0:00
And I've been saying recently that the
0:02
war is going to be moving fronts and
0:04
it's going to become more I don't know
0:05
if we did we talk about it yesterday how
0:07
I believe it's going to become more of a
0:09
>> I think you mentioned it either to me or
0:12
I watch your show so I I think I've
0:14
heard you say it but just you know
0:15
everyone should go and see what I was
0:18
saying back in March 9th. I was saying
0:21
that Somali land and you know there was
0:23
the the that side that kind of red sea
0:26
area was going to pop next. And uh I
0:29
think that's accurate. Yes, we did talk
0:32
about it. Actually, we did talk about it
0:34
because we were talking about proxy
0:35
escalation. So yeah, we did talk about
0:38
>> Everyone should go also see what I said
0:40
in in February 2nd, 1996.
0:44
I said there's going to be more
0:45
instability in the region. Everyone
0:47
should go check that out. Well, you
0:48
would have been you would have been a a
0:50
prophet if you had said that because
0:52
back then back then 96 those were good
0:56
times, man, for everybody for the most
0:58
>> Not not the Middle East, man.
0:59
>> Not in the Well, yeah, but you know,
1:01
it's all relative in the Middle East.
1:02
>> Better than True. True. Better than now.
1:04
Well, let's talk. I know China is an
1:06
area I understand really well. And the
1:07
Guardian put out a really interesting
1:09
piece today. I just got a summary of it
1:11
here. Um so the guiding reports uh on an
1:15
on an Asian group analysis uh that says
1:17
that China emerged as the biggest
1:20
strategic winner from the or in Asia at
1:23
least from the US Israeli war against
1:26
Iran. Uh number one, China weathered the
1:28
energy shock better than expected thanks
1:30
to large strategic oil reserves and
1:32
years of investment in renewable energy
1:34
making it less vulnerable than many
1:37
Asian economies. Before we go, there's
1:38
four points in there. Before we go to
1:40
the second one, pretty clear, and you've
1:42
talked about this already, that China
1:44
was really wellprepared for this, wasn't
1:46
>> Yeah. In fact, like I I think I said it
1:48
to you or Tucker in the last two weeks,
1:50
China really, it looked to me and
1:52
sounded like their leaders were using
1:55
this war as a proof of concept to see if
1:58
they could really weather a real
2:01
geopolitical crisis involving the United
2:04
States. and they just proved they could
2:07
uh they proved to the world that not
2:09
only could they but they actually come
2:11
out looking much better. You'll remember
2:13
also by the way this is not the first
2:15
time China has been in the middle of a
2:18
major major crisis and they've actually
2:21
come out ahead co which of course
2:24
originated in China and I know there's
2:26
some argument about the real origins but
2:28
physically it came out of China whatever
2:30
the origins were I think it was man-made
2:33
um but it came out of China and the
2:35
Chinese actually if you look at the
2:38
first quarter after COVID when
2:40
everything started to reopen
2:42
China's GDP actually did better than the
2:45
West and you know they were ground zero
2:47
of it and it's because the Chinese were
2:49
able to prepare and they were able to
2:52
weather the storm better uh than we and
2:55
the West were and here again now you see
2:58
this playing out with the Iran war.
3:00
Everybody assumed that the United States
3:03
and the West were going to come out
3:04
ahead because China is so dependent on
3:08
Middle East oil and Iranian energy in
3:10
particular. That has not proven to be
3:13
true as we're now seeing the United
3:15
States is the one that's now over a
3:17
barrel. Uh you know, we're all waiting
3:20
for the the bottom to fall out because
3:22
we're so exposed to the disruptions.
3:25
China has not been. In fact, as we
3:27
talked about last time, much of the rest
3:29
of the world looked to China to help
3:31
them during this crisis. And how did
3:33
China do it? One of the things they did
3:35
was voluntary, excuse me, voluntarily
3:38
remove themselves uh from the global
3:42
market for the last two months, relying
3:44
exclusively on that SPR that they built
3:46
up. So, Mario, China's looking pretty.
3:49
And also it was a proof of concept to
3:51
prove to the world that their renewable
3:53
sector is truly truly robust. And it is
3:57
it is not just wind that they have. It
4:00
is not just solar. China has nuclear
4:02
power. China has a uh you know
4:04
geothermal power. China uses hydro
4:07
power. Uh that's what the three gorgeous
4:09
dam was about. And I remember six years
4:11
ago being on a panel uh in Washington DC
4:15
at a closed event and all of the
4:17
panelists and these were very well-known
4:19
people and because it was a closed event
4:21
I will not say their names but these are
4:23
very well-known people who are seen on
4:25
Fox and MSNBC and CNN and they were all
4:28
piling on me cuz I disagreed with them
4:31
when they said that the three gorgeous
4:33
dam was going to collapse and that was
4:36
going to become the the loss of
4:38
Xihinping's mandate of heaven. and that
4:40
that would lead to the collapse of
4:42
China. Never happened. Was not going to
4:44
happen. It was all a bunch of
4:47
>> Sorry. What is the What is that?
