At the council formulations and to serve in the Obama Administration as assistant to National Security council. He also served during the Clinton Administration visiting scholar including harvard and columbia and the International Institute for strategic studies in london and numerous articles on National Strategic affairs and the author of nine previous books. Including how enemies become friends. Walter russell mead at the Hudson Institute the global economist at the wall street journal professor of Foreign Affairs with the council of Foreign Relations and offers numerous books and widely recognized special providence and how it changed the world. I hope we have the chance for work entitled the United States is real and the fate of jewish people. And that to shield itself is the subject of the discussion tonight. Please welcome Walter Russell mead. Thank you for that introduction it is terrific to be here with charles i think ive known so many years now. Quite a while. Can certainly remember in the Clinton Administration doing pbs together on bosnia. So thats like 30 years ago and you have written ten books that fills me with envy. I know how you do it so quickly and they are good. So this book, number ten on isolationism, what led you to the subject . Its a deep dive into history what is the relevance for what were looking at today . And thinks to seattle for organizing this and by a discussing three revelations while i was working on the book and those of Foreign Policy and what came before pearl harbor. And with containment what happened after 9 11 but i can tell you very little about american policy in the early decade and it was eyeopening. In fact my head exploded when i started to read that because but there is so little resemblance to the america that i known and have grown up in. And then to send the military forces and most of our history. That second revelation the reason we were isolationist and to extend the strategic reach was america exceptionalism to propagate the notion that foreign ambition would come at the expense of liberty and prosperity at home. Instead we should perfect the american experiment in those also revelation to me that has been the opposite. And narrative that says america has to go out and run the world. That is a postworld war ii phenomenon in the final revelation that comes directly to your question about relevance for today is that i started this book well before trump was elected but when he came into office on his first day after swearingin to say America First and going back to the pre pearl harbor narrative and the unilateralism of the protectionism that we see in trumps approach to the world is right out of American History that definitely shaped my own thinking tapping into a more populous jacksonian tradition and it is still powerful today. Its hard for the isolationist one of the interesting things of the cold war era and beyond is there is a moralization and to say maybe we should make a exception then you say you are the peas are and what we outsourcing to china so that a lot of Foreign Policy arguments that came down because it was assumed it was a singular truth the right way to do form policy and Everything Else was wrong. Going back to compare that older tradition with the cold war and postcold war, did you find that holding up the merit was in the tradition or is it all bad it is coming back . We tend to have two different modes of strategy in this country that from 1789 through 1941 isolationism and to make it clear what im saying the extension a strategic commitment outside the motherland. They are very engaged commercially from the number one and culturally. To send the military abroad to defend our commercial interest and citizen but what we dont do is follow in the footsteps of great european powers or to take over the territorial possession into the affairs of other countries thats what we should not do with washington in the farewell address said everyone political connection that basically lasted up through 1941 and the only game in town. Then after 41, internationalism was the only game in town and if you said why are we in afghanistan or iraq . Everyone said isolationist. Bad. Dark. One of the things i want to do is to win the National Debate so we can talk about the pros and cons of a more isolationist strategy and american internationalism and hopefully find a middle ground where we were in the 1930s or doing too much for think we have been amid the forever wars. And yes looking back at the United States prior to world war ii with the aversion to geopolitical attachment made great sense because it focused on western expansion and investment in the United States not in battleships and colonies. Then isolationism went way too far leaving the United States to run for cover was serious unavoidable threats so when does strategic detachment make sense when does it not make sense and what does it tell us today with america moving forward . We will move the conversation into the present tense as we go along but its important to look at the historical case charles is working with. So something that anybody can recite the name of is the Monroe Doctrine as part of the american grand strategy. So how did you come to think of the Monroe Doctrine and its place . And the Monroe Doctrine i will tell a very quick story from 1793 because i think it will convey just how tenacious to go way back to the beginning to George Washington and the british were getting the best of us and the founders and in through those powers said we need the alliance with the french otherwise