacob.
And this was sort of a little bit of my own conversion to a more Trumpian view.
And it wasn't done, to be honest, because I was looking for a job and an administration
or anything like that.
You know me well.
That's that's I'm not that type of person.
(06:03):
But back during the days of North Korea, she was very hot.
I was able to spend a lot of time in Korea and Asia.
Something struck me.
Those markets were very close to the United States.
And there was one thing that really struck me about anything else.
Every car I ever got in in South Korea was a Korean car.
I never got in a Ford.
I never got into Cadillac.
I very rarely even saw a Japanese car.
(06:26):
They protected their markets in a lot of ways.
And it really got me thinking about maybe there is something to what people like Patrick
Buchanan and Donald Trump and others have been saying when it comes to trade.
There isn't a level of fairness that's there.
You know, the argument is made, Jacob, that the United States keeps its markets open to
draw in trade partners to create alliances.
And I think there is arguments for that.
(06:47):
But I think that the United States has been on the receiving end of a lot of bad trade
deals.
In the last year or two, I've had the privilege to go to a lot of different parts around the
country when I was involved in some different types of political work.
And I can tell you, and you grew up in Pennsylvania, so you know this well, there are some parts
of this country that are dead, that are just economically dead.
(07:08):
You go through these old main streets that haven't changed much from the 1960s and 1970s.
There's no jobs.
There's no hope.
There's no future for many of these people.
I mean, myself, in a lot of ways, I'm an economic refugee.
You know, I grew up in in bluest of blue Rhode Island.
You know, I was working for a cable company at the time that was slowly dying.
And I knew that I had to get out of there, me and my wife, or I wasn't going to have
(07:30):
a future.
I wasn't going to have any way to have any economic mobility.
A lot of people don't have the resources to do that.
So bottom line is, is I think there's there's there's been this this shift in the Republican
Party that's been happening for a long time to ask fundamental questions of how conservative
or populist ideas can help the working men and women of this country who are suffering,
(07:53):
who inflation has done a lot of damage to, whose wages are coming up as fast.
And the only traditional ways to try and boost those wages are to go to college and take
on one hundred thousand dollars in debt.
I think the Republican Party under Trump earlier in Buchanan was asking these questions and
trying to figure out what the best path forward for the country is.
And I think that's a good thing.
I think the Reagan ideas of the 1970s and 80s, they're not dead, but there are a lot
(08:18):
more in the history books than I think people realize.
So Harry, many Democrats and the never Trumpers have a less sanguine view than you do about
all this.
Let me read you another crystal quote.
He says Trump may well have in the back of his mind that he'll run again.
Good luck with that.
By 2028, it will be Vance's administration and party.
We'll have Elon Musk and Peter Thiel and all the wannabe leaders of American style fascism
(08:42):
organized behind him.
What's your response?
He sounds like a bitter man whose time is gone.
I mean, yes, Donald Trump had to pick a successor.
I think Trump realized that, you know, people did he have to take his successor.
He could have gone with a typical corporate nonentity like Doug Burgum, governor of Dakota.
(09:02):
He could have.
And he also could have Jacob gone with Nikki Haley, who I was I was thinking there was
some rumors in Trump land and in GOP circles that there was maybe an exploration of that.
Some rumors that I have no no nothing to back this up, but there has been rumors floating
around that there may have been a conversation between Trump and Haley in the last couple
of days.
I can't confirm that.
(09:23):
But that's what the rumor that was out there.
So there was there was some thinking.
But Trump, I think, understands that he wants his movement, his MAGA movement to go beyond
him, because I think there was a lot of talk and speculation that, you know, by 2028, the
GOP might just start going back to its old corporatist and neoconservative foreign policy
ideals.
(09:43):
And I think what Trump wanted to do is have a legacy, lock MAGA down into the Republican
Party.
And I think J.D.
Pence was the best person to do that.
Now, look, Vance is going to have his own views.
I mean, what he's really doing right now is for the next few years, basically doing a
giant tryout to see if he can succeed Donald Trump.
I'm going to be very honest with you.
(10:03):
That that is not going to be an easy thing to do.
As so many people, Jacob, have pointed out over the last couple of days, Donald Trump
isn't just a politician.
He's a cultural icon.
I mean, this guy grew up, sort of came of age during WWE wrestling events during a 10
year run on The Apprentice, which was one of the biggest shows on TV, duking it out
in New York state real estate.
(10:25):
The guy is a scrappy fighter who has these really strange political instincts that have
served him well over the last 10 years or plus that we've been talking about him.
It's going to be very hard to replace him.
So I think J.D.
Vance is going to try and carve his own niche out within MAGA within the Republican Party.
And I think it's going to be a crazy 20, 28 primary.
(10:47):
We'll have to see where it goes.
But obviously, I think J.D.
Vance is in the in the pole position.
I think he's going to have to sort of develop his own style.
I mean, he's a little bit more wonky, a little drier than Donald Trump.
But that might what people might want after, you know, eight years, you know, in between
administrations between Trump.
