David Sanger: New Cold Wars

Podcast Summary

• Appreciating Progress and Acknowledging Challenges: Celebrate personal milestones and progress, while honoring the memory of those we've lost. Check out the new Acid Tongue album and look forward to a serious geopolitical discussion.

  Life continues with its cycles of death and rebirth, and it's essential to appreciate the progress we've made while acknowledging the challenges we face. The podcast host shared some sad news about the passing of Mary Louise Swift, a journalist, musician, and dedicated mother to Jim Swift, a key figure in the Bulwark community. Her funeral will be held on Friday. The host also celebrated a personal milestone, officiating his younger brother's interracial, gay wedding in a state where such unions were once illegal. The host encouraged listeners to acknowledge and celebrate such progress. Additionally, the Acid Tongue band, creators of the Next Level Podcast theme music, released a new album. The host encouraged listeners to check it out if they enjoy West Coast indie rock, garage rock, and surf rock. The podcast will continue with a serious discussion on geopolitical issues with David Sanger, White House and National Security Correspondent for The New York Times.

• Iran's attack on Israel: Calibrated Responses and Deterrence: Iran's attack on Israel resulted in minimal damage due to Israel's effective missile defense system. The incident highlights the importance of deterrence by denial, where strong defenses discourage attacks, and the Israeli war cabinet is weighing options for a response.

  The current situation between Iran and Israel, following Iran's attack on Israel over the weekend, presents a complex challenge for both countries and the international community. The attack, which resulted in minimal damage due to Israel's effective missile defense system, has led to discussions about calibrated responses, including cyber attacks, to avoid escalating tensions. The Biden administration's approach to Iran has been focused on keeping them at bay, but without direct negotiations. Some speculate that Iran intended the attack to fail to avoid escalation. Regardless, the incident highlights the importance of deterrence by denial, where the strength of defenses discourages attacks, as opposed to the traditional form of deterrence, where retaliation follows an attack. The Israeli war cabinet is currently weighing options for a response, likely something modest but noticeable, and the outcome could significantly impact the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East.

• Navigating Complex Relationships with Adversaries and Allies: The United States' approach to Russia and China needs updating, as the use of advanced technology and long-standing tensions with allies complicate global affairs. Miscalculations in understanding the power and intentions of these countries can have serious consequences.

  The world's geopolitical landscape has shifted significantly in the last few decades, and the United States' approach to Russia and China has not kept pace. The discussion highlighted the challenges of anticipating and countering adversarial actions, such as the use of drones and missiles, which can be difficult to detect and intercept. Additionally, the complex relationship between the United States and Israel, specifically between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu, adds another layer of complexity to global affairs. The history of tension between these leaders is long-standing, but the current administration's stance balances support for Israel and frustration with Netanyahu's actions. Furthermore, the book "New Cold Wars" argues that the United States has been living in a delusion about the power and intentions of Russia and China for the past 30 years. The last four administrations have struggled to navigate these relationships effectively, and the consequences of this miscalculation are still unfolding.

• Miscalculations in US-China-Russia Relations: Underestimating Intensions and Consequences: Historically, economic interdependence prevented major powers from challenging each other's territorial claims. However, China and Russia's use of digital technology and unexpected actions have shown that assumptions about their intentions and consequences can lead to miscalculations and failure to anticipate their actions.

  The economic interdependence between major powers like China and Russia, and the United States, has historically prevented them from challenging each other's territorial claims or exerting greater control. However, this assumption has been proven wrong as both China and Russia have shown the ability to use digital technology for repression and assert their power in unexpected ways. For instance, China's use of facial recognition technology and Russia's annexation of Crimea defied expectations. Moreover, past administrations, including that of Bill Clinton, underestimated the leaders' intentions and the potential consequences of their actions. The relationship between Bush and Putin, marked by seemingly friendly interactions, also masked underlying tensions. Ultimately, the assumption that a weak China or Russia would be less threatening to the US has led to miscalculations and a failure to anticipate their actions.

• Former President Bush's concern over a weak China: Bush expressed concern over a weak China, contrasting with past integration arguments. Obama's pivot to Asia faced challenges, while Trump's approach was inconsistent.

  During the interview with former President George W. Bush, he expressed concern over a weak China, believing they are more likely to lash out compared to a strong, confident one. Bush's perspective contrasts with the Clinton and Bush era's integration argument towards China. The Obama administration attempted to pivot to Asia but faced challenges due to the TPP's failure and China's growing strength. The Trump administration's approach to China was described as unserious at the top but serious at the staff level, with Deputy National Security Advisor Matt Pottinger leading a sophisticated approach. Trump's actions towards China were inconsistent, trading away human rights for potential trade deals and then blaming China for the COVID-19 pandemic while using bellicose language.

