The MeidasTouch Podcast - World Leaders Outmaneuver Trump as New Global Alliances Take Shape

Episode Date: August 29, 2026

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on world leaders declaring checkmate on Donald Trump and outmaneuvering him on the world stage as new global alliances take shape and the United States grows increasingly isolated and weaker under Trump. Meiselas highlights the upcoming Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting, President Xi's meetings with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney strengthening ties with the European Union. Meiselas then speaks with former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and former National Security Advisor Susan Rice for a powerful discussion about the current geopolitical situation and America's standing in the world. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Going on vacation? We're here for it. With kids, who turned the backseat into a courtroom drama over whose tablet is louder, whose charger is faster, and while watching the same cartoon for the hundredth time is a human right? Yep, we totally have vehicles to handle that, because whether it's a road trip or a business trip, where your flight's delayed, your phone's at 2% and your dinner is whatever is open.

Yeah, here for that too. Enterprise, we're here for it. World leaders are declaring checkmate, and they are taunting Donald Trump about his defeat to his face. But he is too busy posting derange memes renaming Lake Ontario at 2 a.m. in the morning to realize the gravity. Or he simply doesn't care because his sole priority is to do quid pro quos that enrich himself. You want to see why I'm saying world leaders are declaring checkmate. Exhibit A. China's president Xi Jinping will be visiting Kyrgyzstan for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting next week. And then he will be going to Egypt for an important meeting with Egypt's

president. Let's talk about it. The Chinese president will attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Summit before traveling to Egypt, the first state visit in the country in 10 years. At the same time, we've seen over the past week, military exercises between China and Egypt taking place a clear sign to the United States. There is a new superpower in town in the Middle East, in my opinion. China's president Xi Jinping will attend the SCO summit. We know that there will be meetings there as well with the leadership of Russia, as well as the leadership of Russia, as well as the leadership of Iran. Then Xi Jinping will head to Egypt on a trip from August 30th to September 3rd. And think about it. He only wants to spend one day in the United States when he meets with Donald Trump later in the month.

I think that's going to be sending a message as well at the SCO summit to be attended by member states, including Russia and Iran. She will discuss deepening cooperation as well as major international and regional issues, the foreign ministry spokesperson says. The Chinese president will hold talks with his counterpart in Kyrgyzstan and attend various state events during the trip. In Egypt, she will meet with Al-Sisi for talks aimed at making a positive contribution to safeguarding peace and stability in the region is how they are framing it. And this is at the same time that China's J-16s faced off against Egypt's airplanes, the refels in combat drills as the United States continues to pretend under the Trump regime it controls the Strait of Hormuz while it does not. And I think a notable aspect of this is

that the aircraft from China flew more than 6,000 kilometers, 3,730 miles, over nine hours to reach Egypt, crossing four countries, according to a report by state broadcaster CCTV, not specifying which four countries in the region were flown over. And you had these military drills between China and Egypt right there, and a message was clearly being sent. What was the United States doing? Vis-a-vis Egypt, Treasury Secretary Scott Besant made the following announcement. Treasury promised to sever every economic lifeline Tehran has left.

And finally, and the threat of the Iranian regime We also warn that Iran's enablers cannot continue to enjoy access to the U.S. dollar and the global financial system. So Bank, Missouri, UAE decided to find out the hard way. And today we're taking the first step and holding it accountable for its continued egregious support of the Iranian regime. So what's going on there, remember at the beginning of the week, Treasury Secretary Besson said, this is Economic D-Day and by Friday, we are going to be. inflict so much pain on any country that does business with Iran, you wait and see, we mean business here.

While China immediately responded and said, we're going to keep on doing business with Iran. They put out statements through Wang Yi, their foreign minister. Russia put out a statement right away saying, we look forward to meeting with Iran's leadership at the SCO, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting that's taking place in Kyrgyzstan. and we are looking forward to talking about expediting the $25 billion in nuclear capabilities and nuclear programs in Iran in addition to the Bushir nuclear power plant. Pakistan, the mediator between Iran and the United States, said that we do not support any unilateral sanctions on Iran. So Bessent announced these sanctions against Bank Maseur. And so as Brett Erickson explains, in perhaps one of the most embarrassing displays,

of taco throughout the entire war. That's Trump always chickens out. He always backs down. He makes these bold threats and backs down. Treasury Secretary Besson's threats to take action against all major financial institutions that do business with Iran turned out to be nothing but yet again the Trump regime caving. The reporting indicates that the U.S. will be cutting off U.S. dollar and correspondent banking to the UAE's branch of Bank, Missouri, Egypt's second largest bank.

