July 26, 2024 • 49 mins
In the middle of June 2024, Russia signed a comprehensive mutual partnership agreement with North Korea.
As Russia's relations with the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea grow in light of Moscow's isolation from the Western-centric world, how will the global nuclear non-proliferation regime be affected?
For this episode, I sat down with Professor Peter Kuznick, the Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University. Dr. Kuznick and I discussed the implications of Russia's new alliance with North Korea, the escalating NATO-Russia tensions over Ukraine, and the potential for a nuclear showdown.
We also discussed the Taiwan Strait crisis and how Washington's policies in the South China Sea could turn Taiwan into another Ukraine as China feels its claims on the island are undermined. The professor and I also explored why the current nuclear non-proliferation regime in the world has failed.
Kuznick ends by providing the next generation of leaders with his advice for how they should run the world they will inherit from their predecessors when they come to positions of power and influence.
This is Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose. I’m Andrew Jose, a Washington, DC-based security policy analyst, and news reporter, bringing you timely analyses and commentary on issues in international relations, war, and security policy.
The views expressed by the podcast guests are their own and do not necessarily represent the official positions of Andrew Jose, Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose, and Andrew Jose Media.
Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose is an initiative of Andrew Jose Media
As Russia's relations with the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea grow in light of Moscow's isolation from the Western-centric world, how will the global nuclear non-proliferation regime be affected?
For this episode, I sat down with Professor Peter Kuznick, the Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University. Dr. Kuznick and I discussed the implications of Russia's new alliance with North Korea, the escalating NATO-Russia tensions over Ukraine, and the potential for a nuclear showdown.
We also discussed the Taiwan Strait crisis and how Washington's policies in the South China Sea could turn Taiwan into another Ukraine as China feels its claims on the island are undermined. The professor and I also explored why the current nuclear non-proliferation regime in the world has failed.
Kuznick ends by providing the next generation of leaders with his advice for how they should run the world they will inherit from their predecessors when they come to positions of power and influence.
This is Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose. I’m Andrew Jose, a Washington, DC-based security policy analyst, and news reporter, bringing you timely analyses and commentary on issues in international relations, war, and security policy.
The views expressed by the podcast guests are their own and do not necessarily represent the official positions of Andrew Jose, Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose, and Andrew Jose Media.
Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose is an initiative of Andrew Jose Media
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
In mid June twenty twenty four, Russia's President Vladimir Putin
made his first visit to North Korea in twenty four years.
During Putin's visit to the country, Russia and North Korea
signed a landmark defense partnership with a pledge for immediate
military assistance should either state be invaded or in a
state of war, and a commitment to jointly oppose unilateral sanctions.
The two states pledged to bolster cross border co operation
(00:23):
in trade, economy, investment, and science and technology. The two
countries also agreed to joint research in what they considered
to be the peaceful use of nuclear energy, artificial intelligence,
and information technology. You're listening to Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose,
an international relations and security policy podcast brought to you
by Andrew Jose, a Washington, DC based security policy analyst
(00:45):
and news reporter. Joining Andrew today is nuclear historian Peter Kuznick.
Andrew Jose and Peter Kusnick will be discussing the impact
the approachment between Russia and North Korea will have on
the global nuclear non proliferation regime and a security environment
in Northeast TISA.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Peter Kusnik is the director of the Nuclear Studies Institute
at American University in Washington, d C. He's the author
of Beyond the Laboratory, Scientists as Political Activists in nineteen
thirties America and co author of the books Rethinking the
Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japanese and American perspectives,
(01:56):
and the book Nuclear Power and Hiroshima, The Truth behind
the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Power. His most consequential work
has been a series of books and the twelve part
documentary film series he worked on with filmmaker Oliver Stone,
titled The Untold History of the United States, which was
(02:17):
a New York Times bestseller for seven weeks and was
watched by millions around the world. Kuznick's work and commentary
have appeared in several notable outlets, including The Washington Post,
New York Times, Fox News, and Reuters. Doctor Kuznick, Welcome
to the show. Glad to be with you, Andrew, doctor Kuznick.
(02:39):
In your assessment, what do you think is the significance
of Russia's new agreement with North Korea and how will
the agreement affect the global nuclear non proliferation regime.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
Russia feeling both isolated and attacked, has been and threatening
to do certain aggressive things that it seems to be
acting upon now. It has said that when we look
look at the broader picture, especially in terms of the
(03:15):
war between Russia and Ukraine right now, NATO has been escalating.
We've seen a series of steps, more and more financial
and military aid, more advanced weapon systems, French President Macron
threatening to send French and other NATO troops combat troops
(03:39):
into Ukraine, providing more and more advisors, new weapon systems,
the attack ms, the tanks, the F sixteens that are
coming in there, the need for NATO advisors for targeting,
for running these weapon systems, the permission given by the
(04:02):
United States and others for Ukraine to use its advanced
weapons to attack sits inside of Russia, the current NATO
summit meeting reaffirming the commitment to Ukraine. All of this
going on has put Russia in a position where, even
(04:24):
though it's on the offensive inside of Ukraine, globally, it
is in a certainly a defensive situation as it sees
the West, the US and NATO racing or ignoring all
of Russia's red lines and pushing for an increasingly NATO
(04:48):
Russia military confrontation. What we've seen going on has been
a proxy war. What we see in the future could
be a direct war, World War three even and so
Utin's response has been to firm up his alliances, to
(05:10):
show that he's not isolated on the world scene, and
to make increasing threats against NATO as well. I see
what happened in terms of the agreement between Russia and
North Korea. In that context, so Butin is willing to
(05:32):
go further in threatening Western interest that he had been
willing to go before that he had said, especially in
the aftermath of permission for Ukraine to attack inside of Russia,
he said that he is going to provide nuclear technology
and possibly nuclear arms to some of his allies, even
(05:54):
though it's very very destabilizing. I think we're on a
very dangerous path right now on all sides. So we see,
while the NATO summit is going on here in Washington,
what is Putin doing. He's welcoming Nuendrum Modi from India
(06:15):
to Moscow, and they reaffirmed their close ties and friendship.
He's also gone on the speaking and engagement tour where
he went to North Korea. Also Vietnam and to Vietnam
is very crucial. The United States has been trying to
win Vietnam over to supporting the US side in the
(06:41):
confrontation with China in the Pacific. Butin has also recently
visited with Shi Jinping in China. He's also met just
this past week with the head of the Hungarian government.
So we see instance after instance where Putin is trying
(07:01):
to show that not only is he not isolated, but
he's winning right now globally. And the fact that the
global South has refused to go along with the Western
demands for sanctions for isolating Putin, the global South really
is the driver right now. You look at the situation.
(07:26):
Europe represents seventeen percent of the world economy. Asia represents
fifty four percent of the world economy. So what's going
on at the summon meeting in Washington. The NATO summit
has been reaching out to the IP four, to New
(07:47):
Zealand or Australia, South Korea, and Japan to try the
broad to draw them in as part of this broader
global NATO. But even that is getting a lot of resistance.
When they tried to open up the NATO office in Tokyo,
France rejected that and they were not able to do so.
(08:10):
But we see going on, in my view, is a
growing militarization of the planet, and we see both sides
doing it. The United States calling the shots and moving
aggressively toward the militarization of the Pacific with August and
the Quad and the IP four and other measures that
(08:31):
is taking, and we see a Russian response which is
further militarizing the situation and leading toward the potential for
a raidar confrontation. We look at the South China Sea,
we look at the Straits of Taiwan, we look at
what's going on at Okinawa right now. All of this
(08:54):
is pointing in the wrong direction, and so I'm very,
very concerned.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
One of the things you've suggested in your commentary work,
notably your article for Responsible Statescraft titled Prolonging the Ukraine
War is flirting with nuclear disaster, is that the longer
the Ukraine War continues, the closer we get to a
nuclear showdown. Putin on many occasions has threatened to use
(09:22):
nuclear weapons if Russia's interests are challenged, but in many
ways he has held back on delivering on those threats.
Would it be safe to say that among the Russian
government there are cooler heads that are prevailing as opposed
to the caricatures that Washington and his allied make of
(09:43):
the Russian side as being irrational and driven by primordial hatreds.
