>>> AND NEXT TO UKRAINE.

AS WE'VE MENTIONED, A MUCH NEEDED LIFELINE FOR THE BELEAGUERED NATION CAME FROM THE EU TODAY.

BUT NO SUCH HELP FROM WASHINGTON, WHERE CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS UNDER PRESSURE FROM DONALD TRUMP ARE HOLDING UP A BIPARTISAN DEAL ON THE SOUTHERN BORDER THAT'S LINKED TO UKRAINE AID.

OUR NEXT GUEST WARNS THIS IS A DANGEROUS MISCALCULATION.

"THE WASHINGTON POST" NATIONAL SECURITY COLUMNIST MAX BOOT TELLING WALTER ISAACSON THAT PROTECTING UKRAINE ALSO PROTECTS THE UNITED STATES AND ITS ALLIES.

>> THANK YOU, CHRISTIANE.

I'M MAX BOOT.

WELCOME BACK TO THE SHOW.

>> GOOD TOBAC.

>> YOU KNOW, THE UKRAINE COUNTEROFFENSIVE AGAINST RUSSIA THIS PAST YEAR SEEMS TO ME AT LEAST TO BE A DISAPPOINTMENT.

IT GATHERED SOME TERRITORY, BUT THEN IT WAS OFFSET.

>> IT SEEMS TOO THIS MEANS IT COULD GO ON FOR FIVE, TEN MORE YEARS OF BACK AND FORTH LIKE THIS.

WHY SHOULD AMERICANS CONTINUE TO PAY FOR THIS WAR IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE RESOLVED?

>> WELL, WALTER, I THINK THIS WAR IS ACTUALLY THE BEST INVESTMENT WE HAVE MADE IN OUR OWN NATIONAL SECURITY SINCE THE END OF THE COLD WAR.

WE'RE SPENDING LESS THAN 5% OF OUR DEFENSE BUDGET.

AND IN RETURN, THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES ARE DECIMATING THE RUSSIAN ARMED FORCES.

THE RUSSIANS LOST ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF THEIR PRE-WAR TANK INVENTORY.

THEY'VE SUFFERED MORE THAN 300,000 CASUALTIES.

SO THIS IS DIRECTLY DECREASING THE THREAT TO OUR NATO ALLIES AND TO THE UNITED STATES.

AND IT'S ALSO UPHOLDING THE PRINCIPLES OF LIBERALISM, DEMOCRACY, AND THE RULE OF LAW THAT WE HAVE STOOD FOR SINCE WORLD WAR II.

IT SET A HORRIBLE PRECEDENT FOR THE WORLD OF RUSSIA WERE TO GET AWAY WITH ITS UNPROVOKED AGGRESSION THAT WOULD BE A GREEN LIGHT FOR CHINA TO ATTACK TAIWAN, FOR NORTH KOREA TO ATTACK SOUTH KOREA.

WE DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN THAT KIND OF WORLD.

THE UKRAINIANS ARE FIGHTING FOR OUR VALUES WITH A SMALL AMOUNT OF AID.

WE ARE HELPING THEM TO KEEP THEIR NATION INTACT.

AND EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTER OFFENSIVE FAILED, RUSSIA HAS ALSO FAILED IN ITS ATTEMPT TO DESTROY UKRAINE.

8 % OF UKRAINIAN TERRITORY REMAINS IN UKRAINE HANDS.

IT'S VERY MUCH IN OUR MORAL AND STRATEGIC INTERESTS TO CONTINUE HELPING UKRAINE TO DEFEND ITSELF WITHOUT RISKING A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER.

>> AND YOU SAY THE RUSSIANS HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO CAPTURE MUCH TERRITORY.

THE UKRAINIANS HAVEN'T.

WE'VE SEEM ALMOST TO BE FROZEN IN PLACE, WITHIN 100 KILOMETERS OF THE LINE WE HAVE NOW.

WHY CAN'T WE GET TO A TRUCE OR A CEASEFIRE IN PLACE?

>> WELL, PUTIN HAS SHOWN NO INTEREST IN GENUINE PEACE NEGOTIATIONS AND WIDESPREAD SPECULATION AS HE IS WAITING TO SEE IF DONALD TRUMP WINS THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.

BECAUSE TRUMP VERY HOSTILE TO UKRAINE, VERY FRIENDLY TO PUTIN.

