And welcome across your all things are considered. What can we expect from a bygone ministration when it comes to russia . As things stand today, relations are at rock bottom. Bidens orbit is replete with hard liners in neo cons with a long record of Foreign Policy failure. Could relations continue to get worse to discuss this and more, im joined by my guest, Michael Ohanlon in washington. He is a senior fellow and director of research in the Foreign Policy program at brookings, as well as author of beyond nato, a new Security Architecture for Eastern Europe, also in washington. We have brian becker. Hes the executive director of the answer coalition. And in moscow we cross to, maxie should go, he is an expert at the Russian International affairs council, originally crossed out rules, and i think that means you can jump in anytime you want. And i always appreciate it. Ok, let me go to maxime 1st here in moscow. By all accounts, were going to have a by ministration in in january. Now, given the background of the russia gate hysteria hoax and the antipathy and really deep a trait of russia in the american Political Class and particularly the media here, what is, what is the kremlin expecting in january when it comes to american Foreign Policy towards your country . Go ahead 1st of all, i think the relationship between the United States and russia would have continued to deteriorate anyway, regardless of who would end up in the white house. And especially, i think the expectations are peter. Listen, our viewers the biden ministration on 2 on 2 particular issues. As long as you mentioned, mention in your introduction, the ministration is filled with people with the kind of wont long record deep criticism to put it very mildly explores russia and their, you know, ideas on the military interventions. But most importantly, i think, given that they did, the United States is divided now politically and ideologically and socially. What unites the Democratic Administration under the biden. And under the rule, is that they think that democracy at home and abroad is in danger. You know, its under pressure from what they call the populists inside the west and tory tarion leaders outside the west. And lattimer putin is clearly, you know, standing up on both accounts as someone some want to tackle. So i expect it will be a lot of pressure on moscow over in a human rights actors and things like this. And the 2nd component wish makes people in and policymakers and in moscow, particularly, you know, critical or, you know, heres the most of what may be expected. Is that under a truck, we see that the following, the world war 2. United states policy was based upon 2 pillars, you know, predominance and litter ship and truck kind of maintained the predominance component ones into how the United States strong militarily economically. But you kind of double down on what is perceived as litter ship, you know, in his view, and its not willing to, to carry the burden for, for the allies. And i think under the administration, you would see 1st, 2 to reinforce american standing on both the leadership and predominance and russia. Here is again, maybe if you as a particularly challenge. So if you give me you does in this area, you speak like a diplomat. What cave, in a diplomatic words, a michael, how, how do you see it . I mean, is it by just going to revert back to the policy that obama had . And because a lot of people around biden are people who are around obama. Ok, and i think its very fair to call them hard liners and the neocons ratings. Greatest fear, thanks for having me back on. Its nice to be with you again and friends in russia and around the world. You know, im a little more hopeful in the sense that there are a couple of reasons im more hopeful. One is we actually arent talking nearly as much about russia and as you say, russia gay as we had been, i think over 19 has taken over a lot of the oxygen in the room. The donald trump presidency, which as you know, is very controversy over here, whether you like him or not, it was controversy all understand how the issue has been a little less in the front and center. Secondly, i dont think the biden team would see any great benefit to having a showdown with vladimir putin. I mean, people have lowered expectations, of course, of what this relationship can be. But it doesnt mean that they really see an opportunity for a 0 sum competition in americas favor. The places we are presently locking horns, which are largely in Eastern Europe and the broader middle east are areas that by and i think would like to minimum his engagement because theres no real benefits to him in getting more involved in those places. And the last point ill make and other way i dont dismiss any of your concerns, im just trying to give a little bit of a, of a sort of slightly more hopeful spent. I dont know if bill burns, for example, will have a role in this administration, the former deputy secretary of state, but hes well regarded in the Democratic Party circles. And im not sure if you had a chance to read his book yet the back channel, but its a very sophisticated view of the us russia relationship, which may be more critical of certain russian officials than, than some of your listeners may prefer. But its not devoid of sort of a broader Historical Perspective on russia and its pride as a nation, its rights as a nation and how we have to rethink the u. S. Russia relationship going forward. So someone like bill burns has influence, but im a little more hopeful as well. And will hopefully its not susan rice. Brian, let me go to you, let me read some words from the, from joe biden here on the campaign trail. This is from the spring here, we must impose real costs on russia, peretz, violations of international