We'll see.
(11:08):
Harry, with that, I'd like to thank you for your remarks and thank everyone who's listening
to In the National Interest.
We will soon have a new episode.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hi, I'm Jacob.
(00:24):
Heilbrunn, the editor of the National Interest.
And my guest today is none other than our executive editor, Harry J. Kazianis.
Harry has a longstanding interest in the Republican Party and in foreign policy.
And I'm going to talk to him today about the implications of Donald Trump's tapping of
(00:46):
Ohio Senator JD Vance to serve as his vice presidential running mate.
Harry, let me begin with two quotes.
The first is from William Ruger, who declared on X, the former Twitter, quote, There are
very few ways you could make never Trumpers and neoconservatives, including the ones that
(01:09):
will try to get a job in Trump to hate the Trump ticket more than selecting JD Vance
as VP choice.
Right on cue, William Crystal in the bulwark declared today, quote, In just 18 months in
the Senate, Vance has shown that he's all in on autocracy, on authoritarianism, on an
(01:32):
anti liberal movement to transform American politics and America itself.
End quote.
Harry, what's going on here?
Hey, Jacob, it's good to be with you.
Look, this is this is what I would say.
I think with the pick of JD Vance, I think there's a few things going on.
I think the most obvious before we get to foreign policy is that MAGA has fully taken
(01:55):
over the Republican Party.
I mean, there's there's not a lot of room for people like the Nikki Haley's or the Bill
Cristals or people from that George Bush in generation to rise much further in the GOP.
This is a MAGA party.
This is a populist party.
It's it's you can even make the argument.
It isn't even as much conservative anymore.
(02:17):
It's the rules of the day and that's where we are going forward.
You know, focusing on your queries on foreign policy.
Look, JD Vance isn't going to make everybody happy because if you listen to him, actually
just last night he was on on Fox News and gave a very long interview, detailed interview.
And what he really spelled out was what his foreign policy vision was.
(02:38):
And to be frank, I don't think it's going to make the Bill Ruggers completely happy
or the neoconservatives very happy.
His views on China don't match up with people like the Quincy Institute and others.
He's very, very hawkish on China.
He sees China as the number one principal enemy of the United States.
And he agrees with people like like Bridge Colby, who we both know very well, and others
(03:01):
who are who consider that the dominant threat to U.S. primacy, you know, not just in Asia,
but just globally.
So that's that's where he is on Asia.
He sees Iran as a threat, you know, doesn't want regime change in Iran, but I think is
is focused on containing the growing Iranian power, military capabilities, making sure
that Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon.
(03:21):
He seems to fully back Israel when it comes to Ukraine.
That's when he slides more into the realist camp.
You know, he doesn't believe in giving Ukraine sort of an unlimited blank check.
J.D.
Vance, I think, makes the argument very astutely that, you know, he doesn't want to see Ukraine
fall into into the Russian orbit.
But at the same time, what he's looking for is what is the strategy to keep Ukraine going?
(03:45):
What's our ultimate end goal?
How are we going to get there?
How are we going to avoid escalation with Russia?
I mean, we forget, you know, we see a rotten Russian economy.
We see a, you know, a corrupt state with Vladimir Putin.
But at the same time, they have the military capabilities to do a lot of damage.
And keep in mind, they still have five thousand nuclear warheads under their control.
And the Russians seem to be always making these bail threats about tactical nuclear war.
(04:09):
So I think J.D. Vance has a very nuanced and very smart foreign policy strategy that, again,
not going to make everybody happy.
And he doesn't exactly fit into anybody's exact orbit.
I think he fits more with with like the Will Ruggers and the Koch Institute's probably
about 80 percent with them.
But I think some of the stuff on China, I don't think he's going to make them too happy.
(04:29):
And I to be honest, on the record, I love his views.
I think he's a smart pick.
Let me float another quote by you that I saw on Twitter from Eric Erickson, who said, We
are now witnessing the passing of the Reaganite torch to the Buchananites.
Is this true?
Are we seeing the vindication of the founding editor of the American conservative, Patrick
(04:55):
J. Buchanan, who also ran several times for the presidency on the explicit credo of nothing
other than America first?
In some respects, I would say yes.
I mean, an updated version.
But look, I'm 45 now and back in 1992, I remember watching Patrick J. Buchanan, you know, do
(05:15):
a lot of damage in the 92 primary.
I remember that very well.
I think the Republican Party has changed.
I know there are a lot of folks within the party that have, you know, very subtly changed
their positions and moved from a Bushian free trader, neoconservative, cultural warrior
sort of idealism and moved to a very Trumpian, making sure that trade deals are much more
(05:41):
balanced with other countries that are that are reciprocal.
You know, the United States isn't exactly opening all our markets and not getting a
lot back.
You know, I'll just give you a quick story, Jacob.
And this was sort of a little bit of my own conversion to a more Trumpian view.
And it wasn't done, to be honest, because I was looking for a job and an administration
or anything like that.
You know me well.
That's that's I'm not that type of person.
(06:03):
But back during the days of North Korea, she was very hot.
I was able to spend a lot of time in Korea and Asia.
Something struck me.
Those markets were very close to the United States.
And there was one thing that really struck me about anything else.
Every car I ever got in in South Korea was a Korean car.
I never got in a Ford.
I never got into Cadillac.
I very rarely even saw a Japanese car.
(06:26):
They protected their markets in a lot of ways.
And it really got me thinking about maybe there is something to what people like Patrick
Buchanan and Donald Trump and others have been saying when it comes to trade.
There isn't a level of fairness that's there.
You know, the argument is made, Jacob, that the United States keeps its markets open to
draw in trade partners to create alliances.
And I think there is arguments for that.
(06:47):
But I think that the United States has been on the receiving end of a lot of bad trade
deals.
In the last year or two, I've had the privilege to go to a lot of different parts around the
country when I was involved in some different types of political work.
And I can tell you, and you grew up in Pennsylvania, so you know this well, there are some parts
of this country that are dead, that are just economically dead.
(07:08):
You go through these old main streets that haven't changed much from the 1960s and 1970s.
There's no jobs.
There's no hope.
There's no future for many of these people.
I mean, myself, in a lot of ways, I'm an economic refugee.
You know, I grew up in in bluest of blue Rhode Island.
You know, I was working for a cable company at the time that was slowly dying.
And I knew that I had to get out of there, me and my wife, or I wasn't going to have
(07:30):
a future.
I wasn't going to have any way to have any economic mobility.
A lot of people don't have the resources to do that.
So bottom line is, is I think there's there's there's been this this shift in the Republican
Party that's been happening for a long time to ask fundamental questions of how conservative
or populist ideas can help the working men and women of this country who are suffering,
(07:53):
who inflation has done a lot of damage to, whose wages are coming up as fast.
And the only traditional ways to try and boost those wages are to go to college and take
on one hundred thousand dollars in debt.
I think the Republican Party under Trump earlier in Buchanan was asking these questions and
trying to figure out what the best path forward for the country is.
And I think that's a good thing.
I think the Reagan ideas of the 1970s and 80s, they're not dead, but there are a lot
(08:18):
more in the history books than I think people realize.
So Harry, many Democrats and the never Trumpers have a less sanguine view than you do about
all this.
Let me read you another crystal quote.
He says Trump may well have in the back of his mind that he'll run again.
Good luck with that.
By 2028, it will be Vance's administration and party.
We'll have Elon Musk and Peter Thiel and all the wannabe leaders of American style fascism
(08:42):
organized behind him.
What's your response?
He sounds like a bitter man whose time is gone.
I mean, yes, Donald Trump had to pick a successor.
I think Trump realized that, you know, people did he have to take his successor.
He could have gone with a typical corporate nonentity like Doug Burgum, governor of Dakota.
(09:02):
He could have.
And he also could have Jacob gone with Nikki Haley, who I was I was thinking there was
some rumors in Trump land and in GOP circles that there was maybe an exploration of that.
Some rumors that I have no no nothing to back this up, but there has been rumors floating
around that there may have been a conversation between Trump and Haley in the last couple
of days.
I can't confirm that.
(09:23):
But that's what the rumor that was out there.
So there was there was some thinking.
But Trump, I think, understands that he wants his movement, his MAGA movement to go beyond
him, because I think there was a lot of talk and speculation that, you know, by 2028, the
GOP might just start going back to its old corporatist and neoconservative foreign policy
ideals.
(09:43):
And I think what Trump wanted to do is have a legacy, lock MAGA down into the Republican
Party.
And I think J.D.
Pence was the best person to do that.
Now, look, Vance is going to have his own views.
I mean, what he's really doing right now is for the next few years, basically doing a
giant tryout to see if he can succeed Donald Trump.
I'm going to be very honest with you.
(10:03):
That that is not going to be an easy thing to do.
As so many people, Jacob, have pointed out over the last couple of days, Donald Trump
isn't just a politician.
He's a cultural icon.
I mean, this guy grew up, sort of came of age during WWE wrestling events during a 10
year run on The Apprentice, which was one of the biggest shows on TV, duking it out
in New York state real estate.
(10:25):
The guy is a scrappy fighter who has these really strange political instincts that have
served him well over the last 10 years or plus that we've been talking about him.
It's going to be very hard to replace him.
So I think J.D.
Vance is going to try and carve his own niche out within MAGA within the Republican Party.
And I think it's going to be a crazy 20, 28 primary.
(10:47):
We'll have to see where it goes.
But obviously, I think J.D.
Vance is in the in the pole position.
I think he's going to have to sort of develop his own style.
I mean, he's a little bit more wonky, a little drier than Donald Trump.
But that might what people might want after, you know, eight years, you know, in between
administrations between Trump.
We'll see.
(11:08):
Harry, with that, I'd like to thank you for your remarks and thank everyone who's listening
to In the National Interest.
We will soon have a new episode.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.