Now that may sound powerful. Egypt's second largest bank is getting sanctioned. But the United States didn't even sanction it. It can still legally conduct business. The Trump regime literally only cut off the dollar clearing and corresponded bank access to a single branch, a clear indication that the world can receive that there is no hope whatsoever that the United States will ever make good on its threats.

And Donald Trump posting at 2 a.m. along with the world Donald Trump posting at 2 a.m. along with his top advisors, weird AI videos of himself dancing over a sign that says Lake America. But while Trump is doing that, again, world leaders are saying checkmate. China's Xi is also saying, you know what, I'm not just going to stop at Egypt, maybe on the way back to, we'll see the timing all of this, we'll do a big meeting with India for the Bricks Block meeting. The Bricks Block asserting itself more as the Trump regime attacks NATO. Bricks, of course, stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and a lot of other nations have been joining. She is likely to visit India with a big delegation for the first time

in seven years. So the first big visit to Egypt in many years, the first big visit to India in many years right there. China's president Xi Jinping likely to attend next month's Brick Summit in New Delhi with a large delegation. India is host. the September 12th to 13 summit, where she's presence would be watched less for the Bricks agenda than for what it signals about Beijing and New Delhi's efforts to stabilize relations between them. And you'll see major growth there in that relationship. At the same time, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post got their hands on classified information or classified documents by the U.S. intelligence community.

showing how Putin sees U.S. as weakened by Iran war and how China sees the U.S. weakened by the Iran war. And we've also reported how former, I guess current, but, you know, U.S. is not really a good ally anymore, how countries in Asia that were allied with the United States see the U.S. weapons shortage as being the, as the U.S. security umbrella collapsing in Asia. We also saw the same thing Europe, the U.S. security umbrella collapsing there. As that's going on, we know that Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney will be addressing the European Union the day after the State of the Union. He will also be a guest the first time you have a foreign leader being invited as the guest of honor at the State of the Union, where you have Ursula Vondraline giving the speech September

16th. He will give a speech the following day. And of course, we've been talking about new alliances like the Mecca Pact, of course, in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey. And we're seeing other alliances growing there as well that we've been covering here in the minus touch. I want to bring in someone who knows a lot about this. It has an incredible amount of knowledge. I want to bring in Susan Rice.

Susan Rice, of course, was the 23rd United States National Security Advisor under former President Obama. She was the 27th United States Ambassador to the United Nations, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, also under Obama. She served as the United States ambassador to the UN from 2009 to 2013,

and she was the United States National Security Advisor from 2013 to 2017. And I want to talk about all of this. I want to talk about all this, these major international developments as I believe world leaders are declaring checkmate over Donald Trump, as this catastrophic and unlawful war has demonstrated that the Trump regime unable to handle even the most basic of things,

especially now we're in six months since Trump launched this catastrophic war. All right, let's bring in Ambassador Susan Rice. Ambassador Susan Rice, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, former National Security Advisor, under the Obama administration. Ambassador Rice, great to see you. As always, we are approaching, and we are in basically six months into this, what I believe to be a catastrophic war in Iran, a catastrophic war we should never have been involved in in the first place. I want to get your reflections of where we are right now when it seems like every day from Donald Trump in his

regime there's a new lie. We control this, we control that, we're winning, it's amazing, it's great, it's the best, this is what we wanted. What do you assess the situation at now? Well, sadly, Ben, I think your assessment is very spot on. This has been a strategic failure that has been enormously costly to the American people. Obviously, first and foremost, we've lost 18 American service members, men and women. We've had over 500, some say, as high as 750 wounded. And Americans are paying for this every day and in their daily lives.