• Trump's Focus on China and Russia Hindered Efforts to Secure Semiconductor Industry: The Trump administration's focus on China and Russia overshadowed the need to secure the semiconductor industry, crucial for national defense and commercial systems, leading to missed opportunities and potential vulnerabilities.

  During the Trump administration, there was a significant shift in national security policy towards focusing on the challenges posed by China and Russia, but the implementation was hindered by Trump's focus on other issues like counterterrorism and trade deals. This led to a loss of time and opportunity to address critical issues, such as the semiconductor industry, which is vital for national defense and commercial systems. The Obama administration should have addressed this issue earlier, and the Trump administration's efforts were largely unsuccessful. The semiconductor industry is dominated by Taiwanese companies, and a potential war over Taiwan could result in the destruction of these crucial chips. While there may be rhetoric about coming to Taiwan's defense, there are doubts about the political will to actually go to war over this issue among both Democrats and Republicans. The Chinese are learning how to produce these chips themselves, and the "silicon shield" may not last long.

• Leaders' reactions to defending territories far from borders: Presidents might be less likely to risk American lives to defend territories without immediate allies. China uses counter strategies like Volt Typhoon to disrupt US response. Stay prepared for various scenarios and vigilant against cyber threats.

  The potential reactions of world leaders to specific geopolitical situations can be unpredictable, especially when it comes to defending territories far from their borders. Using the examples of Ukraine and Taiwan, it was suggested that a president might be less likely to risk American lives to defend a territory without immediate NATO allies, like Taiwan, compared to a territory with strong allies, like Ukraine. The discussion also touched upon China's counter strategies, such as Volt Typhoon, which aims to disrupt American water and electricity supplies near key military bases to slow down the US response. Another topic that was mentioned was the SolarWinds cyberattack, where Russian hackers gained access to government and corporate networks by infiltrating the SolarWinds software supply chain. These examples highlight the importance of being prepared for various scenarios and the need to stay vigilant against sophisticated cyber threats.

• SolarWinds Hack: A Sophisticated Attack with Geopolitical Implications: The SolarWinds hack exposed the risks of software vulnerabilities and the importance of cybersecurity, especially against sophisticated adversaries like Russia and China. It also highlighted the geopolitical implications of technology vulnerabilities and the need for increased defense spending.

  That the SolarWinds hack was a sophisticated attack that went undetected for months, allowing Russian malware to infiltrate various organizations, including government agencies. The trust placed in software updates and authentication was exploited, and the attackers were able to distribute their malware through a popular software used for managing internet traffic. This incident highlighted the importance of cybersecurity and the need for constant vigilance, especially against adversaries like Russia and China. The EU's continued reliance on Russian oil was also discussed as a major mistake, allowing Russia to gain significant leverage over NATO countries. The idea that embracing Russia would prevent conflict proved to be a flawed strategy, and the need for increased defense spending to counteract this threat was emphasized. Trump's administration was criticized for being soft on Putin, but the actions taken were debated. Overall, the conversation underscored the importance of cybersecurity and the geopolitical implications of technology vulnerabilities.

• Impact of advisors on Trump's foreign policy: Trump's choice of advisors in his second term could alter US foreign policy direction and effectiveness

  The actions of a political leader, such as Donald Trump, can be influenced by the team they surround themselves with. During Trump's first term, he had advisors who understood the geopolitical threats posed by Russia and China, but in a second term, if he surrounds himself with yes-men, his rhetoric could dominate policy, making it more worrisome. For instance, Mike Pompeo, who initially took a traditional Republican approach, made a major error by threatening US allies to abandon Huawei, which backfired and undermined American credibility. Another example is the failed attempt to warn Putin about the invasion of Ukraine, which was not taken seriously by European leaders despite accurate intelligence. Overall, the choices Trump makes in his second term regarding national security advisors could significantly impact the direction and effectiveness of US foreign policy.

• New Cold Wars: Complex Geopolitical Landscape: The New Cold Wars pose significant challenges to US core interests from a complex web of relationships and alliances between China and Russia. The US and its core democracies face a choice between two camps, and disengagement is not an option.

  The world we live in today is experiencing a new form of geopolitical conflict, referred to as the "New Cold Wars," which poses significant challenges to US core interests. Contrary to some views, the threat is not just from one major adversary, but from a complex web of relationships and alliances, particularly between China and Russia. The interconnectedness of the world has offered some level of protection in the past, but it's important to recognize that the threat is real and growing. The US and its core democracies are facing a choice between two camps, and the consequences of not choosing could lead to the creation of new borders and divided worlds. The book "New Cold Wars" serves as a warning and a call to action, urging the US to develop a serious long-term strategy to deal with this complex and evolving geopolitical landscape. The US cannot afford to disengage from the world and must work to shape it in a way that aligns with its interests. The book is a deeply reported and well-researched exploration of this issue, and it's a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the complexities of the current geopolitical landscape.