HE ACTUALLY RECENTLY SAID HE WAS THE APPLE OF PUTIN'S EYE.

THIS IS THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE SOON TO BE.

SO PUTIN HAS NO INCENTIVE TO NEGOTIATE AS LONG AS HE THINKS THAT TRUMP WILL COME ALONG AND CUT OFF UKRAINE.

IN FACT, RIGHT NOW EVEN THOUGH IT'S JOE BIDEN IN OFFICE AND NOT TRUMP, RIGHT NOW THE REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE ARE IN FACT CUTTING OFF UKRAINE.

AND SO THAT TAKES AWAY ANY INCENTIVE FOR PUTIN TO MAKE ANY KIND OF CONCESSIONS BECAUSE HE THINKS THAT IF HE JUST HOLDS ON, HE CAN WIN THIS WAR.

AND, YOU KNOW, UNLESS THERE IS A CHANGE OF COURSE IN WASHINGTON, HE MAY WELL BE PROVEN CORRECT.

>> AND SO WHAT HATCHES IF THE HAPPENS IF THE REPUBLICANS DON'T APPROVE THIS AID PACKAGE?

YOU SAID AT ONE POINT IT WOULD MAKE YOU ASHAMED TO BE AN AMERICAN.

>> IT WOULD MAKE ME ASHAMED TO BE AMERICAN.

CUTTING OFF UKRAINE RIGHT NOW WOULD BE THE EXACT EQUIVALENT OF CUTTING OFF GREAT BRITAIN FROM AMERICAN AID IN 1940 WHEN THE BRITISH WERE STANDING ALONE AGAINST THE NAZIS.

AND REMEMBER, A LOT OF PEOPLE WANTED TO DO THAT, INCLUDING THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

THEY WERE ACTUALLY ADHERING TO AN AMERICA FIRST FOREIGN POLICY BEFORE THE ATTACK ON PEARL HARBOR.

UNFORTUNATELY, THAT AMERICA FIRST FOREIGN POLICY IS BACK.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT EXEMPLIFIES THE BEST OF AMERICA.

THE BEST OF AMERICA IS STANDING FOR OUR ALLIES AND HELPING TO PROTECT THEM FROM UNPROVOKED AGGRESSION.

AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE DOING THAT.

IF WE DON'T DO THAT, UKRAINE COULD VERY WELL LOSE THE WAR.

PROBABLY NOT THIS YEAR, BUT CERTAINLY WITHIN A FEW YEARS FROM NOW.

AND I THINK THAT WILL LEAVE US ASHAMED TO BE AMERICANS.

AND IT WILL -- IF THE REPUBLICANS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CUTTING OFF AID TO UKRAINE, THEY'RE GOING HAVE OWNERSHIP OF THIS GEOPOLITICAL CATASTROPHE.

>> AT THE MOMENT, THE SENATE IS PRETTY CLOSE TO NEGOTIATING A DEAL.

SENATOR LANKFORD OF OKLAHOMA, MANY REPUBLICAN AS WELL AS THE DEMOCRATS THAT WOULD TIE THIS AID TO BORDER SECURITY.

TO A MUCH STRICTER SOUTHERN BORDER WITH MEXICO SECURITY PLAN.

YOU WROTE "WHICHEVER GENIUS IN THE CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICAN CAUCUS DECIDED TO CONDITION AID TO UKRAINE ON THE PASSAGE OF A COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION OVERHAUL DESERVES A MEDAL FROM THE KREMLIN."

WHY IS IT SO BAD TO SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO SECURE OUR BORDER IF WE'RE GOING TO BE PAYING FOR CONTINUATION OF THIS WAR IN UKRAINE?

>> WELL, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH WANTING TO SECURE OUR BORDER.

BUT THE TWO SITUATIONS ARE NOT LINKED.

WE ARE NOT BEING INVADED BY THE MEXICAN ARMY.

WE'RE DEALING WITH A LOT OF MIGRANTS AT OUR SOUTHERN BORDER THAT IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN THE SITUATION UKRAINE IS FACING WITH THE RUSSIAN INVASION.

AND I DON'T MIND LINKING THE TWO IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO GET AGREEMENT ON A BORDER DEAL.

BUT REMEMBER, WALTER, THERE HAS NOT BEEN A COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION BILL PASSED THROUGH CONGRESS SINCE RONALD REAGAN'S PRESIDENCY IN THE 1980s.

