Russia, China on Defense and No Iranian Nuclear Bomb - US Intelligence Report
This. Is taya Graham reporting, for the real news network. There, is a 42, page statement called the worldwide threat assessment, of the US intelligence community, and it, is causing controversy this, is a critical, report that reflects the thinking of all the American intelligence agencies, on threats, supposed to us security, but some of the key points seem to be at odds with the policies, of the Trump administration and, in fact they may exaggerate. The balance of power here. To discuss this with me is Paul Jay the editor in chief so. Paul, we're gonna focus on this report first give, me some of your takeaways from it, well. There's. A lot in this report, and I haven't read the whole report but. Something, jumps, out at me which is simply being completely, underreported. In. The corporate media I would say two big, issues. Number. One the. The reportage. The analysis. Of the report on Iran continues. The view of the American, intelligence agencies. That. Iran is not building a, bomb, and. That has been lost in the coverage of the report, now. You can find it in some, of the newspaper, reporting. But. Especially on CNN, and MSNBC they've. Been focusing, on the reports, talking. About North Korea not really, wanting to give up its, bomb program. They've. Been talking about the lack of discussion, about. That there isn't the national, security, threat at the Mexican American border so, why have a wall. Which. Is all. True that's what. Is and isn't in the report, but it's by far not. The most significant, stuff in the report, and I think the most significant, piece of the report is, the part about Iran you. Do find this, to, some extent in the prim and you know you can find it in a New York Times article Washington. Post article kind. Of where the elites get, their news but. Where the mass audience gets, their news you barely, hear that, according, to this report. Iran, is not building a, bomb has not violated, the. Nuclear. Agreement with the United States and the other European countries, and here's, a quote from the report. We. Continue, to assess that Iran is not currently. Undertaking the, key nuclear weapons, development activities. We judge necessary to. Produce a nuclear device. However. Iranian. Officials have publicly, threatened, to, reverse some of Iran's joint comprehensive, plan of action, commitments. That's the deal made, with Obama let, me finish sorry. A ranch joint comprehensive plan of action commitments. And resumed. Nuclear, activities, that, the jcpoa. Limits. If Iran, does not gain the tangible, trade and investment. Benefits it expected, from the deal so. Essentially. It's the abrogation, of the treaty. That's. Causing the possibility. That Iran might, start. To develop some, kind of movement towards, a nuclear weapon. So it's Trump that's created, the situation that's, made the. World more dangerous if in fact Iran, actually even has a plan to move towards a nuclear weapon, which, is entirely not, clear. Because. Back, in and, let me just said there's a long history of, American. Governments, and certainly the media, completely. Ignoring what the American intelligence community says. About Iranian, nuclear weapons, back in 2007. There was a National, Intelligence. Estimate. Which. In, defiance. Of the Bush administration. At the time the, same way this one kind of upsets. The Trump administration, said. That Iran. Had stopped, building a bomb in 2003. And that there's, no evidence that there was a weapons, program after. 2003. And and, as far, as I understand, I'm no expert on this but my. Understanding talking. To experts, that. There has never been any evidence that, they, are building, a bomb there may be some, evidence that they, were approaching. The, potential. Of a breakout. Possibility. But. Even Joe Biden said and anyone. That followed this said it was it would take a year to five, years, to actually go from the breakout, to, actually accomplishing, the bomb which.