we will lose and what happened . We had the alliance in the french came over and they helped us to win the revolutionary war. Then britain and france go to war again so what does George Washington do . He issues a proclamation of neutrality and to despite the alliance good night and good luck you are on your own. That is the last alliance the United States has until after world war ii. That is tenacious coming to the Monroe Doctrine issues of deprivation this is after many spanish colonies had turned into republicans one and to the republic and the americans were afraid the spanish might come back and in the conventional wisdom this is a great declaration of american hegemony there was nothing of the sort in the United States did not lift a finger to defend the hegemony in the western hemisphere and a couple of years later in 1826 when the american delegation was invited to panama just for a conference about the future of republican government in latin america and the president who at that time was John Quincy Adams to send a delegation, Congress Went berserk and that we have no business interfering in the affairs of latin america in any way. That is not us or our business a strong racist reaction. But it was so late that one of those died before they got there in the other arrive so late that congress was over. So much for the Monroe Doctrine. Washington when he broke the treaty with france these they are breaking the treaty . And he would not tell a lie to his dad about the cherry tree how does he break in alliance with france . A hugely controversial issue that you can imagine. There are different camps in the United States at this time in the jeffersonians that dominated in the southern part of the country where pro french the hamiltonians dominated and then north for probritish. So when washington said were not coming and will remain neutral the jeffersonians went crazy. Washington was very smart and strategic and then to know that alliance in under the current circumstances we dont think it is in the American National interest to involve ourselves in a war between britain and france. And then to have the Constitutional Authority and in some respects of 1796 was the effort to thread the needle and said we dont want those entangling alliances. But lets not do this again. So although defunct not until 18 oh one that they were pulled down by the french and to create a new treaty. And with that empire and then why do we just go back to the isolationist after world war ii . We start off and then to finish westward expansion. That the United States saw itself as the chosen nation. And a lot of people died and native americans were pushed out of the way are put onto reservations, we grabbed a big chunk of land from mexico, we tried unsuccessfully to take over canada on multiple occasions. So its not like the United States was sweet and my throughout the 19th century but it did adhere to the Founding Fathers admonition to go no further than the Pacific Coast to tend to our own garden and dont look for trouble abroad or we go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. But then at the end of the 19th century with a worldclass economic power focusing on domestic development. With Frederick Jackson turner so as americans began to worry the dynamism of the democracy or prosperity could began to wane with industrialization and taking and so a new narrative emerged, that if this exceptional experiment will continue, we need a new frontier. Where is that now that we made it to the Pacific Coast . It is overseas. That is the narrative president mckinley, Teddy Roosevelt, the admiral used to justify the spanishamerican war to basically say to take manifest destiny on the road because we completed the mission here at home. And those to keep the spanish out of cuba we also took over cuba, took over puerto rico and samoa and to say wait a minute we took manifest destiny abroad to spread democracy and suddenly we are colonial occupiers both for the will sony and correctio correction. So what is wilsons reaction against this policy to take shape in your view . Part of what happens is the sharp backlash with real imperialism americans are not imperialist its not in the constitution there are interesting debates in the early 1900 about what we do with these territories and puerto rico and samoa because they were not on the path to favor not occupied by white people and the qualifications for integration into the union. So they really did struggle to figure out the status. And should puerto rico becoming a state. So to go through this movement away from empire. And the democratic candidate for president and is the idealist isolationist who pull out the commitments with a strong interventionist in the western hemisphere. As a country to spread democracy around the world and basically disavows and in 1817 after the germans began to sink american vessels. On the basis of pure idealism and to ask for war declaration to save the world for democracy and those that are dying in the trenches and we could encumbrance a sentence we will convince American People that is a referendum of american internationalism and republican candidate Warren Harding basically said make my day. I stand for the policies of George Washington i am against foreign entanglement running against his own handpicked buffoon. What happened . He wins one of the most lopsided elections in American History and that clears the way for this isolationism of the twenties and thirties. Those that were the most isolationist at least in the twenties they had the idea