AND NOW WE'RE SEEING WHY IT'S SO HARD TO DO THAT.

BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE HAVE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS ON A COMPROMISE BILL, TRUMP IS SAYING THAT IT NEEDS TO FAIL.

BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY, TRUMP CARES MORE ABOUT HOLDING ON TO THE BORDER AS AN ELECTION ISSUE THAN HE CARES ABOUT ACTUALLY CONTROLLING THE ISSUE.

SO THE ODDS ARE THAT THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN CAUCUS WILL TANK THE IMMIGRATION COMPROMISE IN THE SENATE.

THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES WHAT HAPPENS TO AID TO UKRAINE AND BY THE WAY AID TO ISRAEL AND TAIWAN.

IS THAT GOING TO GET A SEPARATE UP OR DOWN VOTE OR NOT?

AND IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT CONGRESS DELINK THESE TWO ISSUES SO EVEN IF THERE IS GRIDLOCK ON IMMIGRATION, UKRAINE CAN'T WAIT FOR US TO SETTLE OUR DIFFERENCES.

THEY NEED AID RIGHT NOW.

THEY'RE UNDER ATTACK RIGHT NOW.

UKRAINIANS ARE DYING EVERY SINGLE DAY.

THEY NEED OUR HELP DESPERATELY.

>> YOU SAID THAT TRUMP LOOKED UPON PUTIN, TALKED ABOUT THE APPLE OF MY EYE.

TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN IF TRUMP IS RESTORED TO THE PRESIDENCY.

>> I THINK IT WOULD BE A CATASTROPHE FOR AMERICA AND THE WORLD.

I THINK THIS WOULD REALLY BE A RETURN TO THE PREPEARL HARBOR FOREIGN POLICY ISOLATION THAT WE SHOED AFTER WORLD WAR II.

EVERY SINGLE PRESIDENT FROM FDR ON HAS BELIEVED THAT AMERICA HAS TO EXERCISE GLOBAL LEADERSHIP.

THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS DONALD TRUMP, WHO ADOPTS THE SLOGAN OF AMERICA FIRST THAT WAS ALSO USED BY THE ISOLATIONISTS OF THE PRE-PEARL HARBOR PERIOD.

SO IT'S VERY HARD TO PREDICT EXACTLY WHAT TRUMP WILL DO BECAUSE HE IS MERCURIAL AND UNPREDICTABLE AND CAPABLE OF GOING OFF IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT OFTEN CONTRADICTORY DIRECTIONS.

BUT HE HAS BEEN PRETTY CLEAR THAT HE IS A BIG FAN OF VLADIMIR PUTIN.

HE IS NOT A BIG FAN OF ZELENSKYY OR UKRAINE.

HE'S CONSTANTLY TALKED ABOUT DESTROYING NATO, ABOUT TAKING AMERICA OUT OF NATO.

HE'S EVEN SAID THAT HE MAY NOT DEFEND TAIWAN.

SO I THINK ALL OF THOSE THINGS PUT TOGETHER SHOULD BE A VERY LOUD ALARM BELL.

THAT IF VOTERS CARE ABOUT EXERCISING AMERICAN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP, IF VOTERS CARE ABOUT TRYING TO SAFEGUARD THE AMERICAN-LED GLOBAL ORDER THAT HAS EXISTED SINCE 1945, THEY NEED TO VOTE FOR BIDEN RATHER THAN TRUMP, BECAUSE TRUMP HAS NOTHING BUT HOSTILITY TO THE PACS AMERICANA.

>> YOU IS A THEY AS SOMEBODY I ALWAYS SAY BEING CENTER RIGHT AND PROBABLY MORE REPUBLICAN IN THEIR SYMPATHY.

SO YOU THINK PEOPLE SHOULD VOTE FOR BIDEN?

>> OF COURSE.

TO TALK ABOUT MY OWN HISTORY, WALTER, I WAS A LIFE-LONG REPUBLICAN, FOREIGN POLICY ADVISER TO JOHN McCAIN, MITT ROMNEY, AND MARCO RUBIO.

THE VERY FIRST TIME I EVER VOTED FOR A DEMOCRAT WAS IN 2016 WHEN I VOTED FOR HILLARY CLINTON OVER DONALD TRUMP.