Is When you listen to the Trump, ministration, you listen to people like Lindsey Graham or even people on the Democratic Party, side like Chuck Schumer and certainly Netanyahu, in Israel the, idea is there they're furiously. Making a bomb in Iran and that even, after this agreement. With Obama they, were secretly, making a bomb it's. Really it's really ridiculous. So. If Trump, and Netanyahu are absolutely. Disagreeing. With this report they're saying that Iran is not living up to its part of this agreement, what, kind of impact is this report going to have when the Trump administration its, policies, everything, he says completely. Contradicts, it well I think their. Approach will, be the. Way the Bush administration. Dealt with the earlier National Intelligence, Estimate which is to bury it to, ignore it and this, is what happened in the already. As, I say on CNN, and MSNBC and. The the mass media is already, not even talking about this Iran provision, but, there's a very there's an important part of the report, and, we've, been saying us on the real news for a long time. They're. Not really concerned, they being the. Military-industrial. Complex the. Foreign, policy, complex, the congressional, foreign policy, military-industrial, complex they're. Not really worried about a nuclear weapons program, in Iran because they know there never really has, been one that's. Anywhere near a bomb even if they, were trying, which is not clear what. They really, our concern is about Iran's. Regional strength, the power of, Iran, in the region, and its, u.s. foreign policy not to allow, contending. Regional. Powers, they don't like it in the Middle East in that area with Iran they don't like the fact that Russia is is a power in that region they certainly don't like China's, a power in Asia but. They particularly, don't like Iran. As an as a power outside the, American sphere of influence so what, they're really concerned, about Iran, is that. Iran is developing the, capability. Of defending. Itself against. Regime change and so. Here's another quote, from the report. Iran's. Ballistic missile programs. Which include the largest, inventory, of ballistic, missiles in the region. Continue to pose a threat get, this pose a threat to. Countries across the Middle East Iran's, work on a space launch vehicle, including, on, its, Simorgh, I'm sure, I'm pronouncing it incorrectly, shortens. The time line to an ICBM, because SLE vs and ICBMs, use similar technologies. They. Don't like that Iran is developing enough. Ballistic. Missile power, not. Nuclear. Conventional. But. Still, formidable. That. If they're attacked the. Counter-attack. Will, be very significant. And those missiles. Might hit Saudi Arabia those his missiles, might hit Israel, they. Might hit American, bases, in, one place or another but. It's clearly. Defensive. In. A million years one could not imagine that Iran, will start firing missiles, at either Saudi, Arabia, or Israel or. An American, base as. A first, strike because, what happens, next, there's. No Iran after that I mean, it's, it's clear, that the United States, some. Extent Israel I don't know if it goes nuclear but even if it stays conventional. There'd. Be little, left of an Iran if. There was an all-out bombing. Assault on Iran which would surely, follow, an. Offensive. First strike by Iran, against. Any of the u.s. you know allies, or, countries. Within their sphere of influence and that's, a theme that actually runs throughout the report. The. So-called, adversaries. Of the United States Russia. China Iran. Are. Actually, in a defensive, posture I wanted to ask you about that because when.
I Was looking at this report it talks about China. Having defensive. Development, and developing. A second strike capability but. Isn't the u.s. actually developing, first strike capability. I mean why is it being framed in this here's some quotes from the report right. From the very beginning, and the forward to the report it says, this China. And Russia are more aligned that at any point since the mid 1950s. Now that's very significant, that, this there's been a lot of contention, between Russia, and China certainly, during the time of Mao Zedong and the Soviet Union China. Denounced. The Soviet Union and there is the it almost came close to war at times and there are some, disputed, territories, between Russia and China the. Militaries, have faced off against, each other, there's. A there's a lot of you, know reasons. Sort. Of why, they could be contending, but they're not they're. Becoming more allied, with each other and why here's, it says in the report. The. Relationship. Is likely. To strengthen, in the coming year as some of their interest, and threat, perceptions. Converge. Get. The word perceptions. As if that's not real and here's, the next sentence again the word perceptions. Sort of. Particularly. Regarding perceived. U.s. unilateralism. And interventionism. As if. This is only perceived. You. Know there's no real interventions. Going on I mean what's going on in Venezuela is just a perception, that's not an not an intervention. The. The recognition. Of the Honduran, coup, is not a intervention. It's, just a perception, I mean even go on in terms of framing. American. Unilateralism. And intervention, ISM. Syria. And go on and on anyway let me continue reading. Perceived. US unilateralism. Interventionism. And Western promotion, of democratic. Values and, human rights, well of course that's, what the United States when. They project power, it's, always about democratic, values and human rights we know what that really means it's the democratic. Values the, democratic, right that. American, capital gets to go wherever it wants to go and if, American, capital, isn't dominant. Then. It's not democratic, if, they really gave a damn about democracy. And human rights then. How is the pillars. Of power in, the Middle East for. The United States Saudi Arabia. Where's. The democratic, values Israel. And the occupation. Where's, the democratic, values and, you, can go on from there and always a nurturing, of these right-wing governments, in. In Latin America now I mean the guy the, new president, of Brazil is threatening, to be Philippines, like like Duarte and going, starting, arrests and shooting people and, and. So. Democratic. Values is, simply, about the ability, of American. Capital. To. Be dominant, and if and, they don't actually give a damn that, what the political, institutions, for, the people of those countries are it's, all rhetoric people, make the argument that there really are expansionist. Ik policies, on the part of Russia and China for example Russia's. Pushing. Into Crimea and Ukraine and, then China actually has an economic, strategy called the 2025 plan, that's, this huge economic, push couldn't you make the argument they, are making expansionist, plans as well. Well. In general. No. Doubt. Russia. Is a capitalist, power and China. Is a state capitalist, power, and. It's the nature of big, capitalist, powers to expand so, in, a general way absolutely. I think Crimea is a very exceptional case even. Kissinger, said that. Because. Of the history that Crimea, was kind of given by the Soviet, Union to the Ukraine and they, took it back and one can argue that it. Wasn't done properly or, not but. It's a very exceptional, story, Crimea. But. As a. Mid-sized. Capitalist. Power does. It want to expand, of course. It does I mean Canada, wants to expand Canada has banks, in the Caribbean. Canada. Canadian mining, companies are, all, over South, America Latin, America. Completely. Ruining, the environment, involved. In developing. The corrupt politics, of the local oligarchies. It's. In the very nature of. Capitalist. Powers at one size or another to, want to expand, they're ruled, by you know elites and oligarchies, who want to be the the. Winning monopoly, is the most successful, rich people in the world and you, know the Chinese billionaires. Compete, with the American, billionaires, and so on so. Yeah of course they want to expand. But. In this at least in this historic. Period, it, could change the. Dominant. Power and certainly, the dominant, military, power is the, United States there's simply no comparison and, none, of these countries whether it's China or Russia, or. Canada. Have. Committed, crimes. Against. International, law against. Humanity. Any. You can't even compare to what the United States has done we should take the Iraq war you, can't say they haven't committed crimes against international law I'm not saying that I'm, taking them to scale you.
