Speaker 1: This episode of the Chuck Todcast is brought to you
Speaker 1: by Wild Grain. Wild Grain is the first bake from
Speaker 1: frozen subscription box for sour dough breads, artisonal pastries, and
Speaker 1: fresh pastas, plus all the items conveniently baked in twenty
Speaker 1: five minutes or less. Unlike many store brought options, Wild
Speaker 1: Grain uses some simple ingredients you can pronounce and a
Speaker 1: slow fermentation process that can be a lot easier on
Speaker 1: your belly, little gut health there right, and richer in
Speaker 1: nutrients antioxidants. There's also no preservatives and no shortcuts. The
Speaker 1: Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable. In addition to their
Speaker 1: variety box, they have a gluten free box, a vegan box,
Speaker 1: and a new protein box. I will tell you I
Speaker 1: have done the gluten free box. I have done it
Speaker 1: a second time. I have also used the code, the
Speaker 1: todcast code. If you use the promo code toodcast at checkout,
Speaker 1: you get thirty dollars off. I've already used it as
Speaker 1: a gift to somebody else who loves this bread. It
Speaker 1: is hard to find good gluten free bread. It is fantastic.
Speaker 1: They give you step by step instructions. I really dig this.
Speaker 1: There is nothing like having an artesian bakery in your
Speaker 1: freezer to chase away the winter chill. Now is the
Speaker 1: best time to stay in and enjoy some comforting homemade
Speaker 1: meals with Wildgrain. I obviously highly recommend it. It is
Speaker 1: worth giving Wildgrain to try. Right now, Wildgrain is offering
Speaker 1: my listeners thirty dollars off your first box plus free
Speaker 1: croissants for life. Come on when you go to wildgrain
Speaker 1: dot com slash podcast to start your subscription today. That's
Speaker 1: thirty dollars off your first box and free croissants for
Speaker 1: life when you visit wildgrain dot com slash podcast, or
Speaker 1: simply use the promo code podcast at checkout. This is
Speaker 1: a sponsor I absolutely embrace, so use that code. How
Speaker 1: unsettled do you feel about the globe? How unsettled do
Speaker 1: you feel about American politics? Obviously, of the year I
Speaker 1: team twenty twenty six, a year of living dayangerously, I think,
Speaker 1: whether it's what we saw in Minnesota feels like we're
Speaker 1: a spark away from something not good in this country,
Speaker 1: and we have a world that feels unsettled everywhere, whether
Speaker 1: it's Venezuela, whether it's Iron, whether it's Taiwan, whether it's Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Well you get the picture. So who better to bring
Speaker 1: in to talk about all the risk and the year
Speaker 1: of living dangerously than my Friendie and Bremer of your
Speaker 1: Raisier group and Ian.
Speaker 2: Look you you.
Speaker 1: I started off a bit glum for the year, and
Speaker 1: you had you played a big role in that. Your annuals,
Speaker 1: your annual risk list of top risks out there, frankly,
Speaker 1: only reinforced what I think what was already I was
Speaker 1: sort of seeing domestically, and certainly I sort of refer
Speaker 1: to myself these days as a political anthropologist when it
Speaker 1: comes to domestic politics. But you've got your pulse on
Speaker 1: international political science as well. So you painted a picture
Speaker 1: of Look, I want to quote Doc Brown in a
Speaker 1: back to the future, where we're going there are no roads.
Speaker 1: I don't know where we're going, but I know there
Speaker 1: are no roads, and we're headed somewhere that by the
Speaker 1: end of this year you and I may meet up again,
Speaker 1: going holy shit, how did we get here?
Speaker 2: I mean this, It's not like there isn't good news
Speaker 2: out there, right. I mean, for example, last twenty years,
Speaker 2: most of the people I know in the international affairs
Speaker 2: space thought that we were heading towards US China confrontation,
Speaker 2: new Cold war, you know, could could lead to something
Speaker 2: even worse than that. That that's not where we are, right,
Speaker 2: I mean the.
Speaker 1: Right. And I also think when we can talk about
Speaker 1: Iron for a minute, we're about to see a Middle
Speaker 1: East that maybe.
Speaker 2: A whole new world.
Speaker 1: In a in a good way.
Speaker 2: Maybe maybe I'd love to see that. I think we're
Speaker 2: still We're still farther from that than i'd like us
Speaker 2: to be. There's a lot of capacity and willingness to repress,
Speaker 2: and a lot of Ronnie and civilians that are dead
Speaker 2: today that weren't a week ago. But still, I mean,
Speaker 2: it's not like everything in the world is blowing up,
Speaker 2: and the response to the United States is not purely destructive.
Speaker 2: I mean, frankly, you know, the EU and Mercasoor just
Speaker 2: did one of the world's largest free trade deals that
Speaker 2: wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for Trump, because they're.
Speaker 1: I talked about this the last time I had you on.
Speaker 1: I think Donald Trump's making Europe great again. Well, I
Speaker 1: wouldn't go down, I think, Well, but the point what
Speaker 1: I what I mean by it is Europe needed to stop.
Speaker 2: Relying on the United States, so they need a kick
Speaker 2: in the ass and fear that they're still not going
Speaker 2: to make it.
Speaker 1: But yes, I agree, and Donald Trump's presidency turned out
Speaker 1: to be the kick of the ass that at least
Speaker 1: they find noticed.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump is definitely that kick in the ass. I
Speaker 2: think that's clear. I think that's clear for the Europeans,
Speaker 2: for the Canadians, for the Mexicans, for some for the
Speaker 2: remaining regime in Venezuela. I mean, my god, he represents
Speaker 2: a kick in the ass to an awful lot of people.
Speaker 2: But of course, you know, the big thing is that
Speaker 2: the uncertain We have seen the uncertainty, we've seen the risk,
Speaker 2: and he is us, right, I mean, that is that
Speaker 2: is the reason why.
Speaker 1: That's what's so. But that's not even you know, it's funny.
Speaker 1: You made it your top risk. And yet I feel
Speaker 1: like two years ago, if you had done that, it
Speaker 1: would have seen controversial, It would have been weird if
Speaker 1: we weren't the top risk. Right, shocking, Right, we are
Speaker 1: at the center of everybody else's instability.
Speaker 2: Yep, yep, yep, no questions.
Speaker 1: A weird place for America to be, yep.
Speaker 2: But in part it is the logical conclusion of decades
Speaker 2: of Americans of different stripes increasingly saying we don't like
Speaker 2: the role that we have carved out for our selfs globally,
Speaker 2: we don't really believe in it in different ways, whether
Speaker 2: it's foreign aid or promotion of rule of law and democracy,
Speaker 2: or free trade or collective security alliances, all these wars.
Speaker 2: So that that's a big piece of it, right, And
Speaker 2: then there's the domestic piece too, with two completely different
Speaker 2: worldviews housed in one country. Right. And you know when
Speaker 2: those things start to really break, when those assumptions are
Speaker 2: fundamentally questioned by a guy who is, you know, thrives
Speaker 2: on being a chaos actor, then it's not a surprise
Speaker 2: that we're.
Speaker 1: Driving that uncertain Let's start in our hemisphere and then move.
Speaker 1: So one of the things I like to correct with
Speaker 1: some of my friends on the left actually is that
Speaker 1: there hasn't been regime change in Venezuela. The regime is
Speaker 1: still in power. Yes, right, they've only extracted one individual.
Speaker 1: How do we get to individuals? Don't disparage the wife.
Speaker 2: Like that enough?
Speaker 1: Where how do we get to a better place in
Speaker 1: Venezuela without American boots on the ground.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, let's face it, getting to a better
Speaker 2: Venezuela with American boots on the ground might be more challenging, right,
Speaker 2: I mean, given our recent experience in Venezuela is not Iraq, right,
Speaker 2: It's not Afghanistan, It has recent experience with democracy, it
Speaker 2: doesn't have massive internal sectarian divides. There are a lot
Speaker 2: of exiled elites that would love to be able to
Speaker 2: come back, and the power asymmetries are massive with the
Speaker 2: United States right there in the hemisphere, right, So, I mean,
Speaker 2: there are lots of reasons to believe that at least
Speaker 2: in the near term, they are going to behave eve
Speaker 2: themselves more because they understand the orls they are going to.