It's really extraordinary when you think about it. You know, Americans were already paying an additional $1,100 per average family as a result of Donald Trump's tariffs. Now, on top of that, the Iraq, excuse me, the Iran War is costing American families on average another $1,200. dollars. And when you look at what's happening to prices of gas at the pump, you know, up over 38 percent, diesel fuel up 50 percent. And then you add in the direct cost to the American taxpayer in terms of, you know, the defense budget, over $100 billion already spent. They're asking for

another $73 billion. This is money that could be used to lower housing costs, provide health care support, lower the cost of food and everyday necessities. And it's all going to a war which was ill-conceived in the first place, had no clear objectives, has been an abject strategic failure, and an extremely expensive one. Yeah. And I always emphasize to my audience when I make this next point first, we should never have been in this catastrophic war in the first place. Then I make the next point, which is observing the execution of the war and the idea that the U.S. was a superpower that could project strength, just seeing how the war was executed appears to have been done on all aspects, also just in a catastrophic way from the execution of it, from day one, slaughtering little

schoolgirls in Manab, and that's what gets a lot of attention. But there was also So Lamar in a volleyball hall where little girls were playing volleyball, and that was even to this day still being covered up by the Trump regime. But then running out of munitions as well, running out of the interceptors, running out of the Thads, the way our interceptors were even being used at the time to shoot down drones, where we'd be using $5 million, $11 million missiles in batches of two to strike down a $50,000 or $200,000 shahed drone, and you're looking at it and you're just saying,

what is this? Like, what are we even doing? There's that aspect of it too from your assessment and from all of the experience you have. What were you seeing there with just the execution of this war? Well, all of the consequences that you've described are absolutely accurate. And I would add that on top of the enormous

depletion of our munitions to a dangerously low level that has left our forces in the region vulnerable but also leaves our allies and our interests in Europe and Asia vulnerable. Our bases in the Middle East have been largely damaged to the extent that they're not habitable. We have had to walk away to a large extent from our core military bases in the Middle East. And those that remain are getting still attacked by the Iranians with relative ease. And as a result, as you said, of our loss of interceptors, which were so grossly depleted, we've left ourselves extremely vulnerable. But the thing, Ben, that you said at the outset is one, I think, really needs to be emphasized. You know, before this war began, the world believed, rightfully so, that the United States was the greatest, most powerful military in the world.

Here we joined in a war with Israel, another extraordinarily competent military, against a middle power adversary. And we have utterly failed to achieve our objectives. If the objective was regime change, that hasn't happened. If the objective was to end somehow by the use of force, Iran's nuclear program, that hasn't happened. We are status quo ante on that. While their Navy and Air Force have certainly been degraded,

We made big hay out of the importance of taking out their missile program. Well, yeah, we probably knocked out a lot of their missiles, but they have been able to reconstitute their launchers and to continue using their missiles, their drone capabilities. They now control the Strait of Hormuz and are using that control in a way that is detrimental not only to our interests, our economy, our allies in the region, but to the entire global economy. We have in effect given Iran through this conflict another nuclear weapon in the form of its control of the Strait of Hormuz. And this is one they are prepared to use.

They never had a actual nuclear weapon previously. They still don't, but they have the wherewithal and the knowledge and the stockpiles to build to one. And as a result of this war, if you're looking at this from the Iranian perspective, whereas before, they were happy to be on the cusp of, of a nuclear weapon. From their vantage point, they may well have assessed by now that it is in their interest to race to get to one so that in the future they're not vulnerable in the way to attack that they have suffered

in the last six months. You know, I remember once upon a time you'd have these characters in armed conflict, like the Baghdad bobs who would be so outrageous in their propaganda, it became almost the punchline on SNL and in movies here in the United States, or there would be movies like The Dictator, or whatever these movies were,

that would mock the behavior of the kind of Kim Jong-un-style authoritarian abroad. Watching every day Donald Trump's behavior posting memes of himself as a pirate boarding Iranian ships or these bizarre memes that he posts of himself. saying like my ship now, my boat now, and just the behavior. And then the barrage of lies. Just every single day, every sound utterance syllable is like a lie about it.

And it's so easily disprovable what he said. But they keep on going. They have certain reporters that they utilize who push this stuff out every day. People aren't buying it. But it just to me as just not a political way. It just pains me because it just makes me feel like weak. And despite the fact that I think that, you know, Trump's the worst person to be anywhere near the Oval Office, he's still the commander in chief. I don't like that.