norms. Norms, really. An stand was russian civil society, which has bravely said time and again against president Vladimir Putins a posse authoritarian system. Thats the mindset of the next president thats going to be dealing with russia. Not hopeful in my mind because its a, its a bit hard to say, although i agree with you. Generally speaking, i mean, think about when the obama team came into the white house in 2009. The 1st one of the 1st acts was, do you have Hillary Clinton go in with the red robin said lets press the reset button. And it was clear that the obama and the obama biden ministration were hopeful that there would be an improvement in u. S. Russian relations. In other words, its not an existential ideological orientation. On the part of whats changed is the political atmosphere in the United States. Since 2009, such that anyone who speaks up in favor of an improvement in u. S. Russian relations will be tarred as some, some kind of puppet, for putin or, or a proxy for the kremlin. And so i think the language on the campaign trail may well reflect this general atmosphere, such that biden cant say anything about the improvement of relations. The real issue is why did the relationship deteriorate . Why did we go from that big red reset button to immediate sort of degeneration or devolution in the relationship . And i think theres 22 issues there. One is what happened in syria, where russia came in and made it clear that the russians would like their position on libya, where they abstained at the u. N. They were going to make a decisive intervention. This say no, were not going to allow regime change to be taken to take place against the us, a government. And then of course, the coup detat in february 2014 in ukraine, which was considered by russia. Actually to be hyper aggressive on the part of the, of the, of the obama administration. And because russia stood up and said, no look, crimea is not, could be turned into a nato base. That was considered to be a cardinal sent. The question is, for biden, in the team, do they accept the fact that russia actually has legitimate national and regional interests and will they accept that or not . Or do they want to continue down this path of hyper aggressive demonization . Maybe perhaps because America Needs big enemies like china and russia to justify the looting of the national treasury, which is actually whats going on by the continued increase in military spending. You know, max might seem like we already heard it from brian here. I mean, when i, when i look at american Foreign Policy makers in the media, there is this run from, i dont, the topic. Russia has no legitimate security interest of its own. Its almost taken as a given. And i played it so bizarre because everything, every country, every nation state has interest in it will obviously pursue it. But russia, when it tries to pursue it, is somehow some kind of rogue character on the international stage. I mean, do you find that frustrating . I do find it frustrating a limit to govern what brian said and kind of go back to what michaels talking about. I think that what my whole brian described actually under obama, the relationship was, would on a very negative trajectory. And this crisis you describe syria crane are still there and you know, when, when michael says hes, he is more optimistic outlook for what may come next for us. Fresh relations. Id love to side with him, but i just dont see any objective grounds for, for this optimism. Simply because i do really, of that. Russia may be a lesser of a domestic issue for the United States for now. Now that the democrats control the white house, but i think russia will return to where it has been ever since. Pretty much just 1008, if not earlier, as a key geo strategic adversary for the United States. And can i take people like tony blinken or Michelle Flournoy who may be you know, all occupy positions . Somebody defense secretary National Security adviser one day when for instance, the biden team should revise. What he sees was the major blunder of the obama administration, which is syria. Policy said it will lead a lot of Syrian Opposition groups down. And you know, when people in moscow hear this use, the question is, what do we make of it doesnt mean the United States is the went back to reinforce. Its not to do anything, anything constructive, but just to know, play game up, denial russian interests. The michael michael, do you, do you think that they have that by ministration is going to take another swing at regime change in syria because were always told it because of the russians. Ok, i mean is this, are we just going to have a reset back to 2016 . Go ahead max and you raise an interesting question, but ive heard tony blinken talk about this as well. And my interpretation of where tonys coming from. Ive known tony for 20 some years. Hes a very humble guy, and when i heard him talk about syria, it was more to criticize the United States early east as much to criticize the United States as to criticize russia. In the sense that tony knows, this was not a stellar accomplishment of the obama administration. Anything at all that happened within syria. And you can be critical of russias policy and also be critical of americas policy. I think thats where tony blinken would put himself also. I think he knows enough to know this is just simply not worth going back to. I mean, what are we going to do . A restart, a civil war thats already been the most tragic of the 21st century. Whatever your take on why it got so bad and who is most at fault, there is no good to come from starting it over again. You know, i see no reason to think you. Would you think that by going astray schuman do the right thing, and remove troops from syria, which are