Speaker 2: They're going to listen to the Americans on oil. They
Speaker 2: have freed a small number of political prisoners, but high
Speaker 2: level prisoners, by the way, leaders of in the opposition movement,
Speaker 2: because Marco Rubio and others told them they had to. So,
Speaker 2: you know, the early days on this are without American troops,
Speaker 2: but with the credibility and presence of all of that
Speaker 2: military capacity, and with the willingness to prod the IMF
Speaker 2: to provide some support over time and get some private
Speaker 2: sector companies with guarantees to actually back them up, that
Speaker 2: there are reasons why in the near term this will
Speaker 2: go well. The much more the problem with Venezuela is
Speaker 2: much more about when start talking about actual power sharing,
Speaker 2: which the people want, you know, Frankly, Marco and others
Speaker 2: around Trump, even if Trump doesn't care, they want it,
Speaker 2: and yet the government, the existing regime will resist that
Speaker 2: with every sinew of their body.
Speaker 1: My concern is that Trump doesn't care about the democracy piece.
Speaker 1: If the regime does what he asks, he's going to
Speaker 1: be fine with leaving them in place.
Speaker 2: Well, but I'm suggesting that that won't work right. In
Speaker 2: other words, that when you have when you have that
Speaker 2: many people in the country that now see a weaker,
Speaker 2: more vulnerable military that's been bloodied up by the US,
Speaker 2: and they overwhelmingly want their opposition in place, they will
Speaker 2: clamor for it. That when you have a lot of
Speaker 2: MAGA supporters in Mara A Lago who are themselves exiles,
Speaker 2: that's a strong community. They're going to be pushing for it.
Speaker 2: Marco and others that really did organize the TikTok on
Speaker 2: these attacks also they want it. And so I don't
Speaker 2: even though Trump Trump's the decider. Trump's got the power,
Speaker 2: he's the president, and he doesn't care. I agree he
Speaker 2: doesn't care about what kind of regime it is. But
Speaker 2: I think that he can't. He can't just ignore that issue.
Speaker 1: Do you see it? Like we help that there's elections
Speaker 1: in six months a year? What's your you know, is
Speaker 1: there anybody thinking about this? Like okay, when what's the soonest?
Speaker 1: We could actually hold national elections?
Speaker 2: Soonest is probably six months? More realistic is twelve to eighteen.
Speaker 2: And again, as they start talking about it, and it
Speaker 2: won't be the first thing they discuss, but as they
Speaker 2: get to that process, what I think we will see
Speaker 2: is an effort by the military to give on many
Speaker 2: other grounds and obfuse gate, which is what they've done before.
Speaker 2: Reasons why it can't be done soon, and here are
Speaker 2: the mechanisms, and here are some candidates we can't tolerate,
Speaker 2: and all sorts of ways to push out, water down
Speaker 2: and ensure that they are the ones that control everything.
Speaker 2: But ultimately, I'm not going to sit here and tell
Speaker 2: you a power sharing agreement is impossible. You couldn't just
Speaker 2: bring in the opposition and tell the military you're out.
Speaker 2: But then again, we all know that Paul Bremer doing
Speaker 2: that in a rock that was a disaster. Like removing
Speaker 2: the Bathists, removing the security and the military forces was
Speaker 2: what the US should have never done, never done.
Speaker 1: There are a handful of intriguing elections this year in
Speaker 1: Latin America, Columbia, Colombia is fascinating to me, in Brazil
Speaker 1: or probably the two big ones. There's Peru as well.
Speaker 1: How much will anti Americanism be part of those campaigns? Now?
Speaker 1: And you know my great fear is, look, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm. I have a friend who does a lot
Speaker 1: of work in Colombia has not been a big fan
Speaker 1: of this. This political party is hopeful that the other
Speaker 1: political party comes back. And I know that a lot
Speaker 1: of American business folks feel that way. And it looks
Speaker 1: like that had been a glide path. But now I
Speaker 1: wonder does Trump and does our involvement in Venezuela spark
Speaker 1: a backlash in a Colombia spark a backlash? Yeah?
Speaker 2: No, and it doesn't. So it's a good it's a
Speaker 2: really good question, especially because we've seen that backlash change
Speaker 2: outcomes in Canada. We've seen that backlash change outcomes in
Speaker 2: Australia in both cases is and I.
Speaker 1: Would argue Lula's political standing has been strengthened due to Trump.
Speaker 2: A little bit, a little bit much less so, but
Speaker 2: a little bit definitely after Trump, you know, sort of
Speaker 2: basically said we're tariffing you because of the bull jail
Speaker 2: term that was handed down by the Supreme Court. Not
Speaker 2: not Lula, right, but but actually in Latin America, in
Speaker 2: these countries, number one issue overwhelmingly right now is domestic security,
Speaker 2: and and that plays out so bole in l Salvador
Speaker 2: is by far the most popular leader, even though he's
Speaker 2: a pro Trump guy. He's not popular because he's pro Trump.
Speaker 2: He's popular because he's actually really like wielded the fists
Speaker 2: in creating security. And one could argue he's broken a
Speaker 2: lot of eggs to make that omelet right.
Speaker 1: A lot of guys, I'll uh, you'll appreciate this. I
Speaker 1: teach a for USC here in DC. That's called how
Speaker 1: Washington works. And last semester I had a an nol
Speaker 1: Salvadorian student who said, yeah, boy, my parents and I
Speaker 1: don't speak about Bouqueta anymore. Like it was just like
Speaker 1: she said, basically, if you live in al Salvador.
Speaker 2: You love the guy.
Speaker 1: If you don't live there, you don't and you're El
Speaker 1: Salvador and you don't like the guy. It's a it's
Speaker 1: a fascinating it's.
Speaker 2: Like ninety percent local approval, and it's it's true approval, right,
Speaker 2: And it's.
Speaker 1: Just because she does. Look, it was so unsafe, right,
Speaker 1: it was so.
Speaker 2: When Maduro gets taken out, and he is not just
Speaker 2: a bad guy, but he is actually coordinating narco cartels
Speaker 2: right across the region, and he also did lead to
Speaker 2: the destabilization of a lot of countries, including Colombia because
Speaker 2: of eight million displaced Venezuelans. They are delighted to see
Speaker 2: the back of Maduro and they want security in their
Speaker 2: own countries. So I and the secondary issue is the
Speaker 2: local economy. So I don't think there's a backlash. Mexico
Speaker 2: is a different story because it's so integrated with the
Speaker 2: US and their economy is not doing well though Shanebaum
Speaker 2: is actually quite popular. But for Columbia and for Brazil,
Speaker 2: I don't actually think that the Trump factor will be
Speaker 2: determinative and either of them.
Speaker 1: Well, it's been interesting. It's sort of like I and
Speaker 1: this is where you sometimes have cross currents. There does
Speaker 1: seem to be a general move you know, and we've
Speaker 1: seen this in Latin America. It's like a windshield wiper
Speaker 1: when suddenly, you know, five countries move left, then five
Speaker 1: countries move.
Speaker 2: Right, you know, and I feel like there's a right
Speaker 2: word pull right now. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But in Columbia,
Speaker 2: I mean, Petro got into that big spat with Trump,
Speaker 2: and apparently the Trump administration was like literally had targets
Speaker 2: and they were ready to engage in the lateral strikes.
Speaker 2: And then Petro calls Trump and he pretends that like
Speaker 2: he'd been begging for that call for weeks.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and he.
Speaker 2: Made it sound as if, oh, I didn't even know
Speaker 2: Trump was gonna call me, and so thank god I
Speaker 2: wasn't laid for it. But I mean, you know, we're
Speaker 2: gonna get together and it's going to be wonderful, and
Speaker 2: you know, suddenly their buddies. Because he's been personally sanctioned
Speaker 2: by by the United States, right, and it's a problem
Speaker 2: for him. He really wanted the the other side of
Speaker 2: get the other side of that potential conflict, and I
Speaker 2: think the likelihood that his preferred candidate on the left
Speaker 2: can get through a second round is. It's there, but
Speaker 2: it's it's very low. You would expect to string.