4:49
>> So, the three gorgeous dam the three
4:51
gorgeous dam is, I believe, the largest
4:54
dam in the world. Um, it it they China
4:58
built it to help to not only dam up the
5:02
river, but they also use it for massive
5:05
hydroelect electrical power generation.
5:08
and they forced a lot of Chinese
5:10
homeowners out of that area so they
5:12
could basically dam it up and you know
5:14
change the geography and it was a big
5:17
controversy and a lot of people in the
5:18
west were using that as another example
5:20
of Chinese government going too far not
5:24
being fair to their people blah blah
5:26
blah there was concerns that there was
5:29
engineering instability with the
5:31
construction of the three gorgeous dam
5:33
it was so big and massive that they
5:36
didn't build it right was the argument
5:38
and that it was basically starting to
5:40
bend and buckle uh and whatnot. It never
5:43
never turned to be true. It it was a
5:45
complete intelligence, you know,
5:50
uh for from the west. And the bottom
5:52
line is people in 2020 when this story
5:54
was going around, including very
5:56
well-known people who should know
5:58
better, uh were running around telling
6:00
the US military, telling the US
6:02
government, well, between that and co
6:04
gee's coming to an end. It's not
6:07
happened. Uh, you know, the the Chinese
6:09
is a nearly a what is it? Over 4,000y
6:12
old country. They're a civilization
6:14
state. They're not going anywhere, guys.
6:18
Uh, until the 1400s, in many respects,
6:21
China was actually more advanced than
6:22
the Europeans, and it flipped in the
6:25
mid400s when the Ming Emperor died. But
6:28
now, it's flipping again. And I think
6:30
that it's very clear that whatever
6:32
happens with the Chinese current
6:34
government, China is not going away as a
6:37
great power. They're a competitor. They
6:39
have a lot of durability clearly and
6:41
they're only getting stronger. And I'll
6:43
just add one other thing, Mario. I have
6:46
a dear friend, uh, two people that I
6:47
know, but one one I'm close with was Dan
6:50
Collins. There's another one named Mitch
6:51
Presnik. And these are really really
6:54
brilliant. And Brendan O'Reilly as well
6:56
who wrote Everyone Is Wrong About China.
6:58
These are three brilliant China hands
7:00
that I routinely talk to. They all speak
7:02
Mandarin. Dan and Mitch started major
7:05
businesses and Dan still has businesses
7:08
in China and and Brendan is a former
7:11
intelligence analyst who lived in China
7:12
for a decade. All three of them tell me
7:16
that um there's a sort of mentality
7:18
among the Chinese. It's a floodplane
7:20
mentality. Basically, right now the
7:23
times are good. So the Chinese want
7:25
their government and want themselves to
7:27
maximize the good times because you
7:29
never know when the floods are going to
7:31
come back and they'll be weak again. And
7:33
that is why China is maximizing. They
7:35
are uh you know leveling up if you will
7:38
even when the west is saying oh no no
7:40
they're about to fall. They are not
7:41
about to fall. And they're benefiting
7:43
now from the geopolitical instability in
7:45
ways that Washington never well
7:48
Washington didn't predict. People like
7:50
me I was not alone in this by the way.
7:52
Other people were saying this as well,
7:54
but people like me were warning
7:56
Washington, this is not going to go the
7:58
way you think it will, but here we are.
8:02
Um, so the other point in the um in the
8:05
piece, the crisis accelerated demand for
8:07
Chinese clean energy exports. So,
8:09
China's exporting not only for internal
8:12
consumption, but they're exporting solar
8:14
panels, batteries, electric vehicles.