It's just the reality. So if you had someone in that position, though, you're like, dude, just behave like a grownup. Like, why are you doing this? And Iran, I believe, is seizing the initiative. And they're talking and behaving publicly. we could say what's going on behind the scenes, but projecting to a geopolitical community, the type of rhetoric of, let's get together,

world uniting, you know, multilateralism that we used to use, and Trump speaking the way we used to say that the other side used to behave. Well, rhetoric aside and memes aside, and I don't dispute that they are childish and grotesque, often laughable, and make him look like a laughing stock, sadly,

which is very detrimental because, as you mentioned, he is our Commander-in-Chief. But I also think you have to add to that the repeated extraordinary threats of inflicting World War II-style catastrophic damage on Iran only to walk them back and rinse and repeat. I mean, the bluster, the threats, the lies, of course, they're all horrible, and they all horrible,

and they all serve to undermine the perception and the reality of American power globally. So when you take the failures that I described in terms of the execution of this conflict, this war, and our inability to achieve any of the varying objectives that have been stated, the world is looking at this and seeing the United States and Israel throwing the military kitchen sink at Iran and failing.

And if you're in China or Russia, sadly, They may look at that and see themselves as strengthened and emboldened and question our willingness and ability to use force when necessary, when it directly serves our national interests or the national defense in the Asia theater or the European theater. So it's more than the lives and the bluster and the memes and the threats. It's the real perception of weakened American deterrence.

and calling into question the credibility of our military power. This is a case, sadly, when the threat of the use of force had proven more effective than the actual use of force. And the ramifications of that, I think, we will be living with for quite a while. Yeah, talk to us about that because, you know, as a national security advisor, as an ambassador to the United Nations,

every word when the U.S. speaks, especially at the presidential level, but certainly at the National Security Advisor level, at the defense secretary, you know, at these positions, how we speak, we would always kind of carry through if you're going to make a post and make a threat and say, we're going to do this on this date. We would do it, you know,

or there would be some explanation. about why we didn't. But the fact that to your point, there's this Ponzi scheme approach now over the threats, it's gonna be on this day, demolish, we're gonna destroy you, it's gonna be over. Then the day happens, and then he announces a fake deal that Iran and nobody else in the world even knows what he's talking.

Actually, we did a deal, we're gonna, I mean, it's just, the damage that that does could be worse than almost anything we, you know, that may be out there. I mean, that is a death, by a thousand strikes on the United States credibility. Absolutely. And while these threats were horrific, and many of them have executed would have entailed the commission of serious war crimes.

Obviously, nobody wanted to see any of that happen. But the bluster, the threats, and the walkbacks in rapid succession as a matter of predictable course is really damaging to our credibility. and frankly, on the flip side, you know, are, you know, when we do make a commitment, when we do make a deal, whether it was the original Iran nuclear deal, whether it was the U.S.-Canada, Mexico trade agreement, or many other commitments we've made, this president, even when they're his own deals, his own commitments, as in the U.S.MCA, he's willing to turn around and blow them up. And so if you're an adversary or an ally, trying to assess whether, you know, if you make a deal,

if you get an agreement with the United States, that it's worth the paper it's written on, you really have to question it. And that, too, is enormously damaging to our standing, our strength, our security, and our credibility. Yeah, and Prime Minister Carney essentially said that. You really can't even do a deal with these people. I think it was Warren Buffett who said,

you can't do a good deal with bad people. The Premier Manitoba Wab Canoe echoed that, and that seems to be the sentiment. and kind of deal can you do with the United States now. We did Kusba. He tore that apart and look at the behavior of them even right now after the weekend where we learned all about, you know, and this is Donald Trump's own admission, the bad faith tactics of the U.S. tried to change the terms.

Trump said, yeah, I did it when he was asked by CNN. But then even the behavior afterwards, you know, Lake Ontario to, you know, Lake America. I mean, it's all ridiculous stuff, but it speaks to a, how could you even work with these people? How do you have a rational conversation? And when you turn on Fox or you turn on all these networks and you hear what the MAGA people are saying, if we just keep on forcing ourselves onto them,

if we just do this, they will back down and they will say, I submit. And that seems to be the approach to everything. If we just keep on attacking and, behaving this way, other people will eventually roll over and say, I guess I give up. But that's what they seem to be suggesting. Yeah, but countries that have a strong sense of national interest and national sovereignty and pride, whether China, Iran, or Canada, are not going to take it lying down. They're willing to endure pain to maintain their independence and their sovereignty