Can't Compare, the United States in terms of the Iraq war in, terms, of allowing and nurturing, the the Saudis and Turkish into interventions, in Syria, which destroyed, Syria, I mean, the US policy, is more or less destroyed, Syria destroyed, Iraq destroyed. Libya, I mean. There's nothing the, other kept powers, listen if history. Had been different and it may be different, you know who knows what China, you, know where the balance of forces will be in 50 years or 75, years it's. Not like in that some nature of the DNA, that Americans, are evil it's. The dominant power, and the dominant, power fights to maintain its dominance, and and, if, China was the dominant power you know who, knows what what, would they might do but they're, not the dominant power and we as people. Who. Are you, know on peoples of the world that, are getting destroyed by these, US. Policies. Need. To speak out and at, the moment when Russia and China push back on US policies, like. Over Venezuela, where they you know are refusing, to play ball on. Recognizing. This, imposter. As president. And. And and and don't, want to recognize, or. Support, American. Interference in Venezuela, I, don't. Know what their intention. Is and I'm, not saying there's something pure, about the intent but it doesn't matter because right now in the balance of forces it's very, important, to defend the. Principle, of non-interference, and, and given, where the balance of forces are even. This report, makes it clear, that Russia, and China are. In a defensive, posture not a none aggressive, posture, towards. The united states and that's, a critical concept, for Americans, to get because, the narrative of the military-industrial, complex, right. From World War Two on. Is. That wean, Americans. Are you, know the Soviets, are out to get us they're gonna Russians, are coming the Russians are coming they're on the attack they're gonna take over Europe they're, gonna take over the, United States but, like you asked about China is China, has the ability, to launch cyberattacks, that cause localized. Temporary. Disruptive. Effects on critical infrastructure, such. As disruption. Of a natural gas pipeline. For. Days to weeks in the, United States, now. Imagine. Why. And when would China ever want. To disrupt natural. Gas pipelines, in the United States let's assume this is true they, have that capacity. China. Owns more. Than one trillion, dollars, of US debt. The. Whole GDP, of China is you. Know somewhere. North of 12 trillion. Dollars. 1/12. Of the whole GDP. Of China is tied, up in owning. American. T-bills. Do. They want to destroy the American economy. How. Much of China's economy is dependent on the American, market for, products, I, mean. This trade war that's going on now it's. It's hurting, the Chinese economy economy, just, to have these tariffs, you're. Gonna destroy, your, market, and cut, off disrupt, natural, gas pipelines. For days to weeks only, as a defensive, measure only. As a second. Strike capability, it. Would never be you, know oh we want to destroy America because, we hate your values, I mean what a crock, maybe. The most overt. Recognition. Of China, in a defensive, posture in relationship, the United States and remember. That that Steve Bannon, and this. Is Trump's, real ideologies, and, bannon's. The real person. That articulates. I think, what Trump believes, sees, China as the real threat, to the United States. But this report defies. That idea in this, way and, here's the quote, China. Continues, its multi-year, effort to, modernize its, nuclear missile forces including, deploying sea based weapons, improving. Its road-mobile, on, silo-based weapons, and testing.