Speaker 1: You know, you don't fear that anti Americanism could suddenly
Speaker 1: prop that left disc government.
Speaker 2: Nope, Nope, it's not playing out in any of the
Speaker 2: polls right now, not at all. And Brazil I think
Speaker 2: is going to be a close election and it's going
Speaker 2: to be Bolsonaro's kid, right it looks that way. I mean,
Speaker 2: that's just going to be a fascinating putting forward fight.
Speaker 2: And they're now thinking about who his running mate for
Speaker 2: vice president would be. But I would say they still
Speaker 2: want to see how he's going to do over the
Speaker 2: next couple months before they all line up behind him.
Speaker 2: So it's likely to be Flavio bolscenario. Keep in mind
Speaker 2: that his father, the former president, has had a lot
Speaker 2: of health issues recently, and you know, if he ends
Speaker 2: up really not being able to be a strong, live
Speaker 2: political force, things could change very quickly.
Speaker 1: How's Lula's health, He's been there a long time.
Speaker 2: Seems to be okay. I mean he's what in his
Speaker 2: eighties now, he doesn't even keep a smartphone. I mean
Speaker 2: he's like, you know, the way he does his work
Speaker 2: and the way he's briefed is so twentieth century. It's
Speaker 2: kind of shocking that he's running the largest economy in
Speaker 2: South America, but he's decided he wants to run again.
Speaker 2: I think it's criminal negligence for him to be running
Speaker 2: for another full term basically because of his age. Yeah
Speaker 2: and all of that. Yeah, absolutely, but very much that
Speaker 2: Biden situation. Biden situation, I mean all across subs are
Speaker 2: in Africa. I mean a lot of places where people
Speaker 2: should know. This is a huge issue all over Africa,
Speaker 2: that's for sure.
Speaker 1: Let's move to Claudia Shinbaum because one of the comments
Speaker 1: that didn't get a lot of traction over the last
Speaker 1: couple of weeks was when Trump just managed, matter of factly,
Speaker 1: said well, she doesn't control her own country. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: have to take care of the cartels, and you're and
Speaker 1: Shinebaum to her. She never overreacts to Trump publicly. She
Speaker 1: always she is you know, she's in that sense, she's
Speaker 1: figured out how to manage the personal relationship with him,
Speaker 1: probably better than any world leader. But I'm curious if
Speaker 1: you disagree, well.
Speaker 2: I mean, you'd argue that h J and Ping has
Speaker 2: done the best job managing the Trump relationship back and
Speaker 2: turns out that's effective. Right, But Cloudia, pound for pound,
Speaker 2: Cloudy the best job. Yeah, I think that's probably right.
Speaker 2: I mean, her throw weight is a little smaller in
Speaker 2: terms of Mexico's asymmetrical disadvantages. But I will say that,
Speaker 2: like three months ago.
Speaker 3: You know, the the scuttle but inside the White House was, yeah,
Speaker 3: we thought we might have to engage in strikes, but
Speaker 3: they're cooperating so effectively that we probably don't need to now.
Speaker 2: And that was even Stephen Miller's perspective.
Speaker 1: Right, it's my assunt, but I understand that in country.
Speaker 1: I've got a few people I've talked to that say
Speaker 1: that she seems pretty intent and that she's more serious
Speaker 1: about it than Amblo was.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes she is, and she is both in terms
Speaker 2: of the importance of her security. Bona fide is for
Speaker 2: her own popular support in terms of what she did
Speaker 2: when she was mayor of Mexico City and the corruption
Speaker 2: around the Attorney General, the Minister of Justice, excuse me,
Speaker 2: and others, which she's who she finally forced out, the
Speaker 2: chief prosecutor. And also because she understands the she's very
Speaker 2: vulnerable to the Americans if she doesn't shut down the
Speaker 2: meth labs, if she doesn't, you know, sort of capture
Speaker 2: a whole bunch of fentanyl. And they have done more,
Speaker 2: but but is more enough. They are very worried about it,
Speaker 2: and it certainly seems to me that Trump, that Marco
Speaker 2: Rubio in particular over the past week since the Venezuela
Speaker 2: operation have soured on Mexico, is getting this done. Maybe
Speaker 2: this is over confidence because of Venezuela and the focus
Speaker 2: on the Donroe doctrine. Maybe it's because there there isn't
Speaker 2: as much cooperation as they really want. Maybe it's because
Speaker 2: they're they're worried about the economy and the rest in
Speaker 2: the US. They want to show some more wins. But
Speaker 2: definitely that noise has increased.
Speaker 1: This episode of The Chuck Podcast is brought to you
Speaker 1: by Quints, and I love me some Quints. New Year,
Speaker 1: Colder Days. This is the moment your winter wardrobe really
Speaker 1: has to deliver. If you're craving a winter reset, start
Speaker 1: with pieces truly made to last season after season. Quint
Speaker 1: springs together premium materials, thoughtful design, and enduring quality so
Speaker 1: you stay warm, look sharp, and feel your best all season.
Speaker 2: Long.
Speaker 1: Quinn's has everything you need men's Mongolian cashmere sweaters. I
Speaker 1: have one. I have to say, really into it. They
Speaker 1: have wool coats, leather, and swayed outerwear that actually hold
Speaker 1: up to daily wear and still look good. Their outerwears
Speaker 1: especially impressive. Think down jackets, wool coats, and Italian leather
Speaker 1: outerwear that keep you warm when it's actually cold. Each
Speaker 1: piece made from premium materials. Quints delivers the same quality
Speaker 1: as luxury brands at a fraction of the price. The
Speaker 1: result is classic styles you'll love that hold up year
Speaker 1: after year. You know me, I love me my quarter zips.
Speaker 1: Quinn S hays quite a few of them. They're great.
Speaker 1: They're both light and warm. There's nothing harder than business casual. Right,
Speaker 1: you get these things? What can I wear? What can
Speaker 1: you wear at a meeting? What do you wear on
Speaker 1: a zoom? I have to say. It's as if Quinn
Speaker 1: sort of says, hey, look, we've got the modern sort
Speaker 1: of working wardrobe ready for you. Clothing that looks stylish,
Speaker 1: looks good, but is actually practical and isn't going to
Speaker 1: break the bank. So refresher winter wardrobe with Quints. Go
Speaker 1: to Quins dot com slash chuck for free shipping on
Speaker 1: your order and three hundred and sixty five day returns.
Speaker 1: And it's also available in Canada. That's q u i
Speaker 1: nce dot com slash chuck, free shipping and three hundred
Speaker 1: and sixty five day returns quints dot com slash chuck.
Speaker 1: Doesn't she have a I mean, tourism is.
Speaker 2: So important to the Mexican economy, and.
Speaker 1: The perception in this country is that Mexico is not.
Speaker 2: As not safe. Doesn't she wants Americans to believe things
Speaker 2: are safe?
Speaker 1: There Isn't that good.
Speaker 2: Ef the perception. I mean, when you think about it
Speaker 2: depends on how you pray. Sure, But I mean, do
Speaker 2: we really think that Cancun is a problem. No?
Speaker 1: And I've always been told that the reason why Cabo
Speaker 1: and Cancun aren't a problem is because the cartels own
Speaker 1: the hotels in those areas and that's the money. That's
Speaker 1: how they launder the money, and they know they don't
Speaker 1: want to kill the golden goose, so I have that's
Speaker 1: how That's how I've had folks reassure.