8:16
>> Um, so that's another way they're
8:19
>> It's another way they're benefiting. And
8:20
they're also sticking an eye a needle in
8:22
the eye of the west. Right? Remember I
8:25
remember in 2010 I remember everybody
8:28
talking about how dirty and polluted
8:31
China is. And China has a lot of you
8:33
know they're a large country that
8:36
rapidly industrialized. So they went
8:38
through a really heightened period of of
8:40
industrial degradation or or or
8:42
environmental degradation. But China
8:44
also is the country that committed to
8:47
reducing that over time. And one of the
8:49
ways they reduced it was through the
8:51
creation and the investment and the
8:53
scaling of workable alternative
8:56
energies. Whereas in the west we talk a
9:00
lot we talk a big game and we tax the
9:02
hell out of industries to make them
9:04
sustainable. China said we're not going
9:06
to do any of that. We're just going to
9:08
create alternative technological routes
9:10
that will inevitably mature and will
9:12
inevitably replace the quote unquote
9:15
dirty energy production that we go
9:17
through today. And that is what you are
9:19
seeing in real time happening. They
9:21
didn't punish industry in China. They
9:23
didn't go after the producers. They just
9:25
created alternative means. They scaled
9:28
it. They made it marketable. And now
9:30
here you have China is again running
9:32
circles around the west in a very
9:35
interesting and dynamic new field. In
9:37
the west we talk about Celindra which
9:40
was a massive government project that
9:42
failed miserably. Uh it was just it was
9:44
a symbol of graft and corruption in
9:46
2012. In China they don't have cylindra
9:50
was a was a it was during the Obama
9:52
administration. This was a big political
9:54
issue during Obama's re-election
9:55
campaign. Basically, a bunch of Obama
9:58
allies, a bunch of Democratic Party
10:00
allies got subsidies from the Obama
10:03
administration to create Yeah. And it
10:06
didn't go well. And the Chinese, on the
10:08
other hand, don't have this problem.
10:09
>> The renewable renewable energy subsidies
10:11
were renewable energy companies.
10:13
>> There was a renewable energy company
10:15
that received subsidies from the Obama
10:17
administration to jumpstart solar
10:20
industry in the United States or to
10:21
scale it. They couldn't do it. They
10:23
couldn't compete with China, it turns
10:24
out. uh and the American taxpayer ended
10:27
up basically footing the bill for that
10:28
failure. In China, because they have
10:31
scale, because they have mass
10:32
production, because they have a very
10:34
talented human capital pool, many of
10:36
whom we trained, by the way, and didn't
10:38
retain here. Um the Chinese have been
10:41
able to now become not just competitive,
10:44
but dominant in alternative energy. And
10:46
alternative energy is not just wind, you
10:49
know, that's not all it is. It's hydro,
10:51
it's geothermal, it's nuclear. China, my
10:54
understanding is they have the hottest
10:56
burning Takamac nuclear fusion reactor
10:58
right now that's more advanced than
11:00
anything in the west. South Korea is the
11:01
next one. Uh and I think Japan is right
11:04
behind them. But China's leading the way
11:06
now in nuclear fusion R&D. So, you know,
11:09
China has they've already surpassed us
11:12
in so many respects and uh the war is
11:16
not helping to slow them down. It's
11:18
actually it's actually, you know,
11:22
The Iran war. The Iran war. Yeah.
11:24
>> Yeah. So, so, but doesn't that mean
11:26
strategically speaking, they have an
11:27
incentive for the war to continue?
11:29
>> Yeah. So, this is an interesting thing,
11:31
and we kind of touched on this before.
11:34
Yes. The Chinese are benefiting, but you
11:37
have to remember this is a more than
11:38
4,000 year old culture. The kind of
11:42
preferences and proclivities that have
11:44
become ingrained over the course of that
11:46
time still dominate the thinking even of
11:50
so-called communist leaders. These guys
11:52
are not really communists. They're state
11:53
capitalists. There's a difference. Um
11:55
but the the and the the preference and
11:58
the proclivity culturally for China
12:01
historically has been we want to
12:04
maintain st as much stability along our
12:06
periphery because otherwise instability
12:10
along the periphery will feed into
12:12
instability and disruption and rebellion
12:14
in the center of the country which then
12:17
leads to the decapitation of regimes,
12:20
leads to civil war, leads to famine,
12:22
leads to the overthrow of dynasties. And
12:24
you have to really you have to really
12:26
view notably Xihinping, but you really
12:28
have to view the entire Chinese um
12:31
Communist Party of China as just another
12:34
of several dynasties that has ruled
12:37
China. And when you put it into that
12:39
perspective, particularly now, you start
12:41
to understand the patterns that are at
12:43
play and why the Chinese certainly don't
12:46
want the US to run the world anymore,
12:49
but the Chinese government also doesn't
12:51
want to see this kind of protracted
12:53
instability because they just don't like
12:56
>> That's a good point. So it's like a thin
12:58
line where they do want to see a weaker
13:00
the U a weaker US where in relative
13:02
terms they do benefit but if they do
13:04
don't benefit in absolute terms and you
13:06
know using their strategic reserves
13:07
having higher inflation whatever it is
13:09
oil shortages even though even if they
13:12
weather the issues better than the rest
13:14
of the world so in relative terms
13:16
they're doing better they still worry if
13:18
they push it too far
13:20
>> then having it could lead to instability
13:22
back home. So it's kind of they're
13:23
treading a very very thin line.