the Federal Reserve should work with the bank of england those with the financial flows in postwar europe so it was an adequate and hyper optimistic to keep the economies of the world going with name for disarmament. Every now and then i ask myself one of the wonderful 1929 treaty president outlawed war and just in the nick of time can you imagine what history would have been like it for was not outlined in the late 19 twentie twenties . The murder and mayhem taking place. They were not complete idiots because for one thing the idea the selfdetermination the wonderful humanitarian and to be lots of little countries and to have a quarrel is not between the big empire to drag the american. And those that get to the United States and to push naval disarmament very far so they have a sense we prevented the worst and got rid the naval disarmament to keep the economy going. In the twenties this internationalism like no institutions and building or form or one formal alliance alliances, but in the thirties when the depression hits and roosevelt says we cannot. So he torpedoes the london conference and so up until the fall of france in 1940 when people really began to worry and the administration we were just out of it for those ten years. Does that sound right . Yes. In the twenties the us practiced what i call isolationist internationalism that the us was internationalist because it is involved commercially and continued to conduct diplomacy through wall street when wall street was in europe and east asia basically to run the world and the other thing that occurred in the 19 twenties a new multilateralism that interestingly this is all in action as long as they were commitments to do nothing not to build the navy or outlaw war you never get the senate to ratify something that committed the United States to force us into world war ii and then the turning point thats in the us not only detaches itself politically but also commercially and roosevelt says i will be focused like a laser on the domestic front and then to shepherd through the congress one neutrality act after another cutting the United States off from the outside world to avoid the prospect of being drawn into war. And this is another revelation. And a great leader but until pearl harbor he was part of the isolationist extreme and to change course and 39 to provide assistance to the british and others over the victims of nazi is a minute fascism and then to alicia 1941 but it wasnt for the war but to prevent the risk of going to war by letting others defend themselves and preventing the nazis to be Strong Enough to come to the western hemisphere. That he had no choice because japan brought the world to the us. And that was sounds internationalist to people but really to supply them with all the weapons that they need so we can sit here safely. And that british gold was the way he hoped to win the war and even when they did get in that there were two goals one was to destroy the British Empire the other was not see germany. But nonetheless she had to fight the America First committee because again but that rigid hemispheric isolation because that we started with the british we would end up at war. And the Public Opinion in 1941 and 80 percent of the American Public was against world war ii to give you a sense of how strong the sentiment was. You can understand it. Do you really want to stick your hand . Do you want your kid to die on an island in the pacific you dont even know the name of . I heard of it but i havent thought about it until we did my work on us israel relations but i did not realize after the end of world war ii they immediately reverted so to dismantle 90 percent of the army. One of the reasons roosevelt made this many concessions as he did was stolen is he believed there was no way to keep americans for more than a year after the end of the war. Its not until stall and began to loom much larger that that starts to take shape. With that internationalism would not last and then to revert with default position and there was a demobilization and there was bipartisan support for what we call liberal nationalism and with very little objections but you are right over the fifties the isolationist reappeared and dug in their heels. And then to be more quiet than when the cold war heats up and you get the korean war the decision to deploy three divisions to europe in the early 19 fifties, people start to get worried and those that say wait a minute this is going too far and in 525354 there were various amendments i tried to curtail the ability of the United States and then to take those actions to the cold war. It your refresh button. Can you hear me . Can you hear me . Actually walter lost the connection. He froze for a while. I cannot see him. I think the russians have stopped messing with communications. We have been interested in the way that looking at the document of that. And the un charter itself they incorporated the reservation and with the league of nations without saying anything about i it, they quietly turned it from wilsons lead to lodges in the weaknesses in the un today they can trace them to that. But if you look at the nato tree it is fascinating historically the nature of the alliance of countries a and to be our allies and country see her bigger than country be then country a is legally obliged to go to country bes defense. But under nato treaty and then to consult the constitutional profit because the senates with a treaty that took the power to declare war out of the hands of the senate but also and then talking about with the rese