Speaker 2: Me about Cabo. Put it that way, okay, But tuloom,
Speaker 2: I mean, you know my Coba even Mexico City, I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, Guadalajara, I mean Wahaka. I mean the friends
Speaker 2: of mine from all walks of life, from working class
Speaker 2: to super rich, have not been you know, sort of
Speaker 2: cutting their Mexico trips because they're concerned about getting you know,
Speaker 2: sort of hauled off by the drug lords or caught
Speaker 2: in a firefight. I think it's much more of a
Speaker 2: concern for the companies that are operating in those areas,
Speaker 2: for whom you know, a shakedown is real. It's also
Speaker 2: a huge concern for the mayors and in the localities
Speaker 2: that are running who are getting gunned down. It's a
Speaker 2: huge number of political assassinations across.
Speaker 1: Especially northern in the northern part of the country. Definitely, yeah, still, yeah,
Speaker 1: I still wouldn't recommend a road trip in Mexico.
Speaker 2: No, but I look, I think the big issue is
Speaker 2: that if the United States decides to go in unilaterally
Speaker 2: with drones or with the federal allys and engages in
Speaker 2: strikes that the Mexican government is not cooperating with overtly,
Speaker 2: I think that is a redline for this government and
Speaker 2: for the US Mexico relationship.
Speaker 1: That would be a disaster. Okay, what does that look like.
Speaker 2: I think that trade relations would would take a severe hit.
Speaker 2: I think that she would. I think she'd be in
Speaker 2: very serious trouble unless she immediately hit the Americans back
Speaker 2: and said this won't be tolerated with real consequences, it
Speaker 2: would cause a break. You said that she's handled managed
Speaker 2: Trump better than anybody else pound for pound, we would
Speaker 2: stop saying that immediately.
Speaker 1: Cuba, how how can this regime survive without the help
Speaker 1: of Venezuela. How important was Maduro? Is Maduro is that
Speaker 1: regime to Cuba?
Speaker 2: So it appears that the United States, and I've only
Speaker 2: heard this in the last few hours, so I'd like
Speaker 2: to dig into it, is not going to pressure the
Speaker 2: Mexicans to stop providing oil to Cuba. Marco Rubio recognizes
Speaker 2: that he wants the regime gone, but he also knows
Speaker 2: that they are not exporting the kind of instability across
Speaker 2: the region that Venezuela has, So it doesn't appear that
Speaker 2: there is urgency. And there also isn't a plan that's
Speaker 2: been put together. Yeah, and the plan for Venezuela, which was,
Speaker 2: you know, militarily a very significant plan from an intelligence
Speaker 2: perspective too, that took about six months. So it doesn't
Speaker 2: feel unless the Cuban economy collapses, driving massive, you know,
Speaker 2: sort of unrest on the ground, this doesn't feel like
Speaker 2: something that we're going to be seeing headlines on next week.
Speaker 1: I know, over the last twenty years, the Spanish government
Speaker 1: in particular had been very helpful to Cuba, obviously the Venezuelans.
Speaker 1: I mean, it does seem as if that who invests in.
Speaker 2: Cuba these days, who has been helping them the most? Yeah, well,
Speaker 2: I mean Venezuela has been significant and Mexico has been significant.
Speaker 2: Those are the two largest countries in the region that
Speaker 2: have been propping them up. And of course, with Venezuela
Speaker 2: essentially having been blockaded and now with the oil being
Speaker 2: taken over by the United States, one assumes that that
Speaker 2: has been cut off, and it would be cut off
Speaker 2: from Mexico if the Americans demanded it. So I think
Speaker 2: it's a question of you know, the how and the when,
Speaker 2: as opposed to the weather. I can't see Trump in
Speaker 2: office for four years with Rubio as Secretary of State
Speaker 2: having taken out Maduro, allowing the Cuban regime to persist
Speaker 2: that that does not seem likely to me.
Speaker 1: And I had a friend of mine just tell me
Speaker 1: that the that the constituency that he is becoming enamored
Speaker 1: with the most are the living Bay of Pigs guys
Speaker 1: that have become a staple at mar A Lago. Now,
Speaker 1: part of that, I've always said, I think part of
Speaker 1: you know, Trump is Trump has been inaugurated as a
Speaker 1: real South Floridian at mar A Lago over the last
Speaker 1: seven years. And I don't think people understand the extent
Speaker 1: of Marco Rubio's education of Donald Trump in the world
Speaker 1: of the exile politics, and that now he is, you know,
Speaker 1: he's on a first Dame basis with all those surviving
Speaker 1: Bay of Pigs guys. And I'm with you one hundred
Speaker 1: thousand percent. He he sees that as a legacy opportunity
Speaker 1: in Cuba, looks weak enough to make it not that hard,
Speaker 1: although these things always are harder than they love.
Speaker 2: I mean, this does not mean to me that Rubio
Speaker 2: is the slam dunk for twenty twenty eight or anything.
Speaker 2: But I just I can't see once you've embraced the
Speaker 2: Donroe Doctrine as your priority region, and it's not just Trump.
Speaker 2: The National Security Strategy Document in December, you know, sort
Speaker 2: of anticipated all of this before the Venezuela operations. I
Speaker 2: don't see how you leave Cuba alone.
Speaker 1: So let me throw a question that I got the
Speaker 1: other day and I didn't have a great answer for it,
Speaker 1: which is Haiti. You know, for all of the tumult
Speaker 1: in our hemisphere, that's one place that Trump doesn't want
Speaker 1: anything to do with.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: The person asked the question, if there were more resources
Speaker 1: that were important to us on the island of Hispaniola,
Speaker 1: would we be more engaged with what's happening on the
Speaker 1: Haitian side of the mountain. You know, look in fairness
Speaker 1: to Trump, you know, a lot of presidents haven't been
Speaker 1: able to figure out the Haitian problem.
Speaker 2: Yeah they're not. I mean, it's massive gang violence, it's
Speaker 2: massive human predation.
Speaker 1: Are we still outsourcing this to the Kenyans and hoping
Speaker 1: they can prevent?
Speaker 2: I mean, they're they're the peacekeepers on the ground. There's
Speaker 2: been some American money, some Canadian money, and some policing,
Speaker 2: but support and training, But the United States, this being
Speaker 2: right in America's backyard and Biden administration has done nothing
Speaker 2: on it. Trump administration has done nothing on it. I
Speaker 2: mean of course that the top concern is making sure
Speaker 2: that Haitians can't make it to the US and sending
Speaker 2: them back when they do. But aside from that, there's
Speaker 2: a big not our problem. And you would you one
Speaker 2: would think this would be more important in the context
Speaker 2: of the Donro doctrine.
Speaker 1: I was just gonna say, if you believe it right now,
Speaker 1: As as a South Floridian, I can tell you the
Speaker 1: Haitians don't have the political power that the Cubans do,
Speaker 1: not even close. And you know, they don't have.
Speaker 2: The business community. They're not in they're not the mara
Speaker 2: Alago members and.
Speaker 1: The Refever, if they could get into mar A Lago,
Speaker 1: perhaps people there are supposed to be elections in Haiti.
Speaker 1: The likelihood that happens this year.
Speaker 2: Seems close to zero.
Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, Greenland, I'm staying geographic here, stay in
Speaker 1: a geographics stay in the hemisphere or the edge of
Speaker 1: the what is Greenland western hemisphere or not? No, no, but.
Speaker 2: It is now. It is now. That is the point.
Speaker 1: What what's the you've got to people will pay you.
Speaker 1: And I say this not in some sort of meaning
Speaker 1: like you're a you're a consulting company, and you know
Speaker 1: you're you're there to help people, Like, what's the most
Speaker 1: likely scenario here? So what's the most likely scenario of
Speaker 1: Greenland's relationship to the United States? January twentieth, twenty twenty nine.
Speaker 2: So the the likelihood of an actual US military invasion
Speaker 2: to hate Greenland strikes me as staggeringly low. That would
Speaker 2: that would end NATO. It would be incredibly believe, right,
Speaker 2: and it was incredibly unpopular in the United States. It
Speaker 2: would also be incredibly unpopular in Greenland, frankly, and you know,
Speaker 2: why would you want to deal with that? Right? But
Speaker 2: but you know, that's like saying, what's the likelihood of
Speaker 2: the Russians sending tanks into the Baltics? That's not the
Speaker 2: way they get what they want, right, They use all
Speaker 2: sorts of asymmetric warfare, and the Americans would have a
Speaker 2: lot more carrots to use, because look, what they want
Speaker 2: is to come up with a plan that Trump will
Speaker 2: approve that has you know, an information campaign and all
Speaker 2: sorts of money being thrown at them and coercion that
Speaker 2: would get the Greenlanders to want to have a referendum
Speaker 2: to leave Denmark and join the United States. Now, what
Speaker 2: is the likelihood that such a thing could be successful.