13:25
>> That's right. And you have to remember
13:26
also the Chinese elite, the people
13:29
leading the country, these are mostly
13:31
people with engineering and other kind
13:33
of mathy hard science backgrounds.
13:36
Whereas in the United States, the people
13:39
leading our country tend to be lawyers,
13:41
lobbyists, liberal arts majors. These
13:44
are not people who really think uh in
13:46
sort of the grand kind of strategic
13:48
terms. Uh notably the civilian
13:51
leadership, they don't think like this.
13:52
Uh it's all very sort of not
13:55
technocratic. It's not competent. Uh
13:58
it's very ideological and it's very self
14:01
negating. And our system does not allow
14:04
really anymore for long-term strategic
14:06
planning. It just does not. I mean I I I
14:09
point to a recent piece of, you know,
14:11
work that I did where I analyzed why did
14:15
the Biden administration, I think in
14:17
2021 or 2022, sell off the US helium
14:21
reserve. We had a strategic helium
14:23
reserve that we had been building since
14:29
and we sold it during the Biden
14:31
administration to a German company that
14:34
had direct and significant linkages
14:37
according to the United States Congress
14:40
uh when they did an investigation after
14:41
the fact it had significant ties to the
14:44
Chinese Communist Party. Um so now in a
14:46
way indirectly China is owning our
14:50
strategic helium reserve and they've
14:52
since drained it. The helium reserve has
14:54
been drastically reduced. Um and helium
14:57
of course is a very critical supply for
14:59
multiple industrial inputs. Uh notably
15:02
the production of semiconductors. So my
15:04
point here is why did we do that? Well
15:06
some people say it's because Biden was
15:08
corrupt and I think that's probably part
15:10
of it. But part of it is also because
15:12
the US government wasn't thinking. It
15:14
wasn't thinking that, hey, we might need
15:16
this and we don't we don't want to get
15:18
rid of it. Even if there's a chance we
15:20
could maybe make some money uh off of
15:22
it, we don't want to get rid of that.
15:23
But that's not the thinking. That's not
15:27
>> The Chinese do think like that.
15:32
>> It's the uh it's the three little
15:34
piggies. Remember the three little
15:36
piggies? Uh the one that built their
15:38
house with brick. uh you know just just
15:41
you know maybe I'm getting
15:43
>> so how the hell the German company have
15:45
ties to the CCP and why did by the
15:47
what's your analysis why did
15:48
>> eventually so so basically the company
15:51
in question had business ties in China
15:54
and I'm going off memory now because
15:55
it's been a while since I've thought
15:57
I've had to talk about it but but
15:58
basically the company in question the
16:00
the United States Congress they
16:02
investigated it after the fact this was
16:04
a cifhious failure the United States
16:06
Congress determined that this German
16:08
firm was able to purchase it um because
16:12
they did not present themselves as
16:14
having a lot of contact connectivity
16:16
with China. They just said, "Hey, we're
16:17
a German company." And the Biden
16:19
administration signed off on it. And the
16:22
twist was after the fact, turns out that
16:25
company has a massive presence in China.
16:28
They do massive amounts of business with
16:30
Chinese-owned ent military entities. And
16:34
there is a fear among Congress that
16:38
notably the Republicans in Congress that
16:41
this sale was actually or this purchase
16:43
was actually orchestrated on behalf of
16:46
the Chinese government which wanted more
16:47
access to helium because of course China
16:49
is you know building their own massive
16:51
semiconductive production capability.
16:56
The third point's an interesting one.
16:58
Let me know if you agree with this one.
16:59
The report argues the conflict
17:01
reinforced China's narrative that the US
17:03
is a destabilizing force in the Middle
17:05
East and even the world, but in the
17:07
Middle East in this case. While China
17:08
presents itself as a more stable
17:09
long-term partner, China's been trying
17:11
to create that image for itself for a
17:13
while now, for years.
17:14
>> And it seems that Iran, the Iran war
17:16
played into that hand really well.
17:18
>> 100% 100%. This this at every level this
17:23
conflict in with Iran in the Middle East
17:26
has been a strategic disaster for the
17:28
United States. There is no win here. The
17:32
only upside, as I have said before, is
17:35
indirect in that if it forces us to
17:38
permanently be out militarily of the
17:40
Middle East and forces us to rep
17:42
prioritize our own hemisphere, that's a
17:45
win then. But it isn't by design. I can
17:47
assure you of that. None of this is by
17:49
design. Um the the the Chinese are the
17:53
real benefactor or beneficiaries rather
17:55
of this conflict. And from here on out,
17:59
we talked previously in one of our
18:00
episodes, Mario, of a post-american
18:02
Middle East. This is clearly a
18:05
postamerican multipolar world system
18:08
that's being birthed before our eyes. It
18:10
is one in which America is, yes, a great
18:12
power. It's not the superpower, though,
18:15
and it is in relative decline. We are in
18:18
we are officially there's no question
18:20
now that this country is in relative
18:22
decline compared to other great powers
18:26
rising powers like China and it will be
18:29
I think a China oriented maybe not China
18:32
run because there's there's still some
18:34
question as to whether Beijing actually
18:36
really wants to fully replace the United
18:38
States as sort of the world policeman.