So is it safe to say that there is responsible
behavior among the Russian side which Washington should not take
advantage of.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
Well, Andrew Putin has been careful to identify the circumstances
under which Russia would be provoked into using nuclear weapons,
and he said that number one, if there's an attack
on Russia with nuclear weapons and possibly other weapons of
(10:20):
mass destruction, and number two, if Russia is facing existential
crisis in which its existence as a nation is being threatened.
Now Putin has said that, but not only has Putin
said that, We've heard this from Medvedev, Lavrov, Peskov and others.
(10:43):
So we know that's going on inside Russia. Is that
Russia has its hawks, and it has not its doves,
it has its less extreme elements Putin. Oddly, it's positioned
somewhere in the middle. And Putin is under pressure from
(11:03):
his hawks, and the same way that Biden has been
pressured by his Hawks. You have to remember that Biden
came to office with eighteen top advisors from the Center
for New American Security, and these are the latest generation
of Hawks. They were like the Committee on the Present
(11:24):
Danger under Reagan. They're like the Project for a New
American Century under George W. Bush. Now these people are
mostly China Hawks, and there's many of them see Ukraine
as a distraction and they would like to get on
the Ukraine over with so they can really focus on
(11:46):
what they call the pacing threat, and that's China. We
see a RAND report titled avoiding a Prolonged Struggle calling
for ending the fighting in so we could get on
with China. I thought it was very revealing. Recently when
they the decision came about who to choose to replace
(12:10):
Wendy Sherman as the number two in the State Department.
Victoria Newland, leading China Hawk, had been leading Russia Hawk,
had been occupying that position, but she was passed over
by Kurt Campbell, who was the leading China Hawk. And
I think that clearly reveals America's top priorities, which is
(12:33):
to go after China even more than to go after Russia.
But you ask about the dynamics, the internal dynamics in Russia.
What we've seen is Russia positioning nuclear weapons in Belarus,
just like the United States has positioned nuclear weapons in
five countries in Europe. Now the US is modernizing those
(12:57):
as well. Whereas the US has had nuclear drills targeting
the Soviet targeting Russia, Russia has carried out tactical nuclear
drills on the Ukrainian border inside of Russia, which are
unprecedented as well. So we've seen nuclear threads being bandied
(13:19):
about by both sides. Now. The reason why Ivanna Hughes
and I said that the main threat comes from Russia
more than from NATO is that unlike during the Cold War,
Russia actually has NATO has conventional superiority, and NATO would
(13:41):
not have to resort to nuclear weapons as quickly as
Russia might in a dangerous confrontation. And so I think
that the threat of using tactical nuclear weapons, we know
that the Russia, or we think Russia as a doctrine
to escalate, to de escalate, it is about nuclear signaling,
(14:02):
to show how serious they are by using a tactical
nuclear weapon in the expectation that NATO will back down. Well,
there's no guarantee for that, of course, and the danger is,
of course, that NATO meets that tactical nuclear weapon with
one or two tactical nuclear weapons of its own, and
(14:23):
from there, the likelihood of reaching a stopping point before
the entire planet is a smoking mess, before we trigger
nuclear winter and pretty much all life on the planet
has ended becomes quite possible in a realistic possibility. Biden
has effectively said it as much, And Biden has said
(14:46):
that for that reason he avoids going to war with Russia,
doing anything that's going to provoke a World War III
between the US and Russia. But his actions are right
the opposite. The other thing is going on that we
haven't even mentioned yet is that while there's NATO summit
(15:10):
is taking place, while these confrontations of the Pacific are
taking place, Biden is in such a precarious position, especially
after that latest debate. It is sad to think that
the fate of the United States, the Western World, and
possibly the human race may lay in the hands of
(15:31):
a mentally challenged, sleep deprived eighty one year old narcissist
of community college English professor and a convicted felon who
is a former drug addict. These three people are the
ones or are waiting whether or not Biden should step
(15:51):
out of this race. I mean, it boggles the mind
to think who's got control over with the future destiny
of our planner right now? One of the two people
right now who has veto power over the future existence
of the human race, that's Joe Biden. The other one,
(16:14):
not much more comforting but a little more rational and saying,
is Vladimir Putin and Shi Jim Ping. If China really
does plan to get fifteen hundred nuclear weapons by twenty
thirty five, as the Pentagon alleges, would be the third
person to have veto power over the future existence of humanity.
(16:37):
So we are in not only a precarious situation, we
are in a strange like situation that the only way
we have to bring back Stanley Kubrick or I can
get my friend Oliver Stone to make this movie. We
need a remake of Doctor Strangelove because the only way
is Kubrick understood back in nineteen sixty four or to
(17:00):
make that movie is to do it as a black comedy.
And it boggles my mind. I hope and we realize,
you know, Tulcia Gabbard. I like Telsey, I don't always
agree with her. But she did tell The New York
Times a few years back that she was reading and
watching Untold History of the United States my project while
(17:22):
ever so, and she said every leader needs to watch
this and read this well. Tulsi has said recently that
when Biden was asked, and when Biden said there's only
one existential threat, and that's climate change, Telsey said, is
he kidding? The man who's got possession of the nuclear codes,
(17:44):
the man who's got his finger on the nuclear button,
doesn't understand that nuclear war represents an existential threat to mankind.
We are in much more danger than people realize.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
One of the provisions that the Russia North Korea Treaty
has is that both countries have agreed to cooperate on quote,
the peaceful use of nuclear power. President Vladimir Putin, in
response to the West sending loads of lethal weapons to Ukraine,
has threatened, as you have mentioned, to send weapons to
(18:25):
entities that are fighting Western interests. When it comes to
Putin saying that he will cooperate with North Korea on
nuclear issues, do you see this as something that is
more of a threat, something like a protest vote, or
do you think Putin would actually follow through on his statements.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
Putin certainly has technologies that would be crucial for North Korea.
That's North Korea desperately once again a hold of and
you know they could these could be to actually accelerate
(19:06):
North Korea's missile programs. They could be to provide the
technology that North Korea wants and needs for its nuclear submarines.
I mean, if you look at the statement that they release,
they talk together about they talk about working together to
(19:28):
challenge our readers. I think this is exact wording, working together,
the challenge to tackle challenges and threats on the areas
of strategic significance including food, energy, security, information and communication technology,
climate change, help and supply chains, and goes on to
(19:49):
specify space biology, peaceful use of nuclear energy, artificial intelligence,
and information technology. The have got serious military implications, and
we know that North Korea is providing Russia with artillery shells,
(20:11):
enormous numbers of artillery shells and other kinds of ammunition,
as well as ballistic missiles that it's using in Ukraine.
So with all of that going on, I think what
rus Russia could provide North Korea would be enormously significant
and enhance North Korea's military capabilities, whether they're going to
(20:37):
provide them with more nuclear weapons or as system. You know,
one of the sad things about that is that after
North Korea's first nuclear test in two thousand and six,
the Russia and China both went along with UN sanctions
(20:58):
to try to punish North Korea and try to limit
nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula. And now Russia is
vetoing those measures in the UN Security Council and will
possibly be actually enhancing nuclear proliferation by encouraging and providing
(21:22):
the technology that North Korea needs. So that's not a
good sign for me, and it's a reflection, and that's
why I blame both sides for what's going on. Much
like with Ukraine, I was opposed from the beginning of
Russia invading Ukraine, but I understood the ways in which
(21:42):
it provoked. I understood how it could be avoided. I
understood what NATO expansion to Russia's doorstep and the threat
of Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO meant to Russia. I
understood what putting advanced NATO weaponry as well as trainers
(22:04):
into Ukraine meant to Russia, and so I think there's
more than enough blame to go around, just as I
think in the South China Sea. Xhijinping talks about win
win diplomacy, But when I look at what's happening in
the South China Sea, much of what I see is
(22:25):
now win win. It's more along the lines of the
United States approach to zero some game diplomacy. As Reagan
put it, we win and you lose. The South China
Sea is rich in resources. There's more than enough to
be shared. That We often talk about China's nine dash
(22:47):
line and how crazy that is. Well you look Vietnam, really,
the Philippines, all the countries in that region are make
expansive claims to what they deserve and what is their
rightful territory and resources. It's not just China, but I
see China's hardline policy toward India, toward the Philippines, Vietnam
(23:15):
and others being self defeating because it gives the United
States and the West and opening. It gives them the
maneuvering room, the legitimacy to push for their policies, which
I see as a policy of militarization. I've given several
webinars about the militarization of the Pacific, and I think
(23:38):
that that's quite unfortunate, but that's the reality. You know.