Speaker 2: We have no idea if it was, you know, held today,
Speaker 2: it would you know, get defeated very very soundly.
Speaker 1: But we have only fifty seven thousand constituents to buy off,
Speaker 1: not that many, right, you might buy them off. And
Speaker 1: it sounds like Trump thinks there's a chance to buy
Speaker 1: him off.
Speaker 2: Sure, sure he does. And he also loves the idea
Speaker 2: of painting that island, you know, Trump Landia. I mean,
Speaker 2: he's his entire life is about putting his name on stuff,
Speaker 2: and whether it was buildings in the on the Upper
Speaker 2: West Side that he doesn't own, or whether it's the
Speaker 2: Kennedy Center or whether it's Greenland. Now, now, you know,
Speaker 2: if you talk to the people in the national security
Speaker 2: space in the Trump administration, most of them will say,
Speaker 2: you can get a lot of what you need, and
Speaker 2: there are real security concerns by negotiating with Denmark and
Speaker 2: green then, but not everything. And so there is there
Speaker 2: is a little bit of a real argument here, and
Speaker 2: of course it's being developed because Trump is telling them
Speaker 2: to So for example, sure, you know, what is.
Speaker 1: That I was just going to say, what's the real
Speaker 1: because this is not He's not the first president that
Speaker 1: is one of this. There's I think we all see
Speaker 1: the strategic uh need potentially and obviously with with thanks
Speaker 1: to climate change, the Arctics is going to be a
Speaker 1: battleground for resources and all sorts of things. So I
Speaker 1: you know, the strategic need is there. But but what
Speaker 1: is it that we couldn't get from a treaty?
Speaker 2: So, I mean a few things. One the argument would
Speaker 2: be that in particular, if it comes to stationing offensive weapons,
Speaker 2: as the Russians and and even the Chinese become more assertive,
Speaker 2: aggressive and present in the area, that's something that the
Speaker 2: Greenlanders under Danish rule and with their own autonomy, would
Speaker 2: would not want that. That also be slower pro bureaucratically
Speaker 2: of getting agreements to allow you even to have defensive
Speaker 2: and intelligence. We don't have NAT outposts there now, Yeah,
Speaker 2: that is one outpost there with like one hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty people there in the Cold War, of course is
Speaker 2: more like fifteen thousands, So I mean it would be
Speaker 2: very easy to ramp it up. But there are real,
Speaker 2: albeit small and I think manageable, but still issues. And
Speaker 2: there's another issue which is kind of more existential, and
Speaker 2: it's a cute argument to use, but I get it,
Speaker 2: which is that, well, you know, how much would the
Speaker 2: Russians or Chinese believe the Americans would defend the territory
Speaker 2: of an ally as opposed to territory that belongs to themselves,
Speaker 2: and especially given that Trump is undermining the belief in
Speaker 2: US led collective security. Like you've got the Baltics that
Speaker 2: aren't convinced that America would necessarily go to bad for
Speaker 2: them if need be. So if Greenland is still a
Speaker 2: part of Denmark, well, yeah it's NATO, but would America
Speaker 2: really defend it. Where if it's America, you know they'll
Speaker 2: defend it as America. It's a weird argument because, of course,
Speaker 2: again Trump is undermining it himself. But I do kind
Speaker 2: of understand the existential logic having said all of those things, Chuck,
Speaker 2: I don't want to give the audience the wrong idea. Overwhelmingly,
Speaker 2: this is Trump deciding I have to have my name
Speaker 2: on this thing. This is a legacy issue for me.
Speaker 2: Is the most consequential American president in history. It's not
Speaker 2: like he cared about it on his first term, and
Speaker 2: those issues were all present during his first term.
Speaker 1: Right, is there a price that the Danes would say, well,
Speaker 1: we can't say no to that.
Speaker 2: This is not only panicking the Danes and the Nordics,
Speaker 2: but it's making them incredibly angry, like with Canada and
Speaker 2: unlike with Latin Americas.
Speaker 1: So it's a boomerang. It's an anti Americanism is.
Speaker 2: Causing permanent damage to the US relationship with Europe, permanent damage.
Speaker 2: The Americans throwing the Ukrainians under the bus on many instances,
Speaker 2: and the Europeans coming back and also paying for it themselves.
Speaker 2: The Americans promoting eurosceptic parties, including in Germany the AfD,
Speaker 2: which many Germans consider to be a neo Nazi party,
Speaker 2: the Greenland issue. There are so many instances where the
Speaker 2: Europeans today consider the Americans fundamentally unreliable. And I think
Speaker 2: this is going to cause permanent damage to the.
Speaker 1: Relationship it already had. I mean, yeah, there's no coming
Speaker 1: I mean and that, and I'm gonna save this to
Speaker 1: the end. But it's sort of like, it doesn't sound
Speaker 1: like a change of administrations just flips a switch.
Speaker 2: This time, not this time, not this time.
Speaker 1: All right, let's move to Iran. You know, I know
Speaker 1: that a regime falls. It's like the definition of bankruptcy
Speaker 1: first it's slowly, then it's quickly, right like we knew
Speaker 1: Syria would fall, We knew a Sod would fall, we
Speaker 1: just don't know when. And all of a sudden one day,
Speaker 1: Oh my god, as Sod's gone. Right, he's in Russia.
Speaker 1: It's over. And I have a feeling it's like this.
Speaker 1: I was in Abu Dhabi about a month ago. It's
Speaker 1: a huge Iranian diaspora there, and the optimism that the
Speaker 1: regime is going to fall was through the roof then,
Speaker 1: and this was pre protests. Do you think this regime
Speaker 1: last the calendar year?
Speaker 2: I would love to say that it does it. I'd
Speaker 2: love to see the back of this regime so incredibly
Speaker 2: repressive of its own people and exporting so much instability
Speaker 2: with bad actors around the region. Hamas has the Lah others.
Speaker 2: But it feels to me like they still have very
Speaker 2: significant capacity to repress, and I haven't yet seen cracks
Speaker 2: inside the regime itself. The Supreme Leader is incredibly old.
Speaker 2: He's mid eighties. I think he's like eighty six now.
Speaker 2: He's quite he's quite frail, he's ailing, he's had it
Speaker 2: seems like he's had cancer that he's dealing with but
Speaker 2: he's hand selected all of the top security officials, and
Speaker 2: they don't seem to be in any way backing away
Speaker 2: from him. We've seen no climb down. Despite American pressure
Speaker 2: for the IRGC, the Islamic revolution of Guard Core and
Speaker 2: the besiege the paramilitary group under them that does the
Speaker 2: head knocking and the shooting, we've seen no willingness of
Speaker 2: them to say no to orders or back away. The
Speaker 2: repression has been very extensive. And that's that's included technical
Speaker 2: press in terms of you know, shutting down electricity, shutting
Speaker 2: down the internet, and the rest and enforcements across the
Speaker 2: country despite very different regional you know makeups, ethnic makeup,
Speaker 2: and the rest in different parts of irun So and
Speaker 2: the United States, as much as Trump has said, you know,
Speaker 2: you better behavior else We're going to hit you. So far,
Speaker 2: the plans for what the US might do seem to
Speaker 2: be pretty pinpoint and symbolically, I mean, I expect at
Speaker 2: some point actually some military strikes for the US.
Speaker 1: What would that look like and what could be effective?