18:40
Who would want that responsibility by
18:42
the way? Uh only the idiots in
18:44
Washington want that. Um but China
18:46
definitely will it will be a
18:48
Chineseoriented or Chinese orbiting
18:51
world system not unlike the concentric
18:54
circles of China's tributary system that
18:57
ruled their imperial order when the
18:59
emperor sat at the middle and everything
19:01
else orbited around him in that
19:03
tributary system. I think that's where
19:05
it's leading to. Do you not worry that
19:08
if an autocracy becomes a world
19:10
superpower and replaces a democracy, an
19:13
imperfect democracy?
19:15
What don't you worry about massive
19:17
centralization of power on a global
19:21
I mean, so generally it's a concern.
19:24
Yeah. Uh if you had asked me that 10
19:26
years ago, I would have been much more
19:28
gung-ho in my answer saying yes,
19:29
absolutely. But I look at the United
19:32
States after the last 10 to 12 years. I
19:35
look at the West, the so-called West in
19:38
general, the so-called developed world,
19:41
and I I I see a lot of autocracy here. I
19:44
see a lot of centralization here, and
19:47
>> still a lot a lot less than the CCP.
19:50
>> Uh, admittedly, so I'm not saying that
19:52
this the CCP call the president an
19:56
>> Yeah. Yeah. No, I I get that. Well,
19:59
>> try that. Try that. Yeah, you can.
20:01
>> I I Yeah. Yeah. I I I get it. I get it.
20:03
But what my point is my point is is that
20:05
we are trending more closer to the China
20:08
model on our own than China is trending
20:11
closer to our model. And so really it's
20:15
a question of gradation. Um and and
20:18
again I don't know if China wants to run
20:24
so much as be the center of it. And
20:28
there is a slight difference there. Um
20:31
the Americans, the British before um the
20:34
Romans, they ran the world as they knew
20:37
it. Um the Chinese, I it's definitely
20:41
not something that's going to be good
20:42
for America on a political and military
20:45
and kind of national security level. Do
20:48
I think the Chinese want to invade
20:49
America and conquer us? No. No. No.
20:52
Well, don't say of course because I mean
20:53
historically empires do that and
20:56
America's been doing that now a lot in
20:58
the Middle East. Uh we don't call it
21:00
that, but that's what we've been doing.
21:02
Um so, you know, I don't want China to
21:05
run the world, to be clear. I don't want
21:06
to see them the number one. I want us to
21:08
be number one, the United States. But,
21:11
you know, I do I do I get into that kind
21:14
of ideological game anymore? No. I think
21:15
that's a holdover from the Cold War. I
21:18
think the real question is what system
21:21
does more for most people? And I think
21:25
still the American system has had a comm
21:28
c commulatively more positive impact
21:31
even with all the covert action and
21:32
whatnot. Um but you know I don't think
21:36
that's really even relevant here because
21:38
it's a question of who has the juice,
21:40
who has the power. And uh right now it
21:43
looks to me like that power and that
21:45
momentum and that leverage is
21:47
increasingly Beijing's to lose whereas
21:50
the Americans have already given theirs
21:51
away. We have already lost the mantle of
21:54
if you want to say empire. We've already
22:00
>> Do you not worry what happens when she
22:04
>> I worry about what happens when American
22:07
presidents, you know, change over. Um,
22:10
>> no. Less so, less so. Come on. when when
22:13
>> doesn't really doesn't really have
22:16
>> look look G's an interesting figure in
22:18
China's system because he is the closest
22:22
>> to Mao they've had whereas Mao had like
22:25
it was all on him and he led them and he
22:28
did the after Mao died you'll remember
22:30
they had Dong Xiaoing they had you know
22:32
they they had Jang Jim they had Hu
22:35
Juntowa um and those three guys ruled
22:39
much more like a cadre and less like a
22:43
cult of personality. I'm not saying X's
22:45
a cult of personality, but he's
22:46
definitely more toward that end of the
22:48
spectrum. Um I think if you look at and
22:51
I think Xi therefore if you look at the
22:53
last what five total Chinese communist
22:56
rule rulers again communist in
22:58
quotations um three of the five have not
23:01
been this sort of cultish strongman
23:04
type. They've very much led by executive
23:06
committee and the you know they've run
23:09
it more like a board of directors for a
23:11
corporation than they have as like a
23:13
dictatorship as we understand it. It
23:15
wasn't Stalinist um or Mauist. Um, Xi, I
23:19
think when he does eventually go, and he
23:22
is old, uh, when he does eventually go,
23:25