One of the people I like to talk about is
Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter in my view as a terrible president,
sadly so, but I think he's been a terrific ex president.
And Jimmy Carter said back in twenty nineteen, he was
(24:02):
only ninety four years old at the time, and he
said to churchgoers. He said that Donald Trump had called
him up that week and talked about his concerns about China.
And Jimmy Carter said, in his talk to the congregation
at the church, he said, since nineteen seventy nine, do
you know how many times China has been a war
(24:24):
with anybody? Carter as he said, and he has none,
and we have stayed a war. He said that during
the entire two hundred and forty two year history of
the United States, the country has only known a palm
trees sixteen years of peace, which makes it the most
(24:45):
warlike nation in the history of the world. He went
on to say, we force other countries to adopt our
American principles. He says, well, how many miles of high
speed railroad do we have in this country? And as zero,
while China has built eighteen thousand miles of high speed
rail while the US has wasted I think three trillion
(25:08):
dollars on military spending. It's more than you can imagine.
China hasn't wasted a single penny on war. That's why
they're ahead of us in almost every way. He said
that we'd think it that three trillion dollars and put
it in American infrastructure, we'd have two trillion leftover. We'd
have high speed railroad, we'd have bridges that are collapsing,
(25:30):
we'd have roads that are maintained properly. Our education system'll
be as good as that of say, South Korea or
Hong Kong. I mean, I think that there's a real
wisdom in what Carter said, and I think that US
policy has too often been blind and self defeating. I
(25:50):
think China's have sometimes been too. But I agree with
a lot of what Jimmy Carter said there.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
In the lead up to the Ukraine War, and as
early as twenty fourteen, doctor John Muersheimer warrened the West
about leading Ukraine down the primrose path to misery with
a future war that he correctly predicted, And one of
the things I've thought about when I consider the situation
in Taiwan. I've thought of writing op eds, but eventually
(26:20):
it did not have the time. So I just wanted
to ask your thoughts on are we in the West
leading Taiwan too down a primrose path like Ukraine to
its own ruin? So is it possible that, just like
the West has done with Russia in playing a part
in provoking the war, any war in Taiwan would be
(26:41):
more provoked than something that China desires to carry out.
Speaker 3 (26:46):
Well, again, this is blame to go around, but most
of that blame goes with the United States and Obama.
At Hillary Clinton is actually Obama and that Hillary Clinton
had the article in Foreign Policy Magazine in November October
twenty eleven titled America's Pacific Century where she discusses the
(27:10):
Asia pivot. Obama was doing it at the same time,
and it didn't really happen under Obama. Obama focused more
on Europe. Obama had the wisdom to say that Ukraine
is a much greater security interest of Russia's than it
is of the United States, and so he refused to
(27:33):
send lethal aid to Ukraine. But Donald Trump did not hesitate,
and he sent lethal aid to Ukraine. And Donald Trump
was the one who really doubled down on the increased
diplomatic and military ties with Taiwan that have provoked the
(27:57):
crisis over Taiwan, the crisis of the China. It had
been managed before that the United States had its one
China policy. The United States had been, you know, come
to Taiwan's defense, but it maintained strategic ambiguity. Unlike under Biden.
The United States strategic ambiguity was that we were not
(28:20):
going to say whether we would come to Taiwan's military
defense if there was a war with China. But Biden
has said on four separate occasions at least that the
United States would do so militarily. Trump and now Biden
have weighed trade war against China, have elevated the China
(28:42):
threat from being an adversary to being really an enemy
of the United States, or from being a competitor to
an adversary and now an enemy. They certainly increased diplomatic
ties and it's not only Trump and Biden. Absurd visit
by Nancy Pelosi, which was provocation for the sake of provocation.
(29:07):
And since that point, China has increased its provocative actions
in the Taiwan Strait, going across the midline there repeatedly
with the shifts as well as its warplanes. You know.
So I think is another crisis that could have been
should have been avoided, that now has been inflamed and provoked,
(29:31):
and that we could step back from and maybe, you know,
get it back on a peaceful footing where we can
have a peaceful resolution of this conflict. Now I can
understand why the Taiwanese do not want to become part
of China. China to me, is not the most attractive
(29:52):
country in the world. Domestically, they've done the Chinese have
done remarkable things in terms of economic growth, in terms
of leviating alleviating poverty at times, in terms of playing
a role as a peacemaker over Ukraine and other situations.
But I don't like the idea of a country that's
(30:13):
got three hundred million surveillance cameras that monitors people as
closely as it does, that doesn't allow more freedom of
speech and freedom of the press. You know, I like
democracy I'm a big advocate of democracy. I wish we
had more of that in the United States. The idea
that this one clown, elderly figure, a warmonger of the
(30:36):
first degree, person who helped bring us Clarence Thomas. We
could go through all the terrible things that Biden has
done supporting the invasion of Iraq. This is not a
wise man in my obinion. He's not an evil man.
He's not a Donald Trump. He's certainly not a fascist.
He believes to some extent democracy. But the latest polling
(30:57):
says eighty five percent of the American peace people think
Biden is too old. Even the Democrats think that Biden
should step down. The American people do overwhelmingly. And the
fact that this old fool will not listen, will not
do so, and listen to Joe Biden and Hunter Biden
instead of the American people is to me also beyond belief,
(31:24):
you know. So, I think that, yes, the Taiwan situation
mention is very dangerous. Biden has done what he can
to inflame it, and if we get somebody else there,
hopefully we can back down and restore diplomacy, which the
Chinese would welcome as well. The last thing they want
is war with the United States over in Taiwan, you know.
(31:48):
And the other thing to keep in mind is that
there's no guarantee the US wins that war. The Pentagon
has run at least eighteen wargames over war between US
and China over Taiwan, and China has prevailed all eighteen.
They're Metagon figures to say, if we're going to have
the war, we better get it over with by twenty twenty.
Some say twenty twenty five, some say twenty twenty seven.
(32:09):
It was Army General Minihan who said he thinks the
US and China will be a war by twenty twenty five.
Other pre predict that we have until twenty twenty seven
to still defeat China. But many think that we couldn't
even defeat China. Now, if we talk about Ukraine being
in Russia's backyard and being a strategic a priority for
(32:32):
Russian not the United States, it's even more the case
over Taiwan. Now, the US does want the microelectronics and
the chips from Taiwan, and the world does also, but
the US policy of trying to weaken China in that
regard makes Taiwan an even more attractive target for China.
(32:55):
So you know, I think I think we're living in
a blind blind world.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Coming to our last second question, over the course of
the last four US administrations, there has been a sustained
escalation in North Korea's missile tests. This trend has intensified
notably in the past three years, with surge and testing
by North Korea going up by one hundred and twelve
(33:19):
percent according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
In Iran as well, we are seeing that Tehran is
coming closer than ever to a nuclear bomb. What have
we done wrong with the non proliferation regime that we
have in the world. Is this something because of multipolarity
or there is something that we as the world have
(33:40):
done wrong the way we approached non proliferation that it
appears that it is dying.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
Good question. First of all, north Korea's tests. They haven't
carried out a nuclear test since twenty seventeen. There's been
discussion of North Korea nuclear tests, but they have not
done so. But they have increased the ballistic missiles. They
have been testing ballistic missiles and that's been provocative as well.
(34:10):
The situation on the peninsula is very very dangerous. But
one of the other consequences of this nuclear of this
security agreement between Russia and the DPRK and North Korea
is that the South Korea has begun again seriously considering
(34:32):
not trusting US extended to terrens and developing its own
nuclear weapons. We know that South Korea is the technological
capability of developing nuclear weapons quickly. We also know that
according to some of the polls, as many as seventy
percent of the South Korean population I want to see
(34:53):
South Korea develop its own nuclear weapons. So that is
definitely on the table again, and that has been spurred
in part by the agreement between Russia and North Korea.
Number one, Number two. The Union government is inxtraordinarily unpopular.