Speaker 2: Oh well, what it would look like and what could
Speaker 2: be effective or two different things. So one what it
Speaker 2: would look like. I mean, right now, it looks like
Speaker 2: it's going to be the US going after the police,
Speaker 2: the US going after the paramilitary forces directly, not taking
Speaker 2: out the supreme leader. I'd like to see them be
Speaker 2: a little more creative than that. You know, for exams sample,
Speaker 2: you have all of these judges that are serving the
Speaker 2: regime and are handing down sentences without any evidence, no
Speaker 2: rule of law, innocent people that are being sentenced to
Speaker 2: horrible jails, time or death, and those judges have never
Speaker 2: been targeted, and frankly they should be. They are instruments
Speaker 2: of terror in the Iranian regime. You know, the Israelis
Speaker 2: have targeted nuclear scientists. No one's after gone after the
Speaker 2: people that are actually sending civilians to their death. That
Speaker 2: strikes me is you know, you go after them, you
Speaker 2: go after some of these softer points that allow a
Speaker 2: dictatorship of theocracy to unleash terror within the country. Maybe
Speaker 2: you start to unravel it a little bit. But again,
Speaker 2: if if you were asking me to make a bet,
Speaker 2: are they gone, Are they gone in five years, Yeah,
Speaker 2: they're gone in three years probably? Are they gone in
Speaker 2: like six months? That's a harder call for me. Right
Speaker 2: now doesn't feel imminent, especially because on the ground I mean,
Speaker 2: there's a lot of support inside Iran for Razapaalabi, who's
Speaker 2: the one that's saying I want you all out there demonstrating,
Speaker 2: but there's no real organization of an opposition movement inside
Speaker 2: Iran itself.
Speaker 1: Having good life insurance is incredibly important. I know from
Speaker 1: personal experience. I was sixteen when my father passed away.
Speaker 1: We didn't have any money. He didn't leave us in
Speaker 1: the best shape. My mother single mother, now widow. Myself
Speaker 1: sixteen trying to figure out how am I going to
Speaker 1: pay for college and lo and behold. My dad had
Speaker 1: one life insurance policy that we found. It wasn't a lot,
Speaker 1: but it was important at the time, and it's why
Speaker 1: I was able to go to college. Little did he
Speaker 1: know how important that would be in that moment. Well,
Speaker 1: guess what. That's why I am here to tell you
Speaker 1: about Ethos Life. They can provide you with peace of
Speaker 1: mind knowing your family is protected even if the worst
Speaker 1: comes to pass. Ethos is an online platform that makes
Speaker 1: getting life insurance fast and easy, all designed to protect
Speaker 1: your family's future in minutes, not months. There's no complicated process,
Speaker 1: and it's one hundred percent online. There's no medical exam
Speaker 1: require you just answer a few health questions online. You
Speaker 1: can get a quote in as little as ten minutes,
Speaker 1: and you can get same day coverage without ever leaving
Speaker 1: your home. You can get up to three million dollars
Speaker 1: in coverage, and some policies start as low as two
Speaker 1: dollars a day that would be billed monthly. As of
Speaker 1: March twenty twenty five, Business Insider named Ethos the number
Speaker 1: one no medical exam instant life insurance provider. So protect
Speaker 1: your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get your free
Speaker 1: quote at ethos dot com slash chuck. So again, that's
Speaker 1: Ethos dot com slash chuck. Location times may vary, and
Speaker 1: the rates themselves may vary as well, but trust me,
Speaker 1: life insurance is something you should really think about, especially
Speaker 1: if you've got a growing family. Somebody indicated to me
Speaker 1: that they thought the president was quietly. Somebody said it
Speaker 1: sort of so that the president sort of is prepared to
Speaker 1: become the Gorbacheff of Iran, and I thought, I'll believe
Speaker 1: it when I say it.
Speaker 2: I mean, he's weak. He is more of a centrist
Speaker 2: in the Iranian context than was expected when those presidential
Speaker 2: elections occurred. But I mean, he is seen as a
Speaker 2: failed figure. The economy has utterly collapsed under his rule.
Speaker 2: He engaged in a.
Speaker 1: Whole pultable water in Tehran right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they've got a massive water crisis in the capitol
Speaker 2: and he he was supporting behind the scenes talks with
Speaker 2: the Americans, and that's happening again through Oman and they're
Speaker 2: good offices, but the Supreme Leader has stopped anything from happening.
Speaker 2: So I don't know that the president possession would be
Speaker 2: useful in really driving a different outcome.
Speaker 1: Are we stretched a little thin right now with Venezuela,
Speaker 1: with what we're doing in Syria, with what to douce
Speaker 1: more in Iran? Would are we prepared if we wanted
Speaker 1: to do something, could we do it immediately? Or do
Speaker 1: we actually have a little bit because of this Venezuela exercise.
Speaker 2: The B two's are all been you know, they're all
Speaker 2: repositioned Diego Garcia. There's massive amount of firepower and readiness
Speaker 2: to engage in those strikes. If that's what you do.
Speaker 2: You could also send them from like Montana if you
Speaker 2: really needed to, right we did Americans have that capacity Again,
Speaker 2: if you're not talking about boots on the ground and
Speaker 2: actual regime change with an ability to execute on it.
Speaker 2: The limitations of the US military suddenly how much much less.
Speaker 1: So I don't want to like get ahead of ourselves,
Speaker 1: But what would this mean for a rock.
Speaker 2: It would mean that a significant constraint on their government
Speaker 2: and the lever that has prevented them from working more
Speaker 2: effectively with the big powers in the region would be gone.
Speaker 2: And I think that that would be a useful thing
Speaker 2: for a Rocky economic.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, you paid a picture. It's like God,
Speaker 1: you know, if a run, if this regime went away,
Speaker 1: maybe Syria could thrive, Maybe Lebanon could thrive, Maybe I
Speaker 1: Rock could thrive. Right like feels like it's steady. I mean,
Speaker 1: are we're being too optimistic about what would happen after
Speaker 1: the fall of this regime.
Speaker 2: Well, we've seen that Saudi Arabia, you know, which we've
Speaker 2: thought of as a twenty years ago, even ten years ago,
Speaker 2: as an enormously conservative and pretty repressive monarchy, and today
Speaker 2: I mean truly revolutionary in the positive sense, for young people,
Speaker 2: for women participating in the economy, for tourism becoming a
Speaker 2: real part of GDP tourism in Saudi Arabia, like no
Speaker 2: one was talking about that ten years ago, and now
Speaker 2: it's increasingly becoming a world class destination.
Speaker 1: Still probably go to Abu Dhabi or Dubai before ryadd
Speaker 1: but still you know, go for it.
Speaker 2: But Alula is now becoming a world class must do destination,
Speaker 2: which is in Saudi Arabia, and if you haven't heard
Speaker 2: of it yet, you will within another year or two.
Speaker 2: So definitely they're putting real effort into that. And yeah,
Speaker 2: it's going to be for tourists in the region first,
Speaker 2: but then it's going to be from all over the world.
Speaker 2: So you know, I think that don't underestimate what energy,
Speaker 2: wealth and some technocrats can accomplish given level of control.
Speaker 2: And of course what you have in Saudi Arabia and
Speaker 2: the Emirates in particular, I mean cut it is tiny,
Speaker 2: but you have, you know, very strong centralized control and
Speaker 2: all you need is the ability to support a reform process,
Speaker 2: which they didn't have before. The Emiratis went first, and
Speaker 2: now the Saudis are fast following.
Speaker 1: Maybe Nan Yahoo. You know, it's interesting. I remember there's
Speaker 1: a poll right before the ceasefire which said as soon
Speaker 1: as there's a ceasefire, sixty percent of Israelis wanted him out.
Speaker 1: I don't see a path for him to be out
Speaker 1: anytime soon. But what's your sense.