I suspect it will be he will be replaced
23:29
by a more technocratic, less cult of
23:33
personality type leader and it might
23:36
actually end up stabilizing the
23:38
political system beyond what it is at
23:41
right now because China's political
23:43
system is h, you know, it their economic
23:46
model works. those purges and recent
23:51
>> Yeah. Yeah. And so what he's doing
23:52
though also under the the the impromoder
23:55
of anti-corruption is he's getting rid
23:57
of any potential impediment to his
23:59
direct reign. Um that is in Chinese
24:03
culture especially that is a that that
24:06
gives him more power for sure. It allows
24:08
him to maximize what he wants to do as
24:11
quickly as possible. But that also means
24:13
it's more responsibility. And if things
24:15
go pear-shaped on him, that means he's
24:18
going to get burned and held accountable
24:20
by the other members of the cadre uh far
24:23
more than he would have been if he had
24:25
governed more like Deng Xiaoing or more
24:27
like uh uh Hu Jin Tao. So, and with his
24:31
age and with these, you know, there's
24:33
there is a reckoning coming within the
24:34
political system of China, but I think
24:37
that the transition will probably be
24:41
less toward another Xihinping like
24:43
leader and more toward more of a
24:45
committee, more toward that kind of
24:47
board of directors style, uh maybe even
24:51
a triumpvirate possibly. um which
24:54
actually would probably lend itself to
24:55
greater levels of stability within
24:57
China's political system.
25:00
>> I know you worry a lot about a war
25:02
between um a continuation of the Iran US
25:05
war. How worried are you about a
25:07
conflict a direct conflict when it comes
25:09
to China and uh and the US and how
25:11
worrying is Taiwan for you? What do you
25:13
think will happen with Taiwan
25:14
eventually? So this is this is actually
25:17
the thing that does keep me up more
25:19
because um I think under ordinary
25:24
I think the the if you look at things as
25:28
like a gravitational pole I think the
25:31
gravitational pole or center of the
25:34
world system is clearly in China's favor
25:37
slowly naturally pulling the world
25:40
system at least the developing world the
25:42
global south pulling them firmly within
25:46
China's orbit within that sort of
25:47
Chinese-led bricks potential order. Um I
25:51
think China doesn't have to do anything
25:54
and it will naturally reorganize itself
25:57
around the center the new center which
26:02
but Xihinping is kind of a wild card and
26:07
because it's not that committee-led
26:09
system they had under the last three
26:11
leaders it's more like Mao Xihinping
26:15
could potentially overstep miscalculate
26:18
say I'm riding high right now I'm going
26:20
to I'm going to go even farther now. Um
26:23
and that could destabilize the whole
26:26
system and trigger a regional and later
26:30
But so far it looks to me like Xi has
26:34
also come to the conclusion that he does
26:38
nothing and still wins as the meme says.
26:40
So I don't yet see and believe me I I
26:43
used to think this was coming. So far
26:45
though, I don't yet see China making the
26:48
moves to initiate or to force a a
26:52
situation where their military could
26:54
possibly flip the script on the
26:57
Americans. They don't have to. They've
26:59
already achieved overmatch militarily in
27:03
the First Island chain. News flash to
27:05
Washington. And I warned them. I warned
27:07
them. There's a there's a speech I gave
27:09
in 2016 where you can find it, I'm sure.
27:11
I warned them that this was coming that
27:14
in 10 years time in 10 years time the uh
27:18
the United States was going to be if we
27:21
didn't change our ways the United States
27:22
was going to lose out um the the first
27:26
island chain to the Chinese. That time
27:27
has come and they've already outmatched
27:30
us. And if you go under my wret brief
27:31
substack, I have an article up there
27:33
today uh demonstrating how with the DF17
27:36
hypersonic glide vehicle, demonstrating
27:39
how with the uh with what they're doing
27:40
in counter space capabilities, with what
27:43
they're doing with their anti-access
27:44
area denial A2AD capacities, um they
27:47
have already achieved overmatch. They
27:49
don't really have to do much. They've
27:52
already kept the American military at
27:54
bay because the American military, the
27:56
only way we can fight them is with the
27:58
Navy and the Air Force. Well, they've
27:59
ranged our air bases in the region uh
28:02
with the DF-17 and these other weapons,
28:04
and the Chinese can keep our carriers
28:06
over the horizon with their DF-21,
28:11
Um, we can't afford to lose our ships.