It's a right wing government that barely got into power
(35:17):
in the latest elections and they behaved terribly since, and
the opposition is strengthened and the support for that Union
regime is very very low. So clearly nuclear non proliferation
(35:37):
has not succeeded in the Korean peninsula, and it could
get worse. It could get dramatically worse. The other situation
with Iran is also a mess. Obama to his credit,
negotiated with the help of Russia, the help of China,
(35:57):
the help of Germany and others, ciated the JCPOA, the
Iran Nuclear Band Treaty, and that was a great thing.
And then Trump was a twenty eighteen decides to abrogate it.
You have to remember that under that treaty, Iran morthballed
(36:21):
ninety seven percent of its centrifuges. It said, ninety seven
percent of its advance its rich nuclear material to Russia.
It only enriched uranium to about three percent or three
point seven percent. Now, after the US abrogated that treaty,
(36:45):
it Ran now has dramatically increased its stock piles of
highly enricheranium and has been enriching up to sixty percent.
It's restored its centrifuges. To go from sixty percent to
the ninety percent that's necessary for a nuclear weapon is
(37:05):
a very easy step. The difficult step is to go
for a three point seven percent for energy use to
sixty percent, and so Iran certainly poses a nuclear threat.
Under the JCPOA, the idea was to have a one
year breakout, would take around a year to develop in
nuclear weapons. The estimate now is that Iran can develop
(37:28):
nuclear weapons within a month. They don't have the technology
yet to put a nuclear bottomb on the tip of
a missile and have it come back safely within the atmosphere,
but they could develop that quickly. They have reinforced and
hardened their bunkers, especially at FOURD out, but also others
(37:48):
as well, and they could certainly easily develop nuclear dirty bombs,
and so the situation is very dangerous. So you're the
big point you're making about unproliit version having failed is true.
And I put the onus of that on, you know,
at the feet of all the nuclear powers, because the
nineteen seventy NPT Treaty said that the five recognized nuclear powers.
(38:16):
The part of the deal was that the non nuclear
powers would commit to not developing nuclear weapons, but the
nuclear powers in exchange would be committed to eliminating their
nuclear weapons, and they have not done so. Yes, they
brought them down, but what's happening now is that all
(38:38):
nuclear non nuclear powers are modernizing and that almost all
of them have stated or are under pressure or thinking
about increasing the number of nuclear weapons. So we brought
it down from seventy thousand to fourteen thousand, even under
fourteen thousand eighty percent reduction, and now we're talking about
(39:00):
increasing it again. In the US, the Joint Congressional Bipartisan
Strategic Posture Committee has called for dramatically increasing US nuclear weapons.
The Russians are talking about the same China we know
is increasing. The Brits are talking about a forty percent
(39:22):
increase in their number of nuclear weapons. You know, we
see this going on everywhere. We're going the wrong direction.
So the non polifericia regime has failed. The Third World
is spoken up with the Nuclear Band Treaty, the TPNW.
The world wants to see nuclear weapons eliminated. However, we're
(39:43):
going the opposite direction, and we're closer than any time
since the Cuban Missile crisis for nuclear war. The billday
Timmy scientists has put the doomsday clock at ninety seconds
before midnight. I was cited in an article an op
(40:04):
ed column in China yesterday saying that I thought that
they should move the hands of the doomsday clock to
thirty seconds before midnight. I don't remember actually having said that,
but I think that that would be appropriate because we're
so much closer to nuclear war now than we were
(40:27):
back even two or three years ago. So we've got
three crisis. We've got the Goza situation, which could expand
into a broader regional war in an instant. We've got
the situation in Ukraine. We've got the situation with China
and the Indo Pacific both in we have the South
(40:48):
China Sea, and we've got Taiwan, and so the world.
You know. John Kennedy said the years ago it is
brilliant American University Commitsment address. He said that to put
a nuclear power in the position of either sufferating a
humiliating defeat or being forced to use nuclear weapons is
(41:12):
either a colossal failure is statesmanship or a collective death
wish on the part of the human species. I think
this is both a colossal failure of statesmanship and a
collective death wish, and civilization is discontent. Sigmund Freud's brilliant
nineteen twenty nine book, he talks about the death instinct. Says,
(41:35):
there's a life instinct and there's a death instinct. And
it looks to me like on a global scale, now
the death instinct is prevailing. Freud hope. I held out hope.
But the longer these situations prevail, the more dangerous, more precarious,
the more suicidal they become.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
Coming to our last question, and one of the target
audience for this show is interns at Capitol Hill and
young bureaucrats, those who would shape American foreign policy in
the future. With your seniority, experience, and knowledge, what would
your message be to this demographic? How do you think
that this demographic should change its thinking and not repeat
(42:21):
the errors of their elders.
Speaker 3 (42:26):
I'll start by quoting phill Oaks, the great nineteen sixties
American folks singer anti war Ydero, in his book I
in March and his song int of Marching Anymore says,
it's always the old who lead us to the wars,
It's always the young who fall. But look at all
(42:48):
we've one with a saber and a gun. Tell me
is it worth it all? I think the younger generation
I see, my students, see Biden and the policy makers
who Ben Roads called the blob as a bunch of
warmongering old fools who have havejured, have rejected diplomacy. We
(43:13):
see by you know, back in March of twenty twenty two,
after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we had the istan
Bull Accords. Russian Zolensky had effectively come to an agreement
to end the fighting a month after it began in Ukraine,
but Zelensky was pushed by Boris Johnson, the British clown,
(43:40):
and by Biden and the Americans. The old the elder
American statesmith in quotes to reject any thinking about ending
the war. He was promised they would get all the
aid they needed. And where are we now? Are we better?
Often we would have been ending the war two and
(44:02):
a half years ago. No, we're worse off. We're gonna
be worse off six months from now, We're worse off
a year from now. We're going to be visited this
a year from now, and the Russians will have gained
a little more ground than Ukraine, and there'll be hundreds
of thousands of more Ukrainian and Russian casualties, and we're
(44:23):
going to have wasted more and more of the world's resources,
and we're going to be no closer to peace. Now.
We're gonna be the same crisis point. We have a
choice between diplomacy and continued warfare. That's the optimistic view.
The pessimistic view is that we're going to be in
(44:44):
World War three, and so you choose. The younger generation
has to choose, and they have to say that the
ways of the older generation. And I mean all of
those leaders. You've got Biden say, I want to make
America great again, great against, we've got Putin wanted to
make Russia grade again, Jesus being wanted to make China
(45:05):
great again. Modi wanted to make India great again. Then
y'all want to make Israel great again. I mean, we
can go down the line, comany money make Iran great again.
They're all fools, and you shouldn't trust them. You shouldn't
think that they've got any deeper wisdom. They've shown over
the last seventy years, seventy five years since World War Two,
(45:30):
that they have no vision for running a peaceful and
prosperous world. We need a multipolar world. We're in a
multipolar world. It's time we recognize that, and we need
to find peaceful solutions to these problems. And so Putin
has said he wants to negotiate over Ukraine, but the
(45:52):
West ignores his words. I say, call his bluff. We're
not going to end this war by sending more arms.
We're not going to end this war there or any
of the global crises by fueling the arms races and
by giving the merchants of death, the arms manufacturers what
(46:16):
they want. We've got to have statesmanship prevail the US.
I don't see any of it. I don't see it
from Biden or Campbell, or Blincoln or Sullivan or Austin.
I see them as a bunch of over the hill warmongers,
and I think they need to all be replaced right now.
(46:38):
And I'm not seeing that wisdom, you know, where I
see some of it. I see China and Brazil Hijin
Bing and Lula putting forth to a ten point piece plan.
I see China's previous piece plan their twelve point plan.
Point number one is respect for national sovereignty, which is
a critique of Russia and Russia's invasion. Point number two,
(47:03):
no nation's national security should be achieved at the expense
of anybody else's national security, which is a critique of
the United States and NATO. I think we need a
balanced approach, and I think we need to figure out
how we're going to get there peacefully.
Speaker 2 (47:24):
Ladies and gentlemen, You just listen to doctor Peter Kuznick,
director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University. Doctor Kuznick,
thank you so much for your time. Thank you, Andrew,
and I'm glad you're raising these kinds of questions and
trying to reach future leaders, because if we survive this period,
(47:47):
these are the ones who are going to have to
create a different world, a better world.