there uniquely, under International Law . But im not sure thats the right thing, as long as we dont know how to vouch for the well being of the syrian kurds. So i think what theyll try to do is see if there can be some kind of an autonomy arrangement that protects those northeastern syrian kurds. And if they can get that, then i think they would be content to leave. That would be my best guess. Right, and its all about the kurds. Ok, theyre fine. But i mean, theres plenty of resentment that theyve lost after this huge effort. They lost in syria and they want their revenge. It seems clear to me 30 seconds. Go to you, brian. Before we go to break, i dont think there is any revenge. I think in that i think the civil war has basically ended. There was a military victory for the us government. Its egg on the face of the United States, but its not the central issue for the United States. Syria is for american Foreign Policy. Something of a side show, not of course for the syrians. So i dont think that this is going to be the dominant issue going forward. I dont think were talking about, well talk about many issues. When we come back here gentlemen, were going to get short break and well continue our discussion. The u. S. Russia relations stay with greater trenchard, it is a symptom of exacerbating and alarming everyone mindlessly. Fortunately, what that means are, we end up making solutions that cost a lot, but actually drink very little. Its just a kind of feel Good Solutions instead of the Actual Solutions that would fix global warming. During the vietnam war, u. S. Forces also bombs neighboring laos. It was a secret war. And for years the American People did not know how much it is official. Cavalry back country per capita. Paul, human history, millions of unexploded bombs still in danger. Lives in this Small Agricultural country. So i mean, we have been going to continue tapping. Even today, kids in laos full victim to bombs dropped decades ago. Is the u. S. Making amends for that tragedy and what help to the people need in that little land on welcome back to cross up where all things are considered. Im here lol. To remind you were just discussing a by Foreign Policy towards russia. Well hes going back to maxine makes him what could the United States and russia work on . I mean, when we have a divided opinion on this program so far, i dont think that the biden ministration is going to break with the past. You know, hating russia, hating putin, pays a modicum of dividends. Stepping out of line. Theres huge penalties here. So, but what can the u. S. And russia were going together with a union ideological photo of United States . Those 2 entities did accomplish many things together. Go ahead, measure it, right, i think will the arse control and the prolongation of the start treaty is one thing when people frequently mention when they talk about any potential for cooperation between the 2, between moscow and washington. And obviously, you know, while geithner will come to office su, weeks before the start treaty expire. So he promised an automatic proliferation of the treaty. So that may be an optimistic note. That said, however, if we kind of hunch, flip the coin and look at it differently, this will pretty much exhaust the, of the constructive agenda of the u. S. , russia relations early or early next year. So after the prohibition of the treaty, you dont really have anything substantial to talk about. Now you, you know, you may have 5 years or 3 years when youre, depending not on for how long the treaty may be prolonged for us to discuss, you know, concrete matter, some of the treating, the me think about, you know, other armstrongs related issues. But i would think that he notices will still want to f. China in the treaty and russia will continue to pose other things like the open skies treaty that now russia, you know, pressure on the europeans to provide some guarantees that you know, american aircraft are not going to fly over the russian territory. Tons of things, flaws you have bitin this regime, people who can very critical of russias own kind of Record Keeping with the, with this arms control deal. So there is deep, you know, divide and also distrust. And you mentioned, you know, that record between this audience and americans and you remember, and all of you remember, im sure they do reconcile and theyre going to have to trust. But verify. I think honor by the industry, the long local the slogan, dont trust an reverify, as far as arms control are, are concerned. So im pretty, pretty pessimistic on that account as well. May go further than the cost control. Plus you have this initiative by trump on the modernization of American Nuclear arsenal. Militarization of space. And i think these things are there to say, even though you know, there are talks that biden the stray. She may cut the Defense Budget and spend it on Climate Change for answers are all the matters. I think its still, you know, given that theres been an attempt on carly one to stray, shes going to retreat american commitments to transit to foreigners. There might be again, a new kind of mentions for confrontation between the 2 countries. Even even though it may have been a small remote michael, its talk about what you know, what can be done. I mean, i brought up the example of the soviet union United States and they were staunch focused for what we call the cold war here. But they still worked on agreements to their mutual benefit. And historically speaking, arms control agreements, people kind of like ok, i mean, if you know you, people on the fringes, a dont like them, you cant, can these kind of things be done . Also, i want to reiterate counterterrorism and Climate Change. Can these things be done in isolation and this relationship