BUT THE DAY AFTER TRUMP WON THE ELECTION, I REREGISTERED AS AN INDEPENDENT, BECAUSE I WAS NOT COMFORTABLE WITH WHERE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WAS GOING.

AND I'M FAR LESS COMFORTABLE TODAY THAN I WAS IN 2016.

IT'S VERY ALARMING TO SEE WHAT WAS ONCE A CONSERVATIVE PARTY TURNING INTO THIS ETHNONATIONALIST POPULIST PARTY OF GRIEVANCE AND XENOPHOBIA AND ISOLATIONISM.

I THINK FOR A TRUMP-LED PARTY TO COME TO POWER WOULD BE A CATASTROPHE.

WHEREAS ON THE OTHER HAND, IF IT WAS NIKKI HALEY, I WOULD SLEEP COMPLETELY STRONGLY AT NIGHT.

EVEN THOUGH I DISAGREE WITH HALEY ON A BUNCH OF THINGS, I DON'T THINK SHE WANTS TO DESTROY U.S. DEMOCRACY.

I DON'T THINK SHE WANTS TO DESTROY U.S. FOREIGN POLICY.

BUT TRUMP I FEAR DOES.

>> YOU HAVE A BIOGRAPHY OF RONALD REAGAN COMING OUT LATER THIS YEAR, PARTLY BIOGRAPHY AND PARTLY AN ANALYSIS OF ALL OF HIS POLICIES.

AND HE WAS IN YOUR BOOK A VERY CONSERVATIVE LEADER.

HOW DID THE PARTY GET DIVERTED OR CHANGED BY TRUMP FROM BEING A CONSERVATIVE PARTY TO I THINK YOU CALLED IT ETHNONATIONALIST?

>> RIGHT.

ETHNONATIONALIST PARTY.

THAT'S A LONG STORY THAT REALLY DATES BACK TO THE 1960s.

I THINK TO SUM IT UP VERY BRIEFLY, I THINK THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS ALWAYS HAD CONSERVATIVE ELEMENTS, BUT IT'S ALSO HAD THESE ETHNONATIONALIST POPULIST ELEMENTS WHICH WERE A LOT OF THE GRASSROOTS.

AND, YOU KNOW, UP UNTIL RECENTLY, REPUBLICAN LEADERS DID NOT INDICATOR TO THAT FAR RIGHT BASE.

THEY SOMETIMES THREW RED MEAT TO THEM DURING THE COURSE OF POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS AS RONALD REAGAN AND MANY OTHERS DID.

BUT THEY TENDED TO GOVERN IN A MUCH MORE CENTRIST AND RESPONSIBLE FASHION, MAKING DEALS WITH DEMOCRATS AND BASICALLY UPHOLDING U.S. INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP.

TRUMP IS THE EXCEPTION.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT REAGAN, THEN.

WHAT WOULD REAGAN BE DOING IN THIS SITUATION, DO YOU THINK?

>> I MEAN, YOU KNOW, RONALD REAGAN WAS THE GUY WHO BELIEVED IN FUNDING FREEDOM FIGHTERS TO FIGHT AGAINST THE EVIL EMPIRE.

IT WOULD BE A NO-BRAINER FOR HIM I THINK TO SUPPORT THE PEOPLE OF UKRAINE IN THEIR RESISTANCE AGAINST RUSSIA.

THAT'S A TRADITIONAL REPUBLICAN FOREIGN POLICY.

WHAT TRUMP IS ADVOCATING IS SOMETHING VERY, VERY DIFFERENT.

>> PRESIDENT BIDEN JUST CUT OFF NEW LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS, LNG, EXPORTS FROM THE UNITED STATES, FROM NEW FACILITIES.

OR HE PUT IT ON PAUSE.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT'S A GIFT IN SOME WAYS TO PUTIN AND A BLOW TO OUR EUROPEAN ALLIES.

WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT?

>> WELL, I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE STILL PUMPING MORE -- MORE OIL AND GAS TODAY THAN WE EVER HAVE IN OUR HISTORY, AND MORE THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY HAS I BELIEVE IN U.S. HISTORY.

I THINK BIDEN NEEDS TO FIND A BALANCING ACT BETWEEN PRESERVING OUR SHORT-TERM ECONOMIC SECURITY AND DOING SOMETHING ABOUT THE LONG-TERM THREAT OF GLOBAL WARMING.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE BALANCE HE IS TRYING TO SEEK.

BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A HUGE BENEFIT TO RUSSIA BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY PUMPING A LOT OF OIL, AND THE PRICE OF OIL IS ALREADY PRETTY LOW IN THE WORLD MARKET.

AND OUR SANCTIONS ARE BITING RUSSIA, ALTHOUGH NOT AS MUCH AS WE WOULD LIKE.

>> OUR SANCTIONS ARE BITING RUSSIA, YOU SAY.

BUT RUSSIA'S ECONOMY SEEMS TO BE DOING JUST FINE.

HOW COME OUR SANCTIONS AREN'T WORKING?

>> WELL, IT'S THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY CONTINUES TO FUNCTION, BUT THEY HAVE VERY HIGH INFLATION, MUCH HIGHER THAN OURS.

AND THEY HAVE BASICALLY GONE TO A MILITARY WAR-TIME FOOTING WHERE THEY'RE DEVOTING MOST OF THEIR ECONOMY OR AN INCREASINGLY LARGE SHARE OF THEIR ECONOMY, AND CERTAINLY MOST OF THEIR GOVERNMENT BUDGET TO DEFENSE PRODUCTION IN THE MILITARY.

>> BUT BY DOING SO, THEY'RE BEING ABLE TO PRODUCE MORE MUNITIONS THAN WE ARE.

IN OTHER WORDS, THEIR AMMUNITION FLOW AND PRODUCTION IS HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING FOR UKRAINE.

ISN'T THIS GOING TO BE A NOT A PRETTY SIGHT IF THIS THING KEEPS GOING ON?

>> WELL, THEY ARE.

I MEAN, THEY ARE CERTAINLY MANAGING TO REV UP THEIR AMMUNITION PRODUCTION, BUT THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO PRODUCE WHAT THEY NEED EITHER.

THEY'RE HAVING TO BUY FROM IRAN AND NORTH KOREA, THE ONLY ROGUE STATES THAT ARE WILLING TO SELL WEAPONS TO THEM.

AND BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE, WE ARE ALSO RAMPING UP OUR AMMUNITION PRODUCTION, ARTILLERY PRODUCTION, ALL KINDS OF WEAPONS PRODUCTION.

I THINK WE CERTAINLY HAVE -- I MEAN, THE U.S. AND EUROPE ARE MANY, MANY TIMES LARGER THAN RUSSIA IN TERMS OF ECONOMIES, IN TERMS OF POPULATION.

WE CERTAINLY HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO OUTPRODUCE THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY.

AND I THINK CERTAINLY KEEP UKRAINE ABLE TO DEFEND ITSELF, AS LONG AS THE UNITED STATES CONTINUES TO PROVIDE THE AID THAT WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING.

>> YOU'VE ALSO WRITTEN A BOOK ON PROXY WARS, SMALL WARS.

AND WE'RE SEEING THIS PLAY OUT IN THE MIDDLE EAST NOW, JUST IN THE PAST WEEK THREE AMERICAN SOLDIERS KILLED BY I THINK -- I GUESS I WOULD SAY THE PROXY FORCES IN SYRIA THAT ARE SOMEWHAT PROXIES OF IRAN.

AND EVEN WITH HAMAS, HEZBOLLAH, AND OTHERS, THEY'RE PARTLY SUPPORTED AT LEAST BY IRAN.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE A PROXY WAR THERE.

SHOULD WE RETALIATE, WE BEING THE UNITED STATES, SHOULD THE U.S.

RETALIATE AGAINST IRAN, OR IS THAT SOMETHING YOU REALLY DON'T DO IN THESE TYPE OF SITUATIONS?

>> I THINK PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS TO WALK A VERY FINE LINE.

I THINK HE DOES NEED TO RETALIATE.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE IRANIAN-BACKED MILITIAS CROSSED A RED LINE BY KILLING THREE AMERICAN SOLDIERS.

AND THIS IS JUST ONE OF ABOUT 160 ATTACKS ON U.S.

BASES IN THE REGION SINCE THE HAMAS ATTACK ON ISRAEL ON OCTOBER 7th.

SO I THINK PRESIDENT BIDEN DOES NEED TO RETALIATE.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK HE IS VERY COGNIZANT HE DOESN'T WANT TO GET INTO A WAR WITH IRAN.

THAT WOULD NOT BE IN ANYBODY'S INTEREST.