Speaker 1 (47:51):
Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose is an initiative of Andrew
Jose Media. The views expressed by guests on this show
do not necessarily represent the official positions and opinions of
Andrew Jose, Andrew Jose Media, and Strategic Wisdom.
Speaker 4 (48:08):
Thank you for listening to Strategic Wisdom. Be sure to
follow and subscribe to us on whatever podcast platform you
are using to listen to this show in order to
not miss out any future interviews and conversations that Andrew
Jose will bring to you on this podcast. We're streaming
on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, yandex, geosovin, Amazon Music, and
many other podcasts streaming services. Also, be sure to subscribe
(48:32):
to Strategic Wisdom on substack at Strategicwisdom dot substack dot com,
and to follow Strategic Wisdom on Twitter, and Instagram at Stratwisdom,
do support our work by buying from our merch store.
For more details, visit Strategicwisdom dot substack dot com.
Speaker 2 (48:48):
Thank you so much, Gabby, and thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (48:50):
Ian ladies and gentlemen. This is your host, Andrew jose
signing off any anything
In mid June twenty twenty four, Russia's President Vladimir Putin
made his first visit to North Korea in twenty four years.
During Putin's visit to the country, Russia and North Korea
signed a landmark defense partnership with a pledge for immediate
military assistance should either state be invaded or in a
state of war, and a commitment to jointly oppose unilateral sanctions.
The two states pledged to bolster cross border co operation
(00:23):
in trade, economy, investment, and science and technology. The two
countries also agreed to joint research in what they considered
to be the peaceful use of nuclear energy, artificial intelligence,
and information technology. You're listening to Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose,
an international relations and security policy podcast brought to you
by Andrew Jose, a Washington, DC based security policy analyst
(00:45):
and news reporter. Joining Andrew today is nuclear historian Peter Kuznick.
Andrew Jose and Peter Kusnick will be discussing the impact
the approachment between Russia and North Korea will have on
the global nuclear non proliferation regime and a security environment
in Northeast TISA.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Peter Kusnik is the director of the Nuclear Studies Institute
at American University in Washington, d C. He's the author
of Beyond the Laboratory, Scientists as Political Activists in nineteen
thirties America and co author of the books Rethinking the
Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japanese and American perspectives,
(01:56):
and the book Nuclear Power and Hiroshima, The Truth behind
the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Power. His most consequential work
has been a series of books and the twelve part
documentary film series he worked on with filmmaker Oliver Stone,
titled The Untold History of the United States, which was
(02:17):
a New York Times bestseller for seven weeks and was
watched by millions around the world. Kuznick's work and commentary
have appeared in several notable outlets, including The Washington Post,
New York Times, Fox News, and Reuters. Doctor Kuznick, Welcome
to the show. Glad to be with you, Andrew, doctor Kuznick.
(02:39):
In your assessment, what do you think is the significance
of Russia's new agreement with North Korea and how will
the agreement affect the global nuclear non proliferation regime.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
Russia feeling both isolated and attacked, has been and threatening
to do certain aggressive things that it seems to be
acting upon now. It has said that when we look
look at the broader picture, especially in terms of the
(03:15):
war between Russia and Ukraine right now, NATO has been escalating.
We've seen a series of steps, more and more financial
and military aid, more advanced weapon systems, French President Macron
threatening to send French and other NATO troops combat troops
(03:39):
into Ukraine, providing more and more advisors, new weapon systems,
the attack ms, the tanks, the F sixteens that are
coming in there, the need for NATO advisors for targeting,
for running these weapon systems, the permission given by the
(04:02):
United States and others for Ukraine to use its advanced
weapons to attack sits inside of Russia, the current NATO
summit meeting reaffirming the commitment to Ukraine. All of this
going on has put Russia in a position where, even
(04:24):
though it's on the offensive inside of Ukraine, globally, it
is in a certainly a defensive situation as it sees
the West, the US and NATO racing or ignoring all
of Russia's red lines and pushing for an increasingly NATO
(04:48):
Russia military confrontation. What we've seen going on has been
a proxy war. What we see in the future could
be a direct war, World War three even and so
Utin's response has been to firm up his alliances, to
(05:10):
show that he's not isolated on the world scene, and
to make increasing threats against NATO as well. I see
what happened in terms of the agreement between Russia and
North Korea. In that context, so Butin is willing to
(05:32):
go further in threatening Western interest that he had been
willing to go before that he had said, especially in
the aftermath of permission for Ukraine to attack inside of Russia,
he said that he is going to provide nuclear technology
and possibly nuclear arms to some of his allies, even
(05:54):
though it's very very destabilizing. I think we're on a
very dangerous path right now on all sides. So we see,
while the NATO summit is going on here in Washington,
what is Putin doing. He's welcoming Nuendrum Modi from India
(06:15):
to Moscow, and they reaffirmed their close ties and friendship.
He's also gone on the speaking and engagement tour where
he went to North Korea. Also Vietnam and to Vietnam
is very crucial. The United States has been trying to
win Vietnam over to supporting the US side in the
(06:41):
confrontation with China in the Pacific. Butin has also recently
visited with Shi Jinping in China. He's also met just
this past week with the head of the Hungarian government.
So we see instance after instance where Putin is trying
(07:01):
to show that not only is he not isolated, but
he's winning right now globally. And the fact that the
global South has refused to go along with the Western
demands for sanctions for isolating Putin, the global South really
is the driver right now. You look at the situation.
(07:26):
Europe represents seventeen percent of the world economy. Asia represents
fifty four percent of the world economy. So what's going
on at the summon meeting in Washington. The NATO summit
has been reaching out to the IP four, to New
(07:47):
Zealand or Australia, South Korea, and Japan to try the
broad to draw them in as part of this broader
global NATO. But even that is getting a lot of resistance.
When they tried to open up the NATO office in Tokyo,
France rejected that and they were not able to do so.
(08:10):
But we see going on, in my view, is a
growing militarization of the planet, and we see both sides
doing it. The United States calling the shots and moving
aggressively toward the militarization of the Pacific with August and
the Quad and the IP four and other measures that
(08:31):
is taking, and we see a Russian response which is
further militarizing the situation and leading toward the potential for
a raidar confrontation. We look at the South China Sea,
we look at the Straits of Taiwan, we look at
what's going on at Okinawa right now. All of this
(08:54):
is pointing in the wrong direction, and so I'm very,
very concerned.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
One of the things you've suggested in your commentary work,
notably your article for Responsible Statescraft titled Prolonging the Ukraine
War is flirting with nuclear disaster, is that the longer
the Ukraine War continues, the closer we get to a
nuclear showdown. Putin on many occasions has threatened to use
(09:22):
nuclear weapons if Russia's interests are challenged, but in many
ways he has held back on delivering on those threats.
Would it be safe to say that among the Russian
government there are cooler heads that are prevailing as opposed
to the caricatures that Washington and his allied make of
(09:43):
the Russian side as being irrational and driven by primordial hatreds.
So is it safe to say that there is responsible
behavior among the Russian side which Washington should not take
advantage of.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
Well, Andrew Putin has been careful to identify the circumstances
under which Russia would be provoked into using nuclear weapons,
and he said that number one, if there's an attack
on Russia with nuclear weapons and possibly other weapons of
(10:20):
mass destruction, and number two, if Russia is facing existential
crisis in which its existence as a nation is being threatened.
Now Putin has said that, but not only has Putin
said that, We've heard this from Medvedev, Lavrov, Peskov and others.
(10:43):
So we know that's going on inside Russia. Is that
Russia has its hawks, and it has not its doves,
it has its less extreme elements Putin. Oddly, it's positioned
somewhere in the middle. And Putin is under pressure from
(11:03):
his hawks, and the same way that Biden has been
pressured by his Hawks. You have to remember that Biden
came to office with eighteen top advisors from the Center
for New American Security, and these are the latest generation
of Hawks. They were like the Committee on the Present
(11:24):
Danger under Reagan. They're like the Project for a New
American Century under George W. Bush. Now these people are
mostly China Hawks, and there's many of them see Ukraine
as a distraction and they would like to get on
the Ukraine over with so they can really focus on
(11:46):
what they call the pacing threat, and that's China. We
see a RAND report titled avoiding a Prolonged Struggle calling
for ending the fighting in so we could get on
with China. I thought it was very revealing. Recently when
they the decision came about who to choose to replace
(12:10):
Wendy Sherman as the number two in the State Department.