Hypersonic. Glide, vehicles. Here's. The key line these new capabilities, are intended, to ensure the viability of, China's, strategic. Deterrent. By. Providing, a second, strike capability get. That second. Strike capability and. A. Way to overcome, missile. Defenses. Second. Strike capability means. You're ready to defend yourself, against. A first strike, it's. The there's, no attempt, on the part of China to develop first, strike technology. My, question is is why, is the media focusing, so much on China's. Defensive. Position, them developing, second, strike capability as, opposed to looking at the u.s. developing, first strike capability, yeah that's a great question and that's that goes to the very heart, of the the whole mythology, of American. Foreign policy and, almost. All the media buys analysts that. America. Is this defender, of democracy and. We're. Always threatened. Because of our values, and these. Non. Democracies. Would like to destroy us and all this the. Truth is the country, that's really developing. First strike capabilities. Is the United States it's. Not new it's from the very beginning, of the development of the nuclear, arsenals. And, people should watch this series I did with Daniel Ellsberg. It's. A crit, and maybe one of the most important things we've ever done on the real news network and Ellsberg. Makes it clear that in the late 1950s, into, 1960-61. When, they were talking about a missile gap you. Know they said the Russians had like a thousand, missiles and the, United States only has 200, and we're going to get destroyed and it turned, out that the Soviet Union had four missiles, at the time and, never. Had neither. A plan to try to dominate the, world through a nuclear threat. Also never had a plan to invade Western Europe the whole rationale. For NATO and all that a total. Crock but. Who is got. What 600, or more military. Bases all over the world who, is developing, nuclear weapons with first strike capability, and very. Concerning. And. Trump, has ordered a new nuclear weapon, which has already gone into, production. Which. Is a new, very. Low yield nuclear, weapon, well. About something around half of Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. Which. Means they really have, some intent to use this on the battlefield. Or. At least to threaten, somebody with it and I. Don't think they're gonna threaten Russia and China with it this. Is to threaten like an Iran. That. If you screw with us you. Don't do what we want you, don't submit, because. We'll Russia and China step, in with, an all-out nuclear war. That will end life on Earth and it will any. Even, the small. H-bomb. War ends, life on earth as, far, as we know. But. A small low yield bomb, dropped. Into an Iran. Maybe. Russia and China don't do, anything about it and so, it becomes a real weapon to threaten mid-sized. Powers, that, don't want to come under American, dominance, and that, weapons, actually, in production as we speak, it's out there they're getting ready to let go and it's not the first small tactical ball in the United States has created, but. If I understand it correctly it's smaller. Which. Makes it more, usable, well. That is incredibly, disturbing, but. That's. Incredibly disturbing but what's interesting is that Elizabeth Warren, has just crafted. A no first use bill so there is some push in the United States to make this pledge no we are not going to be the ones to first use any sort of nuclear weapons how. Does that work now that you've just told me about this, sort of small. Size or mid size nuclear, weapon that President Trump is currently working on how does a no, first use bill work. Yes, that knowledge they did exactly. I mean it's worn and I've Lee and and, Marquis have. This bill. It. Would say, there's no point building these if. They were to pass, a bill that says no first strike. You. Get rid of this stuff because you then you can't threaten people, and then if you you know if we pass a bill like that then you say well let's not spend money on these small tactical. Bombs, because they are only first strike, weapons. Of. Course the only real solution is there has to be a massive. Reduction. In the nuclear stockpile, not what the United States and, Russia are planning, to do which, is spend about a trillion, dollars, over the next 30 years most. Of it in the next 10 years to, enlarge. And upgrade and modernize their. Nuclear weapons, when. When it would take 10, or 15. To. End life on earth and in fact it's interesting according. To Daniel Ellsberg China. Is actually only, building a handful they've only got a very small number of bombs you only need a handful, you, only need a handful, so why build these great big Arsenal's, because.
It Makes money. Because. The companies, that are making this stuff are making a fortune. Making. These weapons, and the, problem, is they're making money but. The more you increase the numbers of these bombs the, more you increase the possibility, of accidental. Use of these bombs I don't think anybody's. Mad enough in any, of any, country, frankly to. Start a war that ends all life on Earth in a deliberate, conscious way, but. The possibility. Of accidental. Accidental. Nuclear, war goes, up the, more bombs you got and we're, building more and more it's. A very dangerous situation and, the it's. Very good to see Warren and these others. Supporting. A bill like that because, for a long time people have just been in denial about the threat of this now. Let, me switch gears a little bit and ask you about Venezuela. Where does Venezuela show up in this report, on security, threats well it doesn't that's. The whole point and and the whole idea. Of interfering. Non-interference. Is you're only allowed, to. Take measures, against the country if it's threatening, you and that's why at the UN a lot of the countries that oppose the American, position. On Venezuela we're saying you're, violating the UN Charter because Venezuela, is no threat to you well, there's no there's, nothing in this report that Venezuela, is a threat the United States so again. It's, it's it's it's, an aggressive posture but by the United States that's the problem, whatever, the problems are in the Maduro government it's, up to the Venezuelans, to figure it out. Paul. I want to thank you for helping me discussed as complicated and exceptionally. Scary, topic so thank you so much for your time I think, we might have to delve back into this again I think there's even more there to discuss. No, doubt and. I want to thank you for joining me at the real news network.