and their stability. And, you know, Donald Trump doesn't understand the concept of national interest, I think in large part because for him, the national interest is, to a great extent, self-interest. But most countries operate on the perspective of national interest and are willing to do what it takes to secure their national interests, even if it means enduring. tariffs from the United States or in the case of Iran, a relentless bombing campaign. Back to the Canadian situation, though, I think, you know, people underestimate the Canadians

resolve and anger and determination to stand together and stand against these unfair, unjust tariffs from the United States. But the real victims of this in the United States are you and I and American consumers across the board because these tariffs are taxes on the American consumer. And as I mentioned earlier, tariffs in general have already cost the average American family $1,100 additional dollars a year. And that's going to go up as the tariffs go up. And it accomplishes nothing. Canada is not going to bend. They are our friends. They are our allies. They have been our closest partner. It's the longest

peaceful border in the world. And Donald Trump is trying to turn it into an adversary. And I'm afraid he's well on his way. Canada, also attacking NATO countries. And I think a reporter asked him the other day, why are you attacking our allies and why are you hoisting up the adversaries? and his response was to say, you know, Xi Jinping's going to be showing up to the White House in September. And whenever I'm with him, we always talk about, we always talk about how Canada is the most difficult person, the most difficult country to deal with.

And so even in answering the question, he answered his own state of mind about what's going on. But like Canada has a plan. I mean, Canada has its own plan now with the EU and the middle powers united. China has a plan. I mean, we see the bricks block and we see the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, meaning that's going to be taking place, the bricks that's going to be taking place soon as well.

And then you have Trump out there, again, just kind of, like there's, there also is no plan and no strategy, it seems, other than to suck up to the authoritarians who see him for what he is, I believe, as weak while we alienate our allies who are actually the strong powers in a post-World War to architecture that we built and we're ripping it apart under Trump. Yeah, it's America alone. And America alone will always be weaker than America with committed, reliable friends and allies. And when you push them away, when you engage in threats and economic warfare against them, whether it's Canada or Denmark or the larger European NATO allies, it's, it's,

It comes back to haunt you because trust has been broken. And trust is a very, very difficult thing to rebuild. Where do you see things right now? I often talk about on the show post-World War II architecture being ripped apart. And fast forward by Donald Trump right now every day, you know, yes, I see some well-intentioned NATO commanders and people, Grinkowich, I highlight a lot in Europe, you know, and other people who seem to be doing everything they can to hold on with these links. And I watch their press conferences and they dodge the questions about what the Commander-in-Chief is actually saying while they're doing what they can do, I suppose. But it just, it doesn't feel like it hasn't been labeled as such yet, but it just doesn't feel like that that architecture exists.

I mean, maybe in a future of textbook, you know, it just seems over. It seems done. It seems lost right now. And it seems irreparable. And I hate to say that. But it just, it seems like it's a different world situation right now and everywhere. How do you see it right now? Well, I think it's definitely under strain.

And I'm not prepared to say it's irreparable quite yet. But it could become that. And we may be closer than we think. What worries me most, as we've been discussing, is the extraordinary damage that we are doing to our alliances and partnerships, upon which American security has rested very successfully since the end of World War II, whether in Asia, China, with Japan, South Korea, Australia, and others, those are critical allies. and what are we doing? We're pulling the rug out from under the South Koreans in our annual

military exercises and presidents making nice with his love letter counterpart Kim Jong-un, whether it's Europe, where we already see the Russians engaging in efforts at hybrid conflict, trying to test the boundaries of NATO's determination. And Ukraine, which has valid valiantly and to a large extent effectively held off. The worst of the Russian advances is now getting pummeled on a nightly basis because it lacks the air defense capabilities that it so badly needs and that we've refused to provide.

And so, you know, we are leaving our partners and allies high and dry. Our adversaries are taking note. And they are, you know, sort of rubbing their hands and glee accordingly. This puts us in a very difficult situation. And we may find ourselves facing the threat of our biggest adversaries trying to see how far they can get

with an administration in Washington that has alienated our allies and seems to naively want to cozy up to our adversaries who are not interested in a reciprocal kind of relationship. One other topic, ambassador, I want to hit on as well is our top military generals have seemed to be pushed out. I mean, whether it's at the chairman of the joint chiefs level, CQ Brown Jr., whether it is the Army Chief of Staff, Randy George, whether it was one of our top commanders in Europe, Christopher Donahue, a lot of their teams. Chief of Maple Operations, Lisa Frank Kennedy. The list goes on and on. The list goes on and on and on.