28:14
The Chinese can. The Chinese have
28:16
missiles in abundance and drones. And
28:18
that's something the Iranian war, the
28:19
Iran war has taught them as well. The
28:21
Americans will keep their ships out of a
28:23
contested hot uh combat zone. And so the
28:27
question is does China really have to go
28:29
to war uh to already achieve their grand
28:32
plan of becoming the new number one? I
28:36
think a rational actor would say no. But
28:38
again because Xi has aggregated so much
28:41
power toward himself and there are
28:42
inputs you and I aren't privy to in that
28:45
closed political system. It's possible
28:48
also X says to survive I got to trigger
28:50
a war now and red rededicate and
28:53
redirect my people away from whatever
28:56
they don't like in my regime to you know
28:58
fighting a foreign foe. Do I think it'll
29:00
be Taiwan? It's possible. That's the
29:03
likeliest or that's the most obvious.
29:06
But G and everybody who runs Beijing
29:09
understands beyond the complexities of
29:12
launching an amphibious attack. They
29:14
also understand many Chinese view
29:17
Taiwanese as fellow Chinese. And most
29:20
Chinese people do not want to send their
29:22
sons to go fight and possibly die
29:25
killing other Chinese. They would much
29:27
rather um do something against Japan.
29:31
And I that is the unspoken story here.
29:33
I'm I think I'm the only one who's been
29:35
writing about this at my Substack uh
29:37
about the actual threat to Japan,
29:40
particularly now that they have this new
29:41
government there where the the I think
29:44
her name is um I'm forgetting her name,
29:45
Tagachi or Tea. The new the new woman
29:48
running Japan is extremely militant on
29:51
China. China has scale. They have
29:54
overmatch. They don't even have to
29:56
invade Japan to do damage. They can do
29:59
what Hezbollah does to Israel. They can
30:01
do what Iran is doing to the Middle
30:03
East. They can just overwhelm Japanese
30:05
defenses with missiles and drones. What
30:08
would be the trigger? Um Brendan
30:11
O'Reilly, who my my buddy who wrote uh
30:13
Everyone Is Wrong About China, the
30:15
trigger would probably be if Japan
30:17
decided we're going to get nukes, which
30:19
is not impossible at this point given
30:21
the breakdown of the US alliance system.
30:23
>> I I don't know. I think I think China
30:28
more open to Japan having nukes and I
30:30
don't think it would be that big of an
30:33
>> I don't I don't think you know
30:37
it is an emotional issue.
30:39
>> Yeah, but true. But that goes against if
30:41
they if they find that to be an issue
30:42
that goes against their
30:43
non-interventionist strategy and why
30:46
suddenly different for Japan.
30:47
>> No, it's that's different. That's
30:48
different. We're talking
30:49
>> country. It's a southern North Korea has
30:51
a has a nuclear weapon.
30:52
>> Yeah. North Korea. Yeah, but North Korea
30:55
is a cat's paw for for Beijing. Um, in
30:58
fact, this was one of the reasons the
31:00
one of the the hidden stories, the
31:02
backstories behind the Trump uh Kim
31:05
Jong-un uh meetings in the first term
31:08
was because the Chinese tried to have
31:11
Kim Jong-il or Kim Jong-un rather
31:13
whacked and replace him with his halfb
31:15
brotherther who they could control more
31:19
>> the Chinese tried to I think tried to
31:21
kill Kim Jong-un because Kim Jong-un
31:24
came into power replacing his father Kim
31:27
Kim Jong-un came into power and he was
31:29
very independent-minded and the Chinese
31:32
were concerned. He the first thing he
31:33
did was kill his uncle, which his uncle
31:36
was China's man in the royal court of
31:38
North Korea. And and Kim Jong-un did
31:41
that very pointedly to send a message to
31:44
Beijing, I'm my own man. Uh then he uh
31:46
he went about killing all and and
31:48
excommunicating all the people in the
31:51
elite who were very close to China in in
31:53
his first several years in power which
31:55
led to his brother I think being eyed by
32:00
China to replace Kim Jong-un. And Kim
32:04
Jong-un famously had or infamously had
32:06
his brother whacked. I think it was in
32:08
the Thailand airport. Who were the
32:12
No, I'm pretty sure it was like Malaysia
32:14
or Thailand. Um, who who was the who
32:17
were the group that was supposed to be
32:19
protecting the half brother
32:22
>> were Chinese? Uh, they were Chinese. It
32:25
was the chi they were Chinese military
32:28
>> Yeah. And uh and and that to me pointed
32:30
to the fact that that was a hit on his