Speaker 2: I think that it's going to be a very close
Speaker 2: run election. Israel is a fragmented multi party system where
Speaker 2: coalition building is extremely hard and also very opaque until
Speaker 2: after you have the votes in. We could easily He's
Speaker 2: an incredibly talented tactician in election math and management. He's
Speaker 2: also very charismatic and being able to convince people that
Speaker 2: he can give them the world and that others along that. So,
Speaker 2: I mean, it's really hard to count him out. But
Speaker 2: he could absolutely not be a part of the next
Speaker 2: government in Israel. I think that that is that is
Speaker 2: plausible as we look, are plausible this time than there
Speaker 2: has been in quite some time, probably, And and you know,
Speaker 2: the fact is that normalization with Saudi Arabia, once BB
Speaker 2: is gone is absolutely on the table. Then you can
Speaker 2: move ahead with Phase two, which BB opposes, but which
Speaker 2: you know you could actually move on.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: The Israelis don't support a Palestinian state anymore, there is
Speaker 2: no there's no support for that in the population as
Speaker 2: a whole, but there is support for I think among
Speaker 2: the majority of the population for the peace plan that
Speaker 2: actually passed the Security Council, the American peace Plan that
Speaker 2: past the Security count This, this is probably the most
Speaker 2: improbable foreign policy win by the United States in the
Speaker 2: first year of Trump, because the US went from being
Speaker 2: completely isolated by pretty much everyone for supporting a war
Speaker 2: that was considered ethnic cleansing by the vast majority of
Speaker 2: the world's governments and populations, with massive humanitarian damage and
Speaker 2: tens of thousands of Palestinians killed kids, right, all huge
Speaker 2: humanitarian outrage. And then suddenly Trump got all the countries
Speaker 2: in the region together and during the United Nations and
Speaker 2: said We're going to make a ceasefire happen. And everyone
Speaker 2: passes it in the Security Council except the Russians and
Speaker 2: Chinese who abstain.
Speaker 1: You know, it's fascinating about Trump with this. I've said this.
Speaker 1: You know, he's the last person you'd want to negotiate
Speaker 1: with Europe, but he might be the only person you
Speaker 1: want negotiating in the Middle East. In a weird way,
Speaker 1: his style, his transactional nature. Look, I don't think he
Speaker 1: cares about BB, and BB's gonna find this out. And
Speaker 1: but in a weird way, he speaks the same language,
Speaker 1: and and he's it works there. It doesn't work in
Speaker 1: a lot of other.
Speaker 2: Parts of the world, but he's so popular there. Weirdly
Speaker 2: went to the Kanesset and spoke there. I mean, the
Speaker 2: ovations that he was getting popular from the not it's
Speaker 2: not even close. I mean, he's unpopular, and rightfully so.
Speaker 2: But Trump is wildly popular, very popular across because he's
Speaker 2: delivered for them. He's the one that moved the American
Speaker 2: embassy to Jerusalem after so many presidents Democrat Republican promised
Speaker 2: and then didn't deliver. He's the one that recognized the
Speaker 2: goal on Heights as part of Israel, which another president,
Speaker 2: other presidents wouldn't do. So he has delivered for the israelis.
Speaker 1: No, which is why he he alone, might be the
Speaker 1: person which may in its own way, why the world.
Speaker 2: Sort OF's like, Okay, you can get this done, go
Speaker 2: do it right. Yeah, Being clearly he was more more
Speaker 2: capable of pressuring Israel when he felt like it, and
Speaker 2: he did.
Speaker 1: This to China.
Speaker 2: Will this be like that kind of foreign policy victory
Speaker 2: in his legacy not? I think not. If if bb wins,
Speaker 2: if he's he's part of the coalition because I think
Speaker 2: that again, what Trump really wants is the Saudi normalization,
Speaker 2: and I's gone, you can't do that until you end
Speaker 2: the Israeli occupation of guys that you create some reconstruction.
Speaker 2: I don't think it has to be a state, but
Speaker 2: there has to be some kind of self governance with
Speaker 2: security provided by outsiders but not Israel, and that just
Speaker 2: I don't think that can happen as long as BB
Speaker 2: is there. And let's also keep in mind that the
Speaker 2: settlements in the West Bank are expanding and BB's far
Speaker 2: right allies are pushing that and not Yahoo is supporting it.
Speaker 1: Yep. I don't know how you unwind that.
Speaker 2: So that I think that that those are facts on the.
Speaker 1: Ground, and I don't know it's a I've been in
Speaker 1: plenty of conversations with a certain monarch who touches that
Speaker 1: West Bank. I mean some things, the toothpastes out of
Speaker 1: the tube.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, I mean, how many millions of Palestinians are
Speaker 2: living in Jordan now and the right of return, Yeah,
Speaker 2: that is never happening. Remember there was a deal that
Speaker 2: Jared Broker that got you before the Abraham Accords, that
Speaker 2: I mean was a lot less territory for the Palestinians
Speaker 2: than they would have had with the previous Camp David accords.
Speaker 2: And yet you know was couldn't get done, non starter
Speaker 2: for the Palestinians, and still reflected much more than they
Speaker 2: have now. And that's the problems, the power asymmetries between
Speaker 2: the Palestinians and the Israelis, and between the entire axis
Speaker 2: of resistance in the Israelis, including Iran and the Israelis.
Speaker 2: The Israelis have the military capabilities and the wherewithal.
Speaker 1: No they're going to be able to dictate the terms
Speaker 1: of the surrender.
Speaker 2: It's funny. Ant Yahoo just came out today, I don't
Speaker 2: know if you saw that and said he really wants
Speaker 2: to end the Israeli reliance on all of the American
Speaker 2: foreign aid in the next ten years. He doesn't want
Speaker 2: any more defense support. He wants the belief and the
Speaker 2: support of the American people the American government, but he
Speaker 2: doesn't want the money. I mean, I will believe that
Speaker 2: when it happens. But it's interesting because he understands that
Speaker 2: the relying on the American taxpayers has been such an
Speaker 2: incredible populous push in the US, and the US has
Speaker 2: ended that for you know, almost.
Speaker 1: Everybody else around them phebe if BB Well, nobody's done
Speaker 1: more damage Daser's reputation in the United States than Bbnanya
Speaker 1: left and right for we can say some of it.
Speaker 1: He's on him for sure. Whatever it is, he has
Speaker 1: not helped the situation, particularly in.
Speaker 2: His very divisive figure.
Speaker 1: Yeah, particularly, and I think how he handled let's move
Speaker 1: to Ukraine. Yeah, it feels as if, let me ask you,
Speaker 1: this is Trump going to be fine if the Europeans
Speaker 1: take the lead in helping the Ukrainians. And does he
Speaker 1: just sort of has he given up on Putin? Because
Speaker 1: I get the sense he's thinking about giving up on Putin.
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, but you probably would have had that
Speaker 2: sense occasionally on several occasions over the last six months. Right,
Speaker 2: He's he's kind of moved in that direction, and then
Speaker 2: he backs off. He does ready to hit the Ukrainians
Speaker 2: again because they're weak and see if you can get
Speaker 2: more out of them. He wants to end the war.
Speaker 2: He's failed to end the war. It's mostly because the
Speaker 2: Russians are giving him nothing. He's put a little bit
Speaker 2: of pressure on Russia, but far more pressure on the Ukrainians.
Speaker 2: But the interesting thing is that the Europeans are now
Speaker 2: spending all the money. So for Trump to cut off Ukraine, well,
Speaker 2: that would have to tell the America can military industrial complex,
Speaker 2: you are no longer allowed to sell weapons to the Europeans.
Speaker 1: Well wait a minute, but intelligence sharing, intelligence sharing still happening, right, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: But I mean if that were cut off, that would
Speaker 1: be a big deal.
Speaker 2: Not as small it would it would absolutely it is
Speaker 2: less of a complete game changer than having the ammunition
Speaker 2: and having the missiles and all the rest. But the
Speaker 2: reality is that the United States is going to continue
Speaker 2: to provide those weapons. They're going to continue to allow
Speaker 2: the Europeans to buy them and transfer them to Ukraine,
Speaker 2: and that allows the Ukrainians to continue to fight. And
Speaker 2: that's a pretty big deal. So the Americans are going
Speaker 2: to continue to be complicit, fully complicit in Ukraine's defense,
Speaker 2: and as long as that is true, you can't really
Speaker 2: have a US Russia deal. So Trump has kind of
Speaker 2: been cut off by the Europeans. The Europeans have bought
Speaker 2: themselves a seat at the table. They bought themselves a
Speaker 2: veto on Trump's ability to drive full capitulation of the Ukrainians,
Speaker 2: and that forces Trump to squeeze the Russians a little
Speaker 2: bit more if he wants to try to get a ceasefire,
Speaker 2: like he has on telling the Indians to stop buying
Speaker 2: Russian oil or else there won't be a US India
Speaker 2: trade deal. And Mukesh Ambani in reliance just stopped buying
Speaker 2: Russian crude in the last few weeks for example. So
Speaker 2: it's it's meaningful, it's it's causing some some pain to
Speaker 2: the Russians.