And then also this idea of we need 1920 to 1940-style battleships and that we should spend hundreds of billions of dollars there versus assess the way warfare actually looks like in 2026 with drones and interceptors. And talk to us about that because, you know, in the daily news cycle, the gamified politics rules the day. but I say focus on what's happening behind the scenes because all of this is the most important stuff that's not getting a lot of coverage. Well, I think you're right to focus on this, Ben.

There are reasons to be deeply concerned about what's going on under the hood within our armed forces. The HEC-SF purges of our most experienced, capable and talented flag officers, generals and admirals and the like, is really horrific. He is casting out people who are supremely highly qualified, some seemingly on the basis of race, or the fact that they may be women, or the fact that they have executed the policies and the orders of prior administrations, or they just aren't bought into the priorities and the excesses of the Pentagon under Pete Hexssef. All of these people are being purged and we have half the number of Army, you know, four stars in position than we had just, you know, a year ago. And these gaps are not being filled. Meanwhile, we've

talked about the munition shortages, the damage to our bases, but the damage to morale and discipline and to the expectation that if you are a high quality performer, regardless of your race or your, your gender or your religion or your your perspectives, if you adhere to the Constitution and you do your job well, that you will be denied promotion or forced out is going to lead to people choosing to leave the service. It's going to affect recruiting as well as retention. And it's going to mean that our long historical tradition of an apolitical military is going to be eroded. And I think the damage is frankly generational. And then you add to it that we seem to have this retro concept

of the kinds of munitions and hardware that we need, spending billions and billions of dollars to take our naval fleet back to, you know, a bygone time, our aircraft carriers back to a time before the latest technology, spending money to take us back. makes no sense whatsoever. And meanwhile, the part of the Army that was most focused on the warfare of the future drone warfare and how to utilize that effectively and responsibly, as we've seen done in other theaters, that unit was dismantled by the Army leadership and the new Army leadership,

the Hegseff handpicked army leadership. And we are now not preparing for the wars of the future to the extent that we should. We're sort of focused on some retro fantasy world that's long since past. And so the quality of the leadership is of grave concern to me. It starts at the top with Hegset, who is profoundly unqualified and is doing, generational damage. But it bleeds through the ranks. It sends a horrible message to the men and women who are sacrificing their families, their time, their commitment, in some cases, their lives to serve the Constitution, not an individual president. And it's corrupting an institution that

we all have to rely on. Yeah, I mean, human nature and how history, repeats itself. I think it's just something we have to stay. If you think about World War II, one of the issues, when you do a post-mortem, there's a lot of issues, but when you think about Japan and World War II, the focus on Bushido, the warrior ethos in certain areas, where it was, you know, was it adapting to certain modern technologies? And you have, like, you have Higgs that basically doing an American version,

we got to go back to the warrior ethos and testosterone. It's like, okay, but like, you also want to focus. on what's modern warfare, technology, and what's happening. And I saw a general from NORAD recently give a speech at a convention where he said, we don't have the ability in the United States to protect the homeland from drones. So if drones were to hit us here at the end,

we don't have things that would stop it at all. Like we just, we haven't prepared for that. And it's like, I don't know, maybe that's something that we think about. Anyway, before we go, anything else that's on your mind. mind. I mean, it's important that people get to hear from you right now. I know it's a broad question. It is a very bright. There's a lot of my mind and we would be here all afternoon. Tell us everything that's on your mind. But before we go, I mean, I wanted to focus on Iran.