32:33
own brother because Kim Jong-un was
32:35
convinced the Chinese were going to try
32:36
to whack him and replace him with their
32:40
agent. uh his half brother. So he
32:42
preempted it and then he started getting
32:45
cozy with Trump because he didn't want
32:47
to be Kim Jong-un didn't want to be too
32:49
close to the Chinese knowing that they
32:50
were coming at him. And I think that is
32:52
what reset everything when Trump and him
32:55
got along and started doing some really
32:57
momentous stuff together at the
32:59
diplomatic level. It's a shame that
33:01
Trump didn't continue as president. Um
33:04
but but that kind of
33:06
>> remember when he crossed into North
33:07
>> It was amazing. It was it was I mean
33:09
that was like that was iconic. That was
33:12
Trump at his finest. Um and it was
33:15
beautiful actually to see. And um you
33:19
know what happened then was uh Trump got
33:21
out of office. He lost and Biden came
33:25
in. Biden was um a lot I think uh less
33:29
open to Kim Jong-un. And Kim Jong-un
33:32
then had to pivot. And who did he pivot
33:33
to though? Who did he pivot to? He
33:35
pivoted to Putin. Uh Kim Jong-un pivoted
33:38
to Putin to play China off of China
33:41
because for Kim he knows China tries to
33:45
use him as a cat's paw. But ultimately
33:48
does China not want to see North Korea
33:51
have nukes? China doesn't really care.
33:53
They don't care about that. But they do
33:55
care. They do care if Japan gets nukes.
33:58
You can bet your bottom dollar on that.
34:00
And they will do something militarily if
34:03
it looks like uh Japan is going to going
34:05
to get nukes. And Japan, by the way, is
34:07
looking at what happened in the Middle
34:09
East and they're looking at what's going
34:11
on in Europe and they're saying, "We
34:13
can't trust the American security
34:15
umbrella." Remember at the start of this
34:17
year, Mario, they were having this this
34:19
antagonistic round of of of back and
34:22
forth between Tokyo and Beijing. And it
34:25
and in fact, um what was it? The
34:27
Japanese war plananes actually buzzed
34:30
the Chinese carrier. I think it was in
34:32
the um the Sea of Japan while the
34:34
Chinese carrier was doing these
34:36
provocative military exercises near
34:38
Japanese territory and Trump got on the
34:41
phone in December or January and told
34:44
the Japanese leader, "Knock it off." And
34:46
I think at that point,
34:47
>> yeah, it was also when the Japanese
34:49
leader was saying Japan will get
34:50
involved if China makes a move on
34:53
>> Yes. which is also when I spoke to the
34:55
guys at Joint Base McCord several years
34:57
ago, I warned the leadership there that
35:00
the real issue with Taiwan is not a
35:02
China Taiwan scenario because I don't
35:05
believe any American leader would
35:06
actually intervene militarily to stop it
35:08
at this rate. But the mutual defense
35:11
treaty with Japan, if Japan got
35:13
involved, they might try to rope us in
35:15
like NATO's trying to rope us in against
35:19
>> and like Israel's trying to rope us in
35:20
even more with Iran.
35:23
Everyone's trying to rope you guys in.
35:25
>> I know. That's why my new book coming
35:28
out. We don't yet know. It's probably
35:31
>> The title is Stop Roping Us in
35:34
>> That's actually not bad, Mario. That's
35:37
>> Leave us the heck alone.
35:38
>> That That's not bad. Get off my lawn.
35:40
No. Uh, no. That's the title. The title
35:43
is Fortress Americas, and it is uh it is
35:46
about Western Hemispheric Defense. And
35:48
>> Can't wait for it to come out.
35:50
>> Yeah, I'll send you a copy. I'm I'm
35:52
almost done. I'm I'm about 20,000 words
35:55
away and I'm trucking along at about
35:57
1,500 to 2,000 words a day. So, I'll be
36:04
>> Thanks for jumping on. I think next next
36:06
time we chat next time we chat, um I
36:08
want to talk about Ukraine developments
36:09
there with the assassination attempt in
36:12
>> Just be on the lookout for Yes. be on
36:15
the lookout for Ukraine possibly getting
36:17
a nuke. And I'll just leave it at that.
36:20
>> Right. All right. He gave us the title
36:21
for the next interview that me and
36:23
Brandon were doing. Why' you guys take
36:24
him off so early? I usually say bye to
36:26
him, guys. Why' they kick him out so
36:28
quickly? What the hell, guys? All right,
36:31
guys. I'll see you guys I'll see you in
36:33
um in 15 minutes with a new guest uh
36:39
uh Tom Luongo and followed by Muhammad
36:41
Faridi and then Larry Johnson. See you