Victoria Newland, leading China Hawk, had been leading Russia Hawk,
had been occupying that position, but she was passed over
by Kurt Campbell, who was the leading China Hawk. And
I think that clearly reveals America's top priorities, which is
(12:33):
to go after China even more than to go after Russia.
But you ask about the dynamics, the internal dynamics in Russia.
What we've seen is Russia positioning nuclear weapons in Belarus,
just like the United States has positioned nuclear weapons in
five countries in Europe. Now the US is modernizing those
(12:57):
as well. Whereas the US has had nuclear drills targeting
the Soviet targeting Russia, Russia has carried out tactical nuclear
drills on the Ukrainian border inside of Russia, which are
unprecedented as well. So we've seen nuclear threads being bandied
(13:19):
about by both sides. Now. The reason why Ivanna Hughes
and I said that the main threat comes from Russia
more than from NATO is that unlike during the Cold War,
Russia actually has NATO has conventional superiority, and NATO would
(13:41):
not have to resort to nuclear weapons as quickly as
Russia might in a dangerous confrontation. And so I think
that the threat of using tactical nuclear weapons, we know
that the Russia, or we think Russia as a doctrine
to escalate, to de escalate, it is about nuclear signaling,
(14:02):
to show how serious they are by using a tactical
nuclear weapon in the expectation that NATO will back down. Well,
there's no guarantee for that, of course, and the danger is,
of course, that NATO meets that tactical nuclear weapon with
one or two tactical nuclear weapons of its own, and
(14:23):
from there, the likelihood of reaching a stopping point before
the entire planet is a smoking mess, before we trigger
nuclear winter and pretty much all life on the planet
has ended becomes quite possible in a realistic possibility. Biden
has effectively said it as much, And Biden has said
(14:46):
that for that reason he avoids going to war with Russia,
doing anything that's going to provoke a World War III
between the US and Russia. But his actions are right
the opposite. The other thing is going on that we
haven't even mentioned yet is that while there's NATO summit
(15:10):
is taking place, while these confrontations of the Pacific are
taking place, Biden is in such a precarious position, especially
after that latest debate. It is sad to think that
the fate of the United States, the Western World, and
possibly the human race may lay in the hands of
(15:31):
a mentally challenged, sleep deprived eighty one year old narcissist
of community college English professor and a convicted felon who
is a former drug addict. These three people are the
ones or are waiting whether or not Biden should step
(15:51):
out of this race. I mean, it boggles the mind
to think who's got control over with the future destiny
of our planner right now? One of the two people
right now who has veto power over the future existence
of the human race, that's Joe Biden. The other one,
(16:14):
not much more comforting but a little more rational and saying,
is Vladimir Putin and Shi Jim Ping. If China really
does plan to get fifteen hundred nuclear weapons by twenty
thirty five, as the Pentagon alleges, would be the third
person to have veto power over the future existence of humanity.
(16:37):
So we are in not only a precarious situation, we
are in a strange like situation that the only way
we have to bring back Stanley Kubrick or I can
get my friend Oliver Stone to make this movie. We
need a remake of Doctor Strangelove because the only way
is Kubrick understood back in nineteen sixty four or to
(17:00):
make that movie is to do it as a black comedy.
And it boggles my mind. I hope and we realize,
you know, Tulcia Gabbard. I like Telsey, I don't always
agree with her. But she did tell The New York
Times a few years back that she was reading and
watching Untold History of the United States my project while
(17:22):
ever so, and she said every leader needs to watch
this and read this well. Tulsi has said recently that
when Biden was asked, and when Biden said there's only
one existential threat, and that's climate change, Telsey said, is
he kidding? The man who's got possession of the nuclear codes,
(17:44):
the man who's got his finger on the nuclear button,
doesn't understand that nuclear war represents an existential threat to mankind.
We are in much more danger than people realize.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
One of the provisions that the Russia North Korea Treaty
has is that both countries have agreed to cooperate on quote,
the peaceful use of nuclear power. President Vladimir Putin, in
response to the West sending loads of lethal weapons to Ukraine,
has threatened, as you have mentioned, to send weapons to
(18:25):
entities that are fighting Western interests. When it comes to
Putin saying that he will cooperate with North Korea on
nuclear issues, do you see this as something that is
more of a threat, something like a protest vote, or
do you think Putin would actually follow through on his statements.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
Putin certainly has technologies that would be crucial for North Korea.
That's North Korea desperately once again a hold of and
you know they could these could be to actually accelerate
(19:06):
North Korea's missile programs. They could be to provide the
technology that North Korea wants and needs for its nuclear submarines.
I mean, if you look at the statement that they release,
they talk together about they talk about working together to
(19:28):
challenge our readers. I think this is exact wording, working together,
the challenge to tackle challenges and threats on the areas
of strategic significance including food, energy, security, information and communication technology,
climate change, help and supply chains, and goes on to
(19:49):
specify space biology, peaceful use of nuclear energy, artificial intelligence,
and information technology. The have got serious military implications, and
we know that North Korea is providing Russia with artillery shells,
(20:11):
enormous numbers of artillery shells and other kinds of ammunition,
as well as ballistic missiles that it's using in Ukraine.
So with all of that going on, I think what
rus Russia could provide North Korea would be enormously significant
and enhance North Korea's military capabilities, whether they're going to
(20:37):
provide them with more nuclear weapons or as system. You know,
one of the sad things about that is that after
North Korea's first nuclear test in two thousand and six,
the Russia and China both went along with UN sanctions
(20:58):
to try to punish North Korea and try to limit
nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula. And now Russia is
vetoing those measures in the UN Security Council and will
possibly be actually enhancing nuclear proliferation by encouraging and providing
(21:22):
the technology that North Korea needs. So that's not a
good sign for me, and it's a reflection, and that's
why I blame both sides for what's going on. Much
like with Ukraine, I was opposed from the beginning of
Russia invading Ukraine, but I understood the ways in which
(21:42):
it provoked. I understood how it could be avoided. I
understood what NATO expansion to Russia's doorstep and the threat
of Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO meant to Russia. I
understood what putting advanced NATO weaponry as well as trainers
(22:04):
into Ukraine meant to Russia, and so I think there's
more than enough blame to go around, just as I
think in the South China Sea. Xhijinping talks about win
win diplomacy, But when I look at what's happening in
the South China Sea, much of what I see is
(22:25):
now win win. It's more along the lines of the
United States approach to zero some game diplomacy. As Reagan
put it, we win and you lose. The South China
Sea is rich in resources. There's more than enough to
be shared. That We often talk about China's nine dash
(22:47):
line and how crazy that is. Well you look Vietnam, really,
the Philippines, all the countries in that region are make
expansive claims to what they deserve and what is their
rightful territory and resources. It's not just China, but I
see China's hardline policy toward India, toward the Philippines, Vietnam
(23:15):
and others being self defeating because it gives the United
States and the West and opening. It gives them the
maneuvering room, the legitimacy to push for their policies, which
I see as a policy of militarization. I've given several
webinars about the militarization of the Pacific, and I think
(23:38):
that that's quite unfortunate, but that's the reality. You know.
One of the people I like to talk about is
Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter in my view as a terrible president,
sadly so, but I think he's been a terrific ex president.
And Jimmy Carter said back in twenty nineteen, he was
(24:02):
only ninety four years old at the time, and he
said to churchgoers. He said that Donald Trump had called
him up that week and talked about his concerns about China.
And Jimmy Carter said, in his talk to the congregation
at the church, he said, since nineteen seventy nine, do
you know how many times China has been a war
(24:24):
with anybody? Carter as he said, and he has none,
and we have stayed a war. He said that during
the entire two hundred and forty two year history of
the United States, the country has only known a palm
trees sixteen years of peace, which makes it the most
(24:45):
warlike nation in the history of the world. He went
on to say, we force other countries to adopt our
American principles. He says, well, how many miles of high
speed railroad do we have in this country? And as zero,
while China has built eighteen thousand miles of high speed
rail while the US has wasted I think three trillion
(25:08):
dollars on military spending. It's more than you can imagine.