SO I DON'T THINK HE IS GOING TO PAY ATTENTION TO THESE UBER HAWKS LIKE LINDSEY GRAHAM AND JOHN CORNYN WHO ARE SAYING BOMB TEHRAN.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT UNHINGED AND VERY, VERY DANGEROUS.

BUT CLEARLY, WE NEED TO ALSO SEND A STRONG MESSAGE TO IRAN THAT THEY CAN'T ATTACK U.S.

FORCES OR THEIR PROXIES CAN'T IMPUNITY.

SO I'M SURE THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN AND HIS MILITARY AND FOREIGN POLICY ADVISERS ARE LOOKING AT TARGETS THAT THEY CAN GO AFTER TO SEND THAT MESSAGE TO IRAN WITHOUT GETTING INTO AN ESCALATORY SPIRAL THAT WOULD PRODUCE A MASSIVE WAR THAT NOBODY WANTS.

>> YEAH, I ALWAYS THINK OF YOU AS VERY MUCH A REALIST IN FOREIGN POLICY.

AND IT SEEMS THAT THESE DAYS WE'RE VIOLATING THE GRAND PRINCIPLE OF REALISM, WHICH IS NOT TO FIGHT ON TOO MANY FRONTS AND NOT TO HAVE OUR ADVERSARIES END UP JOINING TOGETHER AGAINST US.

AND YET WE'RE DOING THAT WHERE WE'RE PUSHING AGAINST RUSSIA, PUSHING AGAINST CHINA.

NOW PUSHING AGAINST IRAN AND THEY'RE ALL BECOMING CLOSER TO EACH OTHER.

DO YOU THINK WE'RE MAKING A MAJOR STRATEGIC ERROR IN FOREIGN POLICY?

AND IF SO, SHOULD WE BE OPENING UP TO CHINA OR IRAN AND TRY TO NOT HAVE OUR ADVERSARIES ALL GROUND AGAINST US?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, I WOULD NOT ACTUALLY SAY THAT ALL OF OUR ADVERSARIES ARE GROUPED AGAINST US.

THERE ARE SOME OVERLAPPING INTERESTS BETWEEN IRAN, CHINA, AND RUSSIA.

BUT THEY'RE NOT CLOSE ALLIES.

AND IN FACT I THINK THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HAS DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB OVER THE LAST YEAR OF IMPROVING RELATIONS WITH CHINA.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, CHINA IS NOT PROVIDING WEAPONS TO RUSSIA AND UKRAINE.

I THINK THAT'S HUGELY IMPORTANT.

AND CHINA SEEMS TO HAVE ADOPTED A SOMEWHAT MORE CONCILIATORY APPROACH TO THE U.S. AND THE WEST, AND I THINK THAT'S A POSITIVE THING.

SO I THINK WE SHOULD CERTAINLY TRY TO RATCHET DOWN TENSIONS WHERE WE CAN.

IT'S HARD.

THERE IS NO WAY TO RATCHET DOWN TENSIONS WITH RUSSIA AS LONG AS THEY CONTINUE TO INVADE AN INNOCENT COUNTRY NEXT DOOR.

IT'S VERY HARD TO RATCHET DOWN TENSIONS WITH IRAN AS LONG AS THEIR PROXIES ARE ATTACKING U.S.

FORCES.

CERTAINLY, WE SHOULD TRY TO AVOID GETTING EMBROILED IN MULTIPLE CONFLICTS, BUT REMEMBER, THIS IS KIND OF THE HISTORIC FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES GOING BACK TO 1945 IS TO TRY TO PRESERVE THE PEACE IN THE KEY CENTERS OF GLOBAL POWER, IN EUROPE AND EAST ASIA AND THE MIDDLE EAST.

AND SO I THINK WE STILL HAVE A VITAL ROLE, AN INDISPENSABLE ROLE AS MADELEINE ALBRIGHT SAID IN TRYING TO UPHOLD GLOBAL ORDER.

AND THAT'S NOT ALWAYS EASY AND SOMETIMES DANGEROUS.

BUT I THINK THE FAR GREATER DANGER WOULD BE TO ABANDON OUR INTERNATIONALIST ROLE AND RETREAT INTO THE KIND OF PRE-PEARL HARBOR ISOLATIONISM THAT DONALD TRUMP SEEMS TO ADVOCATE.

>> MAX BOOT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU.