Speaker 1: Why do sail ads have to be so over the top.
Why can't they be more relaxed, more like the air
Lingus January Sale. Sure, great savings on flights to Europe
and North America are worth shouting about, but that wouldn't
be very air Lingus, would it. Sale ends twentieth of January.
Book now at airlingus dot com.
Speaker 2: My daughter Ellie had this ankle pain. We went to
see VGI Orthopedics that they actually picked up on her
fatigue issues, so they brought in a rheumatologists and just
a few small tests, they realized that Ellie was sediac.
So what was brilliant was that VGI had a pediatric
dietitian ready to help manage her diet.
Speaker 3: Really felt shameless, VGI, because your health means.
Speaker 4: Everything on the go, NonStop gym sessions, deadlines, homework with ava,
more soups, comforting, flavorful taste, It all just hmmm, with
a range of different flavors. We've been perfecting soup for
over thirty years, so you can have a moment of
delicious pleasure. So whatever it is, soup it with Avon.
Speaker 5: Moore meaning a live man like this man you letting
butterfly flapping his wing. Dig down in the forest, man,
it gonna cause the tree fall, letting five thousand miles away.
Speaker 6: Man, nobody, see nobody. You don't need no man.
Speaker 5: Don't they plug you with a little story?
Speaker 7: And you got like to like that. That's the point.
Speaker 5: Man, don't black it down on the pane right now.
Speaker 7: You don't don't matter.
Speaker 5: Man.
Speaker 8: Okay, all right, mister Chris Fish, welcome to the Jay
Burton Show. How are you doing.
Speaker 9: I'm very well and I'm glad to be with you.
Speaker 8: So I know your son. We have some friends in common,
but I had not been exposed to your work until
you wrote an article in the most recent edition of Chronicles.
Quite good. I'll have it linked on the description for
those interested. But if you could before we get into
your article, could you describe who you are and what
you do.
Speaker 9: Well. I am seventy one. I was born in Belgrade
in Tito's heyday. My primary and secondary education was in Yugoslavia.
It was good quality education because, believe it turned up,
even though Tito's brand of communism was not typical real
socialism of the Soviet type, it was still pretty oppressive.
But education was good unless of course it dealt with
things like sociology and political economy, and in that case
you had to parrot the platitudes and ideological cliche days.
But I had always been interested in world affairs, and
so after the grammar school and the fifteen months army service,
I went to England to study international relations at the
University of Sussex. At that time, fees for foreign students
were still quite low, and my family could afford it.
But also I wanted to live in the West because
at that time I was actually younger, naive and pro Western,
because frankly, Tito's culture personality always got onto my nerves,
and I believed that all that the West came to represent,
as conveyed in the movies, popular literature, and of course
goods such as genes and electronics, had a certain magnetism
that was quite strong at the time. I must say.
Also in nineteen seventy two, I was seventeen eighteen at
the time, when I spent some months first in France
then in England, I really decided that I didn't want
to live in what used to be Yugoslavia, that this
was much more dynamic, much more interesting part of the world.
And much more promising, both professionally and material So I
started my Western career as a radio journalist with the
BBC World Service, both in what used to be the
Yugoslav Service at the time and later in the news
room and talks and features department, moving to the Voice
of America, where he stayed only very briefly in eighty
six eighty seven. It was a very bureaucratic and stifling organization,
and then I became a freelancer reporting from Belgrade for
US News and World Report eighty nine to ninety one.
It was the time of Yugoslavia's gradual disintegration and slide
into civil war, and in ninety one ninety two I
spent a year as a postdoctoral researcher at the Hoover
Institution at Stanford on a State Department grant. And that
was my swan song, as shall we say, kosher member
of the establishment, because with the Western campaign of quessaimoralistic
malignment of the Serbs during the civil war in Yugoslavia
boilth in Bosnia and in Kosto. Later I became not
only dissillusioned but utterly discussed it with the media machine
and accepted the post of informal and unofficial representative of
the Bosnian Serb Republic based in London, and also I
started writing very critical pieces, especially on the Hague Tribunal
more athletes would be called Inquisition, the International Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia, and the farce known as the Strebnitzer genocide,
where if you have genocide at the level of a
municipality of twenty thousand people, then of course we are
entering the grays zone of postmodern semantic games, which can
lead us anywhere. And in the late nineties I spent
some years, one year at the University of Saint Thomas
in Houston, Texas and two and a half the now
defunct rose Hill College in aken, South Carolina, which was
the first attempt and the only one so far as
to my knowledge, to start a great books college based
on Orthodox faith. It was supposed to be broadly speaking,
the Orthodox censor to Saint Thomas, Aquinas, but it ran
out of steam due to lack of funds and mismanagement.
It's a sad story. And since ninety nine I've been
affairs editor of the Chronicles. It has been what twenty
seven years now, with two breaks In two thousand and
nine I took a year's break and last year two
thousand and five ten months break. But basically I provide
one editorial for the print edition, two page editorial of
about eighteen hundred words every month and two to three
online articles on the subjects of the day. Parallel bit
that I teach international relations at the University of Banyaluca,
which is the capital of the Republic of Srpska, the
Serbian Republic in Bosnia Herzegovina, and currently I'm writing a
book called Space and Power. It's the working title which
looks at the entire human history through the prism of geopolitics,
primarily of the interaction between the spatial dimension of international
relations and the propensity of states in all times, culture,
civilizations and geographic spaces to use a force on the
threat or the threat of force as the primary means
of achieving their objectives. So that's a summary of it.
I spend most of my time now in the small
town of Petrovats on the Montenegrin coast of the Adriatic Sea,
but I also divide my time between Belgrade Banie Luca,
where I still teach postgraduates and Zurich, were my wife.
I still has business engagements. I travel a lot through Europe.
I visit the US on average once a year, but
in Europe I love traveling through Italy and France and
Spain primarily, but also very often to the Pannonia lands
of Hungary, Slovakia and southern Germany. Northern Germany doesn't interest me.
And also of course Holland, where I have two daughters,
one son in law and two granddaughters. And you mentioned
my son, he and his wife and their daughter in
suburban Washington, d c. So I occasionally visit there too.
I'm a US citizen, but I'm dual citizen. I also
have Serbian passport and permanent residents in the United Kingdom.
So that's just about as far as I can go
with a disclosure of private interests.
Speaker 8: Well fair enough. So your piece for Chronicles most recently
is titled the Tump the Trump Doctrine, and is sort
of comparing the foreign policy of the Trump administration to
the Monroe Doctrine. So two things. One, the Monroe doctrine
is a term that gets thrown around quite often. It
might be useful for my audience to define that what
was that historical doctrine, how does it apply to what
the Trump administration is doing? And then also, I imagine
a great deal has happened since you wrote that piece, Right,
there's a little bit of air gap between when you
send off a piece and when it appears in print.
So what do you make? And I realize I'm throwing
out a lot of questions at you all at once,
but it is an interview show. What do you make
of both the actions in Venezuela and then also sort
of saber rattling with Iran.
Speaker 9: The main thing that makes the difference between Trump and
his predecessors is a cooling of relations with the European
Union and its key member countries. And I think it's
a very very good thing because if you look at
the National Security Strategy, which was revealed on December seventh
of last year, even though about one half of that
thirty two page document is devoted to the Western hemisphere,
to my mind, the most important part is towards the end,
where it warns of the civilizational threat to Europe's survival
if it's ruling elites continue what it terms and are
quoting from memory, cell defeating or suicidal immigration policies, excessive
censorship and deficit of democratic uh, and also attempts to
stifle sovereignist and patriotic anti immigration political parties such as
the Alternative for Germany.
Speaker 7: It didn't Actually.
Speaker 6: Every neighbor got deaf lavor? Did somebody say, see if
them kids? Nine three little words, it's dinner time? Head
sets down for some higher brow as the olgy we
all that smell have rig I think he's made a
new sun and tasty up and nine from the menu.
Speaker 10: Rav whoever you are, whatever your flavor.
Speaker 6: Every neighbor got their flavor. If somebody says.
Speaker 10: A cecil, a steering contest, a high five. Some things
are hard to do on your own in business, becoming
more sustainable can be one of them. That's why Bank
of Ireland has introduced the Sustainable Business Coach. This free
digital platform gives you guidance, support and a practical plan
to help you take your next sustainability steps. To get
started today, search Bank of Ireland Sustainable Business Coach. Bank
of Ireland is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland.
Speaker 9: Mentioned any of them, but it's obvious what they had
in mind. Well, Monroe Doctrine came into being in eighteen
twenty three, at the time when the liberation of Spain's
colonies in Central and South America was fruitfully ended by Bolivar,
and when the United States was primarily interested in keeping
other European powers away from the Western Hemisphere from the Americas.
Primarily it was aimed at Great Britain, which was of
course the dominant global naval power at the time and
all the way until the Second World War. But at
that time the young American Republic was still relatively weak,
both militarily and economically, and it had limited means of
enforcing this until the period of manifest destiny at the
end of the nineteenth century, and of course the Spanish
American War of eighteen ninety eight, when the last two
Spanish possessions of Cuba and Puerto Rico came under US control.
The modern day reincarnation primarily has the objective of keeping
other powers away not only in political and military terms,
which was the primary focus of the original, but also economic,
and this is primarily directed against China rather than Russia,
because even though Russia signed an agreement on strategic cooperation
with Venezuela in May of last year, and it was
ratified by the Russian Duma in October of last year.
It didn't move one little finger to and its protest
of Nadura's captures, shall we say restrained. It was utterly meaningless,
especially considering the fact that this was theoretically their strategic
partner in the Americas. And I think this is because
since Putin has always insisted on the need to recognize
the legitimacy of spheres of interest, and obviously Russia sees
Ukraine as a sphere of interest as well as other
parts of it's near abroad in the former Soviet Union,
that in return, put In would be more than happy
to recognize Trump's own sphere of interest, which is of
course the Western Hemisphere. But Russian investment in Venezuela was
pretty minor anyway, even though they had this agreement and
and military extu even though they had this strategic agreement
and military cooperation which antedates this agreement, they had never
tried to build in Venezuela, for instance, an equivalent of
the naval base at Tartus in Syria, which was their
foothold in the Mediterranean. On the other hand, the Chinese
are present and have been present for about fifteen years
now with major infrastructure projects all over Central and South
America from the Panama Canal to especially in Brazil, but
also in Venezuela. And I think that Trump's policy will
make some of these states look again at their cooperation
with China in the economic sphere, and that they will
probably think twice before signing fresh agreements, because it is
obvious that with the return to what can be described
as imperialist policy, imperialists in the nineteenth century sense, that
Trump is determined to speeze the Chinese out from the hemisphere.
So what is refreshing is that his rhetoric is not
based on making Venezuela safe for democracy and LGBTQ community,
or for the recovery of human rights and establishment of
democratic credentials. He is talking about oil. He is talking
about US interests. He is talking about what one might
say HOBBSI and politics based on frankly, power relations and
reison detta, which is the French term which is loosely
translated as state reason, but fundamentally means the perception of
the decision maker of what is the national interest of
the given country.
Speaker 8: Can you contrast this sort of new pragmatic or new
Hobbesian style of international relations, with the way that the
United States Empire interacted, for instance, with the Serbs. You
mentioned that earlier in the late nineties as part of
the reason that you left sort of kosher discourse, if
you will, so, if you could, you describe one state
versus the other and why that transformation is significant.
Speaker 9: I think it's highly significant because in the context of
policy which claims to be based on US exceptionalism, and
medleyne Olbright made a famous remark in the nineties when
she became Secretary of State and the Clinton we are America,
we stand taller, we see further, We are the indispensable mate.
Almost equally famous is the that the death of half
a million Iraqis was the price well worth pay. But
it goes one with the other. Whenever you postulate a
moral principle as your guiding light, any form of compromise
becomes very hard. It goes hand in hand with the
irrational belief in the right and wrong side of history,
and the rhetoric of the right side of history has
been a regular feature of the Obama years, unfortunately also of.
Speaker 7: George W.
Speaker 9: Bush Is. But after all that's the period when we
had the jelling of the neo conservative neoliberal duopoly, so
that essentially there was very little difference in the assumptions
and in the character of foreign interventions between the Neo
Conservative dominated administrations of trade George W. Bush between two
thousand and one and two thousand and nine and Obama
for the ensuing eight years. And in his first term,
Trump was hardly able to function because of catastrophic appointments
of traders inside the gates which hindered him. And also
at that time I think he was still lacking the
know how the Sabola fair, the ability to translate some
of still rudimentary ideas into concrete policies.
Speaker 7: And then of course we had.
Speaker 9: Four years of Team Biden, which really brought this rules
based international order quote unquote, which means what I say
is the order of the day, to almost rxism. It
was most visibly difficult, most visible in the way that
they cajoled Russia into attacking Ukraine, by turning Ukraine, by
weaponizing Ukraine into the factor anti Russia. When you claim
that your actions are not guided by self interest but
by some higher principle, that means that your enemy needs
to be demonized, because if it is communicated in terms
of right and wrong and good and evil, then every
enemy is reduced to Hitler Reduxia at Hitlererum applied at
different times to Slavodamlosovitch in Serbia, to Saddam Hussein in Iraq,
and of course the blademic put In in the Kremlin
and the It is the international relations equivalent of the
domestic use of the term fascist, where everyone left disagrees
with becomes a fascist and the term ultimately becomes meaningless.
Of course, we can discuss at length if there is
irreducible core or what it means to be fascist, but
most certainly neither the national socialists nor the European conservatives,
who want to stop uncontrollable immigration and who want to
revive pride in their communities and their culture and legacy
are not fascists. So in the nineties there was a
great deal of willingness on behalf of the Western powers,
led by the United States and the Clinton at that time,
to prove to the Islamic world that they are Muslim friendly,
which they thought would somehow compensate for the many decades
of uncritical and unreserved support of Israel, most notably after
the Sixt Year War in nineteen sixty seven, and so
the Bosnian Muslims were construed to be the pro Western
multicultural tolerance blah blah blah Muslims, the ones we can
work with, the ones we can treat as if necessary,
an example for the reform of the Muslim world as
a whole in the direction of this collective West as
it existed back in the nineties, and Sir were the
victims of it. What is worse, they openly talked about
preventing the establishment of an Islamic state in the heart
of the Bulkans, thinking that it would appeal to the
Western is Exactly at the time when both the European
Union in its postmas Strift period and the United States
and the Clinton were moving rapidly in the post national
and the globalist direction, and especially in Europe, there was
a determined push.
Speaker 11: Whatever you're working towards, a Volkswagen commercial vehicle is with
you all the way. It might be the crafter or
transporter for carrying tools and the drive that goes with them,
the caddy, cargo or amarok for when the job and
the journey matter equally or the id Buzz cargo to
get excited for the future, then benefit from HP finance
from zero percent and purchase contributions up to three thousand europe.
Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles Space for Needs and Dreams. Terms and
conditions apply. Finance provided by way of hire, purchase agreement
from Lkswagen Financial Services Ireland and subject in any criteria.
Volkswagen Financial Services Areland Limited is regulated by the Central
Bank of Ireland. Visit Volkswagen bands dot for further information.
Speaker 12: If he makes mean a free guess, come at lardlas.
Speaker 9: Okay bandymitrilas.
Speaker 13: Ten vol dolent to the foste tetro martunkar agand nicotine,
a reinord agola agus very numero hoco is moshanskagashi at
the back an shine fresh and Martin taring and oil
rhine August lauerlo Enov find a fiery kiel nicotine to
a quarter HC punkai tall flash beeping on HC.
Speaker 9: With a series of agreements, the Shangan Agreement, Amsterdam Threat,
Lisbon threat away from national sovereignty and in the direction
of this construct where the European Union is supposed to
be based on values and principles. Just as the exceptionalists
in the US claimed that somehow the United States was
not really based on the legacy of European primarily West
and Northwest European early settlers and British institutions, that it
was somehow the shining city on the hill. So if
Trump is going to overturn this, and at least with
the NSS we have a promise that this might be
the case, then we may be witnessing the beginning of
a revolutionary change. And I insist that there is not
a sign of equality between Trump and his globalist predecessors,
even though I dislike foreign interventions, even though I think
that US never interests is not visibly served by the
removal of Madura. There is a new intellectual and legal
and propagandistic justification for this. It is returned to the
old relations of amend nations based on power, on space
and resources, and that in itself is well come. If
this also means that the European Union and the doors
such as Chancellor Mertz and President Macron, and outside the
EU the Labor Prime Minister in London will be left
to their own devices, and the US will no longer
be part of this experiment in self annihilation that done
so much better. I am not a trumpion. I'm simply
trying to evaluate his impact on America's position in the
world and America's policies on the basis of the results
of his actions. As the Bible says, you'll know them
by the fruits and in the fullness of time. If
this means that power politics is back, at least it
will be easier for other powers, primarily China and Russia,
to negotiate with the US on the basis of clearly
defined interests and not some nebulous values. Because if your
objective is to make the Red Square safe for Pride parades,
then there is nothing to negotiate. If you start with
the assumption that Russia needs to fundamentally change its character,
or that it would be preferable for Russia to be
democratic if it were to disintegrate it into twelve or
twenty entities, as suggested by the lads big new Ruzhinski,
then of course, again there is nothing to negotiate if
you start lambasting the Chinese, as Anthony Blincoln did a
Tnchorage four years ago over the treatment of Wigurs and
democracy movement in Hong Kong. Then again, there is nothing
to negotiate with Trump in the White House. I think
that the return to the kind of predictability of international
relations in the context of a global balance of power
system will be both safer for the world and surprisingly
more morally sustainable, because moral absolutism of the globalist neo
con neolib clique is in fact deeply more and hypocritical,
as well as dangerous and laden with the possibility for
uncontrollable escalations.
Speaker 8: Several things there. What is your retort Because many people
who I consider sort of compatriots, right, people pulling in
roughly the same direction, are out and out anti war.
They view war as illegitimate they do they view any
sort of aggressive foreign policies on its face immoral and wrong.
And many of them are reacting to this pivot to
sort of focusing on the hemisphere, which is hysterics. They're
absolutely beside themselves because it is not full isolationism. And
these are people I consider friends, Scott Horton, a few others.
So what is your response to that position? The true isolationists,
the true Because you could say anti war, I guess base, Well.
Speaker 9: Some wars have to be fought, but we really need
to start with some clarity. In theoretical terms, conflict is
imminent to human nature, and the use of force or
threat of the use of force is present in all
eras and all geographic spaces, all cultures and all civilizations.
From the Sumerians and Heatites, and the Mesopotamian hydraulic states,
the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Egyptians onwards, we have certain
regularities which absolutely determined relations between states. The first true
historian as well as theoretician of geopolitics, even though geopolitics
is term, only came into being in nineteen hundred. The
historian of the Polar Permission War, to Kiddidis gave us
the famous definition of the conflict between Athens and Sparta.
The rise of Sparta and the fear that this created
sorry the rise of Athens as maritime trading empire, and
the fear of Sparta that its position would be jeopardized,
and the desire to preserve the set of scroll made
the war inevitable. Now, he did not mention the fact
that Athens was a democracy and Sparta was an aristocracy,
because he DMed it irrelevant and the deed it is
the notion that domestic order somehow determines or justifies the
posture of a country in world relations is simply not true.
It's not supported by evidence. But what we have in
the case of the Roman Republic, for instance, is the
Punic War against the Cartoginians, who are the descendants of
Phoenicians who colonize North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula. It
was the struggle of central Mediterranean, the space between Tunisia,
Sicily and Calabria. It was really a matter of who
gets home. There was nothing ideological, nothing ontological about it.
It was geopolitics, plain and simple. Only one of those
two stay would emerge victorious. It was not a conflict
amenable to compromise. It was an existential conflict, and the
victorious power simply destroyed the losers to the point of
raising their capital and plowing it with salt, so that
even memory of it is.
Speaker 7: Erased.
Speaker 9: Similar situations have risen ever since, and I would only
mention that in the modern era, after the Piece of
Asphalia of sixteen forty eight, which ended the Thirty Year War,
we have an interesting period in Europe. It's the period
of the classical balance of power. System, and it was
the system that provided Europe with a long period of
relative stability, which was only interrupted in a major way
by the French Revolutionary Wars, and by Napoleon's seventeen years
of meteodic rise and then sudden fall after his Russian adventure,
and then again in eighteen fifteen at the Congress of Vienna,
the balance of power system was renewed and provided Europe
with another ninety nine years of relative peace, when it
flourished into arguably the most successful, both scientifically, technologically and
artistically richest, and the most brilliant civilization known to mankind.
So I do believe that both the bipolar world of
the Cold War and the monopolar moment of the post
Cold War American global dominance were temporary aberrations, and that
in the long term, some form of balance of power system,
and we do have emerging multipolarity that is obvious, is
both as I said, politically more manageable and philosophically more
logical and morally more sustainable. Of course, this is anathema
to globalists and exceptionalists of all colors, but their refusal
to acknowledge the emerging multipolarity was in fact probably the
most destabilizing and the most dangerous element in the foreign
policy mix of the old bipartisan Washington establishment, because the
refusal to accept reality and the insistence to persevere in
trying to continue with full spectrum dominance was in fact
the most stabilizing and the most dangerous strategy that the
United States would possibly devise.
Speaker 8: The fly in the ointment, and you've already mentioned this
is our relationship to the State of Israel, both in
the who is the first mover in that relationship? Obviously
you have reports coming out about Operation Midnight Hammer, some
sources claiming that mister Netahu made the decision and then
informed us and we were forced to react. But how
does a generalized pivot towards the hemisphere interact with our
stated or actual obligations to this Middle Eastern democracy.
Speaker 12: When does exceptional design stop and true art begin? Perhaps
when it moves you Coopra. We're bold design, smarter technol
and pure performance come together in perfect harmony. It's why
we're one of Arland's fastest growing car brands with a
range of advanced petrol, diesel, plug in hybrid and all
electric models. Explore our latest offers, including the Coopra five
year warranty at Coopra Official dot Ie Coopra design that
moves Ugh.
Speaker 3: January Yes, Sky January Sale time. What It's great You
get Sky TV with exclusive shows like a Knight of
the Seven Kingdoms, Love a Man in Armor, Netflix with
The Stranger Things Finale and super liable Sky Broadband paring
it all SkyTV, Netflix and Sky Broadband YEP forty four
year own month for twelve months in the Sky January sale.
Speaker 5: I love January.
Speaker 3: Search, skysale availability subj the to location New customers only
twelve month minimum terms TV and broadband cells every all
content available by January nineteen. Terms of life more embosskyt
e slash speeds.
Speaker 9: Well, First of all, there are now real obligations and
the myths of our Anshynco aircraft carrier being the reliable
and essential and the existentially important ally is just that
a myth. Now. Who can blame the Israelis for wanting
to keep Washington completely committed to their defense and the
Apollosia for whatever policies they conduct in the region. But
oddly enough, ironically, even this is the one area where
both Israelis and Arabs agree that they both want the
United States to remain committed to the Middle East, and
I think that the best answer to that is that
the region has no longer any tangible, vital interests to
the United States, and I was encouraged that in the
National Strategic Document issue last month this is actually stated
point when that with the diversification of energy sources, the
United States does not have the same degree of interest
in the Middle East as before. Now, de mythologizing the
relationshipship with Israel is both possible and necessary, and it
is unfortunate that so far we still have this curious,
passionate attachment in the White House, which is at odds
with MAGA assumptions and also at todds with what one
might term foreign national interest guided foreign policy. Demutologization, however,
must not veer into the kind of leftist moral condemnation
for its own sake, which is both irrational and hypocritical,
because at the same time it is completely intervious to
the condemnation of the Islamic world for its treatment of
Christians and for its general dysfunctionality and its inability to
create either sustainable and viable economies or productive and harmonious societies.
So In answer to your question, I think that perfect
detachment from the region with equidistant attitude to both parties,
especially when they use mythological or religious arguments in support
of their aims, is the way to go. For instance,
it's a regular feature of the Israeli discourse to claim
that there is the biblical basis for Judea and Samaria
as they call them to belong to them. And at
same time, on the Muslim side, and this is less
known any part of the Umma, the collective community of
the Muslim faithful, which used to be under the Muslim
control and then falls to infidel must never be recognized
as legitimately theirs. And that's why the late Yasser Arafat
in the end refused to sign the Camp David deal
offered by Clinton in December two thousand, which was the
best off of the Palestinians had ever got since nineteen
forty seven eight, because he couldn't bring himself to sign
something that would have permanent character. In the Muslim world,
everything is based upon analogy with the early period of
Muslim expansion and in the lifetime of Muhammad and his
first four successes as they called him the Four rightly
guided halifs, and Muhammad signed or agreed to a temporary
truce with Mecca, which he later violated. And this model
of temporary truths has been present in the period of
the Ottoman Empire's decline in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
But the Ottomans never gave up on the hope, however
unrealistic at that time of returning to Some of that
was sessions in the Balkans and around the Black Sea,
so that in Arabic, for instance, Spain is still known
as al Andalus, and in Turkish Serbia is still Serbistan
and Montenegris Karadag. So biblical claims of the Israelis for
are at Israel from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea,
and the Muslim claims to the return of the Uma
and the world of faith dar al Islam from the
world of war. These claims should be simply ignored by
the United States, regarded as quaint, as anthropologically interesting, but
totally irrelevant to the American interests. And of course, in
that context the problem we have is with Christian Zionists.
But I think it is a community declining in both
size and influence. Mercifully because they are difficult people to
deal with in rastural terms.
Speaker 8: Well to that point, and you mentioned de mythologizing, I
realized this is somewhat outside of the scope of our conversation.
I promise I'll bring it back around to international relations.
But the rapid de mythologization of both the State of
Israel and of to talk around it a certain prominent
twentieth century event which is responsible for much of our
attitudes towards Israel. That's been incredibly rapid. And look, as
a young person in a heavily Protestant area, I see
this transformation very interestingly. It is very much a generational divide.
Obviously baby boomers get the worst rap there's maybe some
to that as regards Zionism, but even once you get
down really halfway through Generation X into millennials, it is
at best a certain indifference, if not kind of harsher
attitudes towards the State of Israel. Conversation for another day,
but I want to return to the subject of Iran.
We mentioned Operation Midnight Hammer, which was targeting their nuclear program,
but also it seems as if there is and it's
very hard to get data out for any number of reasons.
But it seems as if there is a color revolution
in the offing currently going on in Iran. What do
you make of our relationship to the Islamic Republic? How
does that, I guess, mesh with your your previous analysis.
Speaker 9: I would put Iran in the same context of the
Israeli Arab conflict in our previous segment. Let us keep
away from it because no much of what it does
visa its Arab neighbors in the Golf or Israel, will
affect the United States In the slightest degree. Iran is
not a threat to either the United States or US
interests in the region. Israel is perfectly capable of defending itself.
It has nuclear weapons, It has the military that, as
we've seen time and over again ever since the nineteen
forty seven forty eight War, is superior to any coalition
that its real or potential enemies can put together against it,
let alone Iran by itself, which is of course viewed
with grad deal of suspicion or worse by the Sunni
Arab monarchies in the Golf. It is also ridden with
domestic discontent and we an economic crisis which makes its
infrastructure barely functional. So I think it would be completely
absurd to regard Iran as either a threat or as
a potential, let alone real target for the repeat of
this lamentable episode from last summer, which I think shook
Trump's base pretty badly, and if it were to happen again,
I think the whole Marga edifice might start showing cracks
equivalent to those that domestically were created with the mismanagement
of the Epstein affair.
Speaker 8: Well, thank you so much, mister Trivivick. This was very interesting.
If people are interested in you and your work, I
know you've mentioned your routine appearances in Chronicles. You've also
written a popular book. Where can people find that?
Speaker 9: Well, the sort of the profit which I still be
leave is not because I've written.
Speaker 14: It, but probably the most readable summary of what Islam
is really all about, including its doctrine and its historical record.
Speaker 9: Unfortunately, it can only be found secondhand on Amazon dot
com because Regina Wanted Express, the publisher has gone out
of business, but my current output can be found on
Chronicles website Chronicles Magazine dot org. I also have Substa
Trifkovic dot substec dot com and as for and by
the way, my substanct articles often deal with little known
aspects of Balkan history as well as world affairs. And finally,
for those who speak Serbia or Creation or other post
Yugoslav languages, Bosnia and Montenegrin, you name it. On YouTube,
they can find my many appearances on local TV and
podcasts in Southeast Europe. I'm afraid we've only touched on
so many issues that are yet to be covered, so
I hope in the fullness of time we will have
an opportunity to talk again.
Speaker 8: Well, definitely, this was incredibly educational, and I enjoy having
returning guests, especially those who have actual expertise on a topic, because,
as you can probably tell by my inability to pronounce
your last name or really any word that isn't in
the King James Bible, I'm sorely uneducated on the topic,
and so we'll have to have you on again again.
It was great speaking to you and everyone at home.
Keep your head up. I can't last forever.
Speaker 7: Good night, God bless.
Speaker 13: Most do Maho founderd fiber Arrator must mean la Emmert
Yard of the Kree has been with differdy and of
Labartish Fibilinis far is to a gear her kin must
mean that too, Sorry the Winters, the Ridge Skillinger, Concured
Post and it's the Raim Space. It's killing a sula
or public jobs.
Speaker 2: Punk you