China hasn't wasted a single penny on war. That's why
they're ahead of us in almost every way. He said
that we'd think it that three trillion dollars and put
it in American infrastructure, we'd have two trillion leftover. We'd
have high speed railroad, we'd have bridges that are collapsing,
(25:30):
we'd have roads that are maintained properly. Our education system'll
be as good as that of say, South Korea or
Hong Kong. I mean, I think that there's a real
wisdom in what Carter said, and I think that US
policy has too often been blind and self defeating. I
(25:50):
think China's have sometimes been too. But I agree with
a lot of what Jimmy Carter said there.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
In the lead up to the Ukraine War, and as
early as twenty fourteen, doctor John Muersheimer warrened the West
about leading Ukraine down the primrose path to misery with
a future war that he correctly predicted, And one of
the things I've thought about when I consider the situation
in Taiwan. I've thought of writing op eds, but eventually
(26:20):
it did not have the time. So I just wanted
to ask your thoughts on are we in the West
leading Taiwan too down a primrose path like Ukraine to
its own ruin? So is it possible that, just like
the West has done with Russia in playing a part
in provoking the war, any war in Taiwan would be
(26:41):
more provoked than something that China desires to carry out.
Speaker 3 (26:46):
Well, again, this is blame to go around, but most
of that blame goes with the United States and Obama.
At Hillary Clinton is actually Obama and that Hillary Clinton
had the article in Foreign Policy Magazine in November October
twenty eleven titled America's Pacific Century where she discusses the
(27:10):
Asia pivot. Obama was doing it at the same time,
and it didn't really happen under Obama. Obama focused more
on Europe. Obama had the wisdom to say that Ukraine
is a much greater security interest of Russia's than it
is of the United States, and so he refused to
(27:33):
send lethal aid to Ukraine. But Donald Trump did not hesitate,
and he sent lethal aid to Ukraine. And Donald Trump
was the one who really doubled down on the increased
diplomatic and military ties with Taiwan that have provoked the
(27:57):
crisis over Taiwan, the crisis of the China. It had
been managed before that the United States had its one
China policy. The United States had been, you know, come
to Taiwan's defense, but it maintained strategic ambiguity. Unlike under Biden.
The United States strategic ambiguity was that we were not
(28:20):
going to say whether we would come to Taiwan's military
defense if there was a war with China. But Biden
has said on four separate occasions at least that the
United States would do so militarily. Trump and now Biden
have weighed trade war against China, have elevated the China
(28:42):
threat from being an adversary to being really an enemy
of the United States, or from being a competitor to
an adversary and now an enemy. They certainly increased diplomatic
ties and it's not only Trump and Biden. Absurd visit
by Nancy Pelosi, which was provocation for the sake of provocation.
(29:07):
And since that point, China has increased its provocative actions
in the Taiwan Strait, going across the midline there repeatedly
with the shifts as well as its warplanes. You know.
So I think is another crisis that could have been
should have been avoided, that now has been inflamed and provoked,
(29:31):
and that we could step back from and maybe, you know,
get it back on a peaceful footing where we can
have a peaceful resolution of this conflict. Now I can
understand why the Taiwanese do not want to become part
of China. China to me, is not the most attractive
(29:52):
country in the world. Domestically, they've done the Chinese have
done remarkable things in terms of economic growth, in terms
of leviating alleviating poverty at times, in terms of playing
a role as a peacemaker over Ukraine and other situations.
But I don't like the idea of a country that's
(30:13):
got three hundred million surveillance cameras that monitors people as
closely as it does, that doesn't allow more freedom of
speech and freedom of the press. You know, I like
democracy I'm a big advocate of democracy. I wish we
had more of that in the United States. The idea
that this one clown, elderly figure, a warmonger of the
(30:36):
first degree, person who helped bring us Clarence Thomas. We
could go through all the terrible things that Biden has
done supporting the invasion of Iraq. This is not a
wise man in my obinion. He's not an evil man.
He's not a Donald Trump. He's certainly not a fascist.
He believes to some extent democracy. But the latest polling
(30:57):
says eighty five percent of the American peace people think
Biden is too old. Even the Democrats think that Biden
should step down. The American people do overwhelmingly. And the
fact that this old fool will not listen, will not
do so, and listen to Joe Biden and Hunter Biden
instead of the American people is to me also beyond belief,
(31:24):
you know. So, I think that, yes, the Taiwan situation
mention is very dangerous. Biden has done what he can
to inflame it, and if we get somebody else there,
hopefully we can back down and restore diplomacy, which the
Chinese would welcome as well. The last thing they want
is war with the United States over in Taiwan, you know.
(31:48):
And the other thing to keep in mind is that
there's no guarantee the US wins that war. The Pentagon
has run at least eighteen wargames over war between US
and China over Taiwan, and China has prevailed all eighteen.
They're Metagon figures to say, if we're going to have
the war, we better get it over with by twenty twenty.
Some say twenty twenty five, some say twenty twenty seven.
(32:09):
It was Army General Minihan who said he thinks the
US and China will be a war by twenty twenty five.
Other pre predict that we have until twenty twenty seven
to still defeat China. But many think that we couldn't
even defeat China. Now, if we talk about Ukraine being
in Russia's backyard and being a strategic a priority for
(32:32):
Russian not the United States, it's even more the case
over Taiwan. Now, the US does want the microelectronics and
the chips from Taiwan, and the world does also, but
the US policy of trying to weaken China in that
regard makes Taiwan an even more attractive target for China.
(32:55):
So you know, I think I think we're living in
a blind blind world.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Coming to our last second question, over the course of
the last four US administrations, there has been a sustained
escalation in North Korea's missile tests. This trend has intensified
notably in the past three years, with surge and testing
by North Korea going up by one hundred and twelve
(33:19):
percent according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
In Iran as well, we are seeing that Tehran is
coming closer than ever to a nuclear bomb. What have
we done wrong with the non proliferation regime that we
have in the world. Is this something because of multipolarity
or there is something that we as the world have
(33:40):
done wrong the way we approached non proliferation that it
appears that it is dying.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
Good question. First of all, north Korea's tests. They haven't
carried out a nuclear test since twenty seventeen. There's been
discussion of North Korea nuclear tests, but they have not
done so. But they have increased the ballistic missiles. They
have been testing ballistic missiles and that's been provocative as well.
(34:10):
The situation on the peninsula is very very dangerous. But
one of the other consequences of this nuclear of this
security agreement between Russia and the DPRK and North Korea
is that the South Korea has begun again seriously considering
(34:32):
not trusting US extended to terrens and developing its own
nuclear weapons. We know that South Korea is the technological
capability of developing nuclear weapons quickly. We also know that
according to some of the polls, as many as seventy
percent of the South Korean population I want to see
(34:53):
South Korea develop its own nuclear weapons. So that is
definitely on the table again, and that has been spurred
in part by the agreement between Russia and North Korea.
Number one, Number two. The Union government is inxtraordinarily unpopular.
It's a right wing government that barely got into power
(35:17):
in the latest elections and they behaved terribly since, and
the opposition is strengthened and the support for that Union
regime is very very low. So clearly nuclear non proliferation
(35:37):
has not succeeded in the Korean peninsula, and it could
get worse. It could get dramatically worse. The other situation
with Iran is also a mess. Obama to his credit,
negotiated with the help of Russia, the help of China,
(35:57):
the help of Germany and others, ciated the JCPOA, the
Iran Nuclear Band Treaty, and that was a great thing.
And then Trump was a twenty eighteen decides to abrogate it.
You have to remember that under that treaty, Iran morthballed
(36:21):
ninety seven percent of its centrifuges. It said, ninety seven
percent of its advance its rich nuclear material to Russia.
It only enriched uranium to about three percent or three
point seven percent. Now, after the US abrogated that treaty,
(36:45):
it Ran now has dramatically increased its stock piles of
highly enricheranium and has been enriching up to sixty percent.
It's restored its centrifuges. To go from sixty percent to
the ninety percent that's necessary for a nuclear weapon is
(37:05):
a very easy step. The difficult step is to go
for a three point seven percent for energy use to
sixty percent, and so Iran certainly poses a nuclear threat.