I wanted to focus on alliances. I wanted to focus on, you know, the U.S. security umbrella weakening. You know, we see things like the Mecca Pact forming in the Middle East right now with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey to replace what used to be a U.S. security umbrella. We see South Korea's foreign minister meeting with Xi Jinping and meeting with Wang Yi over there and the types of stuff that you and former President Obama were working on in Asia and the pivot there, I mean, has been kind of thrown out the window by Trump. And so, you know, it must be very hard when you and others have very methodically planned and saw where things were heading to see somebody just to destroy it.

or work hard to destroy very methodical thinking with this. It is hard to watch, but the reason it's so hard to watch, Ben, is not because one might be frustrated that things that I and others worked hard on have been undone. It's that we are now weaker. We are now more vulnerable. And our national security has been undermined by this combination of factors that we've been

discussing, you know, eroding our alliances, making enemies out of allies, not investing in the personnel and the hardware that we need to be cutting-edge military long into the future, the threats, the bluster, the damage to our credibility, and the message that we have sent to our adversaries, particularly Russia and China, about our resolve, about our resolve, about our strength, about our military efficacy, and about our readiness and willingness to stand up in the event of aggression. And they are now stronger, sadly, vis-a-vis us in that war of perception. And I think particularly, I mean, Russia's bogged down to a large extent in Ukraine, but it's still, you know, probing and testing in Europe. It may be tempted to take advantage.

of this moment while we're very focused on the Middle East. And I worry much more even about China, who has been clear in its ambitions vis-a-vis Taiwan and the South China Sea. And rather than maximizing our deterrents and making clear that we have very strong red lines that will adhere to, we've pulled the only aircraft carrier out of Asia.

We've undermined our, our, partnership with South Korea. And we are giving every reason to question whether we're ready if the Chinese were to test us. I'll try to do one quick pivot for the audience. And because this is what you said before though, which is when I said, it feels irreparable sometimes, but you said it could be, but it's not irreparable right now. And it's close to being irreparable. So within that delta, you see some some hope. You see some way out of this hell. Talk to us about that before we go because how would even a new administration, you know, be handed this when you know also the other side's going to blame all these issues on them too. And the arsonists are going to say, you did it. You screwed

it up. You know, we've seen a knack for that. We've been to that movie multiple times, sadly, Ben, but look, irreparable is a very, very strong word. That means never, and I don't believe that. I think it's going to be difficult. I think to build back trust to restore credibility and deterrence, those are very hard things to do, but they're things that we must do, that we have the capability to do, and with strong and principled leadership that is focused on the national interests, I think we can do that. But we're going to have to be patient, which is not our strong suit. And we're going to have to be a little bit humble because we're going to have to recognize that much of the damage that has been done is not going to go away quickly. Just take, for example,

the U.S.-Canada relationship. We've been talking about that. For years and decades, we had a relationship of trust and partnership and mutual interest and mutual benefit. And what we have shown in two successive Trump administrations is that, you know, that can't be relied on anymore. If you're sitting in Canada, whether you're, you know, a farmer or a citizen or in the prime minister's office, the only rational conclusion is that Canada has to reduce its reliance on the United States. It's got to diversify its economic partnerships, its security relationships. It's got to look out for its own interests and it can no longer count on a mutually

beneficial enduring relationship with the United States. That is a tragic reality. And a new United States administration can't come in and say, okay, Canada, you know, as it was said in the beginning of the Biden administration, America is back. Well, the Allies then asked for how long, and it turned out not very long. And we have to understand that if you're looking at the United States from the perspective of Europe or Asian allies or Canada, we've proved ourselves to be very fickle and very unpredictable. And on that basis, they have to act accordingly. And so when, you know, when we seek to repair this very significant damage, we have to do it with an understanding of the interests and perspectives of those that we're working with. And that's the thing that's

been, you know, completely absent from the assessment of the Trump administration. You know, They think that power alone and brute force alone will cause adversaries and allies to submit. And they don't take into account the extent to which allies and adversaries have their own interests, which they are determined to secure and adhere to. Ambassador Rice, I want to thank you for your time. This has been a major priority for me and this network to be focusing on international affairs. We launch Midas, Canada. We cover on a daily basis, kind of this changing world dynamic.

And so when I get to have you on here and share your perspective and your experience, I lose track of time. We went a little longer than I told you it was going to be. But it's an honor to have you on. And we appreciate you sharing with us your perspectives of all of us. Thank you, Ben. It's always good to talk to you. Take care.

Ambassador Rice, everybody. Everybody hit subscribe. Let's get to 7 million subscribers. Before you go, our book, WTF America is available for pre-order now. It's the story of how we got here and how we fight our way back. To pre-order, scan the QR code

or click the link in the description. Let's do this.