Speaker 1: What's some you know, we've we've there's been a lot
Speaker 1: of speculation that that that the longer this war goes,
Speaker 1: that eventually it would create internal descent in Russia. In Russia,
Speaker 1: you know, you hear anecdotal we'll see a report here
Speaker 1: or there. One would assume that now more people know
Speaker 1: somebody killed in this war than they did yesterday, day
Speaker 1: and the day before, et cetera. Yeah, what's your sense
Speaker 1: in your sources of sort of of of the level
Speaker 1: of discouragement in the Russian populace over this war not.
Speaker 2: Seeing anything meaningful. I mean, we've seen a couple of
Speaker 2: saw one former general that came out publicly and talked
Speaker 2: about what a kind of disaster this was. The sort
Speaker 2: of thing that you hear some people say internally but
Speaker 2: never publicly. That was a little surprising some of the
Speaker 2: bloggers who are quite patriotic talking about the fact that
Speaker 2: the Russian military is not performing as well as it
Speaker 2: should for examples a little that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's sometimes more criticism from his right, you haven't
Speaker 1: been strong enough, you haven't been aggressive enough.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, but within the population not so much. Now
Speaker 2: the economy I think less about the Russians that are
Speaker 2: getting killed, although there are a lot of them. They're
Speaker 2: not from Moscow, they're not from Petersburg. They're from you know,
Speaker 2: sort of areas that are going to cause much less trouble,
Speaker 2: and they're prisoners.
Speaker 1: That's that was obviously done on purpose, right, he doesn't
Speaker 1: want people at Moscow or Saint Petersburg to get first
Speaker 1: time glimpses of But I do.
Speaker 2: Think the Russian economy is starting to take more of
Speaker 2: a hit as a consequence of low oil prices and
Speaker 2: the squeeze from all of these sanctions, especially the energy sanctions.
Speaker 2: So it does. I do think it matters, But I
Speaker 2: also think that ultimately the Ukrainians are having a harder
Speaker 2: time of it in terms of maintaining this level of fighting,
Speaker 2: and I think that the Europeans are having a harder
Speaker 2: time if we look over the next two three years,
Speaker 2: the fact that everything you've asked me about Greenland, everything
Speaker 2: we've talked about America squeezing the Europeans as well. If
Speaker 2: you're Putin, if I'm advising Putin, I'm telling him double
Speaker 2: down on pressure in Europe because you concause maybe your
Speaker 2: big crag, Yeah, you might be able to crack.
Speaker 1: Well, that's an interesting is there? Who of our By the.
Speaker 2: Way, I'm sorry, but I've got I'm going to have
Speaker 2: to go in like four minutes.
Speaker 1: Just okay, all right, let me get you out of here.
Speaker 1: On two questions. Question one is this, who's the most
Speaker 1: secure leader in Europe right now? In the sort of
Speaker 1: the western part of your you know, the sort of
Speaker 1: the G seven allies?
Speaker 2: The most secure? I mean in the Italian Maloney is
Speaker 2: probably the most popular among the major economies right now,
Speaker 2: and France seems like it's a mess. Italian governments used
Speaker 2: to fall apart every few months.
Speaker 1: Right now, that's that the French National Assembly says, hey,
Speaker 1: we hold our champagne, We'll do this now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean the Macron's not going anywhere because the
Speaker 2: general elections are twenty twenty seven. Everyone's going to wait
Speaker 2: for that. But they've been you know, governments that they've had,
Speaker 2: like multiple prime ministers that mess. Yeah, yeah, I mean
Speaker 2: Germany is I guess you'd say Germany is more stable
Speaker 2: because you know, grand coalition multi party system. Understand they
Speaker 2: benefit from the EU, and yet the parties in that
Speaker 2: system disagree on so much that it's become very dysfunctional.
Speaker 2: And as the German economy continues to underperform, the AfD
Speaker 2: on the right and dur Linka on the left continue
Speaker 2: to do quite well. This year they're going to be
Speaker 2: five state elections in Germany. I expect the far right
Speaker 2: is going to do very well. So, I mean, there's
Speaker 2: no great answer for that question, is what I'm telling you.
Speaker 1: All right, And one year from now is going to
Speaker 1: be twenty twenty seven, and.
Speaker 2: The Greece is probably the country that's doing the best
Speaker 2: because they've had post Grexit, they've had great, great, strong government.
Speaker 1: It's fascinating to see the southern European countries have an
Speaker 1: economic boom after having such a disaster and have to
Speaker 1: be built out by the Germans. Yeah, back in that
Speaker 1: long ago, very quickly. Next year is supposed to be
Speaker 1: the year that China takes Taiwan. Where are we at?
Speaker 1: What is your expectation and do you expect Donald Trump
Speaker 1: to stand in the way.
Speaker 2: I think that the Chinese and the Americans have both
Speaker 2: understand that a level of stabilization of that relationship is
Speaker 2: good for them after the big fights that they had
Speaker 2: on tariffs and export controls and licensing last year. And
Speaker 2: I think that means that Chinese understand that an invasion
Speaker 2: of Taiwan would be really, really bad. If Americans are
Speaker 2: screwing up in so many areas long term, don't get
Speaker 2: in their way and you know, make hay in other places.
Speaker 2: So I could see the Chinese testing Taiwan on certain
Speaker 2: issues like bigger exercises and maybe a coastguard boarding a ship,
Speaker 2: you know sort of thing, maybe some political and economic pressure,
Speaker 2: but not that's very different from an invasion. Nothing that
Speaker 2: would be an action enforcing event or an embarrassment for
Speaker 2: the US administration.
Speaker 1: But if we're embracing sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere,
Speaker 1: how is that? How does Beijing not see that as
Speaker 1: a right?
Speaker 2: I mean we're on the one hand, we are. On
Speaker 2: the one hand, the Western Hemisphere is not the limit
Speaker 2: of American ambitions in the world. It is a prioritization.
Speaker 2: On the other hand, American military dominance in the Western
Speaker 2: Hemisphere does not relate easily with Chinese commercial dominance with
Speaker 2: most of the countries outside of the US and Canada
Speaker 2: and Mexico, and that's not going to change anytime soon.
Speaker 2: So I think the sphere of influence argument is overstated.
Speaker 1: Ian bremer Man, I always appreciate this steward to force that.
Speaker 2: Thanks a lot of fun to do. Let me do.
Speaker 1: I love traveling the world with you. Who knows someday
Speaker 1: we met actually do it in person. Good luck in Davos.
Speaker 1: It'd be a lot of my fun on jeeus. The
Speaker 1: fact that Trump goes to Davos is that clearly that
Speaker 1: an American president goes.
Speaker 2: Oh well, I mean the sense that the Americans are
Speaker 2: going to be meeting with so many different leaders around
Speaker 2: the world. The communication is good, but if you watch
Speaker 2: how the how the heads of state and how the
Speaker 2: CEOs comport themselves publicly with him, it is very different
Speaker 2: from the way they talk privately. And that is a
Speaker 2: big part of the problem.
Speaker 1: Oh well, that's why we have you and your tremendous
Speaker 1: newsletter that is available for free. Even it's it's tremendous
Speaker 1: G zero. Uh and boy you have said we live
Speaker 1: in a G zero world. Yeah, well we're there now. Congrats,
Speaker 1: now we are there now.
Speaker 2: Thanks Chuck, good brother.