Under the JCPOA, the idea was to have a one
year breakout, would take around a year to develop in
nuclear weapons. The estimate now is that Iran can develop
(37:28):
nuclear weapons within a month. They don't have the technology
yet to put a nuclear bottomb on the tip of
a missile and have it come back safely within the atmosphere,
but they could develop that quickly. They have reinforced and
hardened their bunkers, especially at FOURD out, but also others
(37:48):
as well, and they could certainly easily develop nuclear dirty bombs,
and so the situation is very dangerous. So you're the
big point you're making about unproliit version having failed is true.
And I put the onus of that on, you know,
at the feet of all the nuclear powers, because the
nineteen seventy NPT Treaty said that the five recognized nuclear powers.
(38:16):
The part of the deal was that the non nuclear
powers would commit to not developing nuclear weapons, but the
nuclear powers in exchange would be committed to eliminating their
nuclear weapons, and they have not done so. Yes, they
brought them down, but what's happening now is that all
(38:38):
nuclear non nuclear powers are modernizing and that almost all
of them have stated or are under pressure or thinking
about increasing the number of nuclear weapons. So we brought
it down from seventy thousand to fourteen thousand, even under
fourteen thousand eighty percent reduction, and now we're talking about
(39:00):
increasing it again. In the US, the Joint Congressional Bipartisan
Strategic Posture Committee has called for dramatically increasing US nuclear weapons.
The Russians are talking about the same China we know
is increasing. The Brits are talking about a forty percent
(39:22):
increase in their number of nuclear weapons. You know, we
see this going on everywhere. We're going the wrong direction.
So the non polifericia regime has failed. The Third World
is spoken up with the Nuclear Band Treaty, the TPNW.
The world wants to see nuclear weapons eliminated. However, we're
(39:43):
going the opposite direction, and we're closer than any time
since the Cuban Missile crisis for nuclear war. The billday
Timmy scientists has put the doomsday clock at ninety seconds
before midnight. I was cited in an article an op
(40:04):
ed column in China yesterday saying that I thought that
they should move the hands of the doomsday clock to
thirty seconds before midnight. I don't remember actually having said that,
but I think that that would be appropriate because we're
so much closer to nuclear war now than we were
(40:27):
back even two or three years ago. So we've got
three crisis. We've got the Goza situation, which could expand
into a broader regional war in an instant. We've got
the situation in Ukraine. We've got the situation with China
and the Indo Pacific both in we have the South
(40:48):
China Sea, and we've got Taiwan, and so the world.
You know. John Kennedy said the years ago it is
brilliant American University Commitsment address. He said that to put
a nuclear power in the position of either sufferating a
humiliating defeat or being forced to use nuclear weapons is
(41:12):
either a colossal failure is statesmanship or a collective death
wish on the part of the human species. I think
this is both a colossal failure of statesmanship and a
collective death wish, and civilization is discontent. Sigmund Freud's brilliant
nineteen twenty nine book, he talks about the death instinct. Says,
(41:35):
there's a life instinct and there's a death instinct. And
it looks to me like on a global scale, now
the death instinct is prevailing. Freud hope. I held out hope.
But the longer these situations prevail, the more dangerous, more precarious,
the more suicidal they become.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
Coming to our last question, and one of the target
audience for this show is interns at Capitol Hill and
young bureaucrats, those who would shape American foreign policy in
the future. With your seniority, experience, and knowledge, what would
your message be to this demographic? How do you think
that this demographic should change its thinking and not repeat
(42:21):
the errors of their elders.
Speaker 3 (42:26):
I'll start by quoting phill Oaks, the great nineteen sixties
American folks singer anti war Ydero, in his book I
in March and his song int of Marching Anymore says,
it's always the old who lead us to the wars,
It's always the young who fall. But look at all
(42:48):
we've one with a saber and a gun. Tell me
is it worth it all? I think the younger generation
I see, my students, see Biden and the policy makers
who Ben Roads called the blob as a bunch of
warmongering old fools who have havejured, have rejected diplomacy. We
(43:13):
see by you know, back in March of twenty twenty two,
after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we had the istan
Bull Accords. Russian Zolensky had effectively come to an agreement
to end the fighting a month after it began in Ukraine,
but Zelensky was pushed by Boris Johnson, the British clown,
(43:40):
and by Biden and the Americans. The old the elder
American statesmith in quotes to reject any thinking about ending
the war. He was promised they would get all the
aid they needed. And where are we now? Are we better?
Often we would have been ending the war two and
(44:02):
a half years ago. No, we're worse off. We're gonna
be worse off six months from now, We're worse off
a year from now. We're going to be visited this
a year from now, and the Russians will have gained
a little more ground than Ukraine, and there'll be hundreds
of thousands of more Ukrainian and Russian casualties, and we're
(44:23):
going to have wasted more and more of the world's resources,
and we're going to be no closer to peace. Now.
We're gonna be the same crisis point. We have a
choice between diplomacy and continued warfare. That's the optimistic view.
The pessimistic view is that we're going to be in
(44:44):
World War three, and so you choose. The younger generation
has to choose, and they have to say that the
ways of the older generation. And I mean all of
those leaders. You've got Biden say, I want to make
America great again, great against, we've got Putin wanted to
make Russia grade again, Jesus being wanted to make China
(45:05):
great again. Modi wanted to make India great again. Then
y'all want to make Israel great again. I mean, we
can go down the line, comany money make Iran great again.
They're all fools, and you shouldn't trust them. You shouldn't
think that they've got any deeper wisdom. They've shown over
the last seventy years, seventy five years since World War Two,
(45:30):
that they have no vision for running a peaceful and
prosperous world. We need a multipolar world. We're in a
multipolar world. It's time we recognize that, and we need
to find peaceful solutions to these problems. And so Putin
has said he wants to negotiate over Ukraine, but the
(45:52):
West ignores his words. I say, call his bluff. We're
not going to end this war by sending more arms.
We're not going to end this war there or any
of the global crises by fueling the arms races and
by giving the merchants of death, the arms manufacturers what
(46:16):
they want. We've got to have statesmanship prevail the US.
I don't see any of it. I don't see it
from Biden or Campbell, or Blincoln or Sullivan or Austin.
I see them as a bunch of over the hill warmongers,
and I think they need to all be replaced right now.
(46:38):
And I'm not seeing that wisdom, you know, where I
see some of it. I see China and Brazil Hijin
Bing and Lula putting forth to a ten point piece plan.
I see China's previous piece plan their twelve point plan.
Point number one is respect for national sovereignty, which is
a critique of Russia and Russia's invasion. Point number two,
(47:03):
no nation's national security should be achieved at the expense
of anybody else's national security, which is a critique of
the United States and NATO. I think we need a
balanced approach, and I think we need to figure out
how we're going to get there peacefully.
Speaker 2 (47:24):
Ladies and gentlemen, You just listen to doctor Peter Kuznick,
director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University. Doctor Kuznick,
thank you so much for your time. Thank you, Andrew,
and I'm glad you're raising these kinds of questions and
trying to reach future leaders, because if we survive this period,
(47:47):
these are the ones who are going to have to
create a different world, a better world.
Speaker 1 (47:51):
Strategic Wisdom with Andrew Jose is an initiative of Andrew
Jose Media. The views expressed by guests on this show
do not necessarily represent the official positions and opinions of
Andrew Jose, Andrew Jose Media, and Strategic Wisdom.
Speaker 4 (48:08):
Thank you for listening to Strategic Wisdom. Be sure to
follow and subscribe to us on whatever podcast platform you
are using to listen to this show in order to
not miss out any future interviews and conversations that Andrew
Jose will bring to you on this podcast. We're streaming
on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, yandex, geosovin, Amazon Music, and
many other podcasts streaming services. Also, be sure to subscribe
(48:32):
to Strategic Wisdom on substack at Strategicwisdom dot substack dot com,
and to follow Strategic Wisdom on Twitter, and Instagram at Stratwisdom,
do support our work by buying from our merch store.
For more details, visit Strategicwisdom dot substack dot com.
Speaker 2 (48:48):
Thank you so much, Gabby, and thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (48:50):
Ian ladies and gentlemen. This is your host, Andrew jose
signing off any anything
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.