ISA2022 Panel: US Grand Strategy and European ‘Strategic Autonomy’: Fostering A Transatlantic Debate 

He’s no non-sense. I have learned a lot from John Mearsheimer. Some people talk round and round.

@@richiesd1 Mearsheimer was clear, before this war begun.

I tried to watch this, but not enough Mearsheimer.

@@mariocomeq1961 he certainly was. I have been listening to John Mearsheimer for a decade. He taught me how to think objectively based on reason and objectivity - form a theory (of state actors) and test the theory.

if you think mearsheimer is brilliant and not a useful idiot to genocidal russian fascists then i have some NFTs to sell you

Mearsheimer is a joke. He says to bend to Russia’s will. Let me ask you this question. In 2008, 2014 and 2022 why was Russia the first to fire a weapon against a sovereign nation and then invaded it? It’s it the reality of Europe that the Russian threat is what drives NATO membership? Sweden and Finland were neutral for decades. The Russian threat drove them to seek NATO protection. So it’s the opposites of Mearsheimer narrative. If Russia was not such a threat to its neighbors or even a perceived threat NATO wouldn’t be so desired.

@@paperandmedals8316 U must be joking about NATO. Finland and Sweden were neutral for decades and they do well with there neutrality. Russia even draw back weapons and troops from Finland border. U simply dont know history.. U should read how Finland became a neutral country. Little countries like Finland or Georgia without NATO are not dangerous for Russia so the neutral status is the best solutions for this countries. Russia is a huge country with dying population and demographic problems we simply dont need new land we have more lands than we can use . About Finland im sure turkey will not allow them to become part of NATO. We dont care about Sweden.

@@elenekuprashvili1145 you’re talking out your ass. These countries feel threatened by Russia. If Russia was the neighbor asshole filled with criminals and drunks maybe their neighbors would want them around. You can’t say shit. Look at what Russia has done to Georgia and Ukraine and try to excuse that. Can’t wait for the Russian age demographic to crash so it will not even me an ethnicity anymore. Take care, while you still can.

@@paperandmedals8316 i have listening to professors lectures for 8 years and till now all he said or predicted was true. So i respect him too much P.S im not russian im georgian And my stupid president Saakashvili in 2008 almost killed thousands of georgian men not without NATOs help . U hate Russia when u live in some other country because everyday your propaganda is telling u how awful and aggressive Russia and russians are Do u know what all u hear about russia simply is not truth . When u start to live in russia u really enjoy to live with russians u start to love this country which is so patient . Russians are nice i like them too much . I like Ukrainians as well a lot of Ukrainians live in Russia .

@@elenekuprashvili1145 listen I’m not reading your nonsense. Russia took eastern Ukrainian in 2014 right after the gas reserves were discovered there and off Crimea. Russia also is tired of paying tariffs to Ukraine for gas lines passing through the country. Russia is also pissed that the northern Crimea canal is damned off to Crimea leaving it a a little waterless drought. Russia could have been a prosperous country and been in the world order along with other countries. It chose war. War is what it will get.

😂😂

Germany is quite famous for its experience and slow internet. Hopefully with the new 3%of gdp cost for military development, they can upgrade their military internet into other normal country level, such as India or US.

Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah!....

Man people hanging off Mearsheimer's every word here. It's more complicated than the way he presents it. And it isn't simply about Russia.

@@racheddar It sure seems to be very complicated for Europeans, so complicated that they immediately take the most drastic actions, doing everything they can to escalate the war, screwing the situation as bad as they possibly can until they realize they have to somewhat back-paddle to survive the next winter and keep some food on the table...

@@racheddar It actually is very simple. Imperial politics often is.

Sound is very important in a video.

yeah the whole "look how badly Russia is doing against tiny helpless little Ukraine" narrative is ridiculous. Ukraine has the largest army in Europe, trained by NATO to NATO standards for 8 years, they should be the best army in Europe with the exception of the British and French. They also have basically the FULL intelligence capabilities of the USA on their side, as well as planning and strategic and tactical advice. Moreover Ukraine is the largest country in Europe too, so it's a huge battlefield to fight over. We know that NATO was unwilling to engage even just Serbia in ground combat in the 1990s, preferring to engage in an air war against them for months until they surrendered.

0

@Jon Little I've read John's books and given his educational/military background I'm going to go with his analysis over any number of youtube randos who are very likely grossly under qualified to be critiquing the man.

@Jon Little No Mearsheimer doesn't ignore those other things, he has mentioned this in other talks when this very critique is erroneously made, he acknowledges those other factors but correctly does not grant them primacy in the bigger picture. His analysis of the Russia-Ukraine situation is on point but the state department is committed to this foolish course and will chase it right over the edge of the cliff. If you had read his books as you claim and you had listened to his lectures, I wouldn't have to tell you this.

@Jon Little No you don't understand, you begin with an incorrect assertion that NATO is stronger than Russia, in what sense do you mean? in conventional military terms? okay so what? Russia has enough nuclear weapons to make sure that no conventional war ever takes place on Russia soil. Additionally Russia's economy is arguably doing better than America's and Europe's right now and in the long term these sanctions will make them stronger as they build eastward and become self sufficient in terms of technology. Smaller powers must cede to the influence of great powers and anyone who thinks otherwise is spouting ideology, the world does not run on idealism contrary to what many Westerners believe.

@Jon Little You fail to realize that Russia didn't "poke" NATO. Everything Russia has done in Ukraine since 2014 has been the direct result of US aggression since the end of the cold war. Russia didn't invade Ukraine out of the blue. That's Mearsheimers point. How does it not get across to you?

Hardly deep cutting words of wisdom. Mearsheimer fails to include into his conversation the threat Eastern European countries feel towards Russia. Maybe they don’t want to be in Russia’s where of influence. Russia has unilaterally started an armed conflict in 2008 with Georgia; 2014 against Ukraine with the taking of Crimea and backing eastern separatist (including blowing a civilian jet out of the sky killing over 240 people); and again in 2022. Seems to me Europe has a reason to fear Russia. Say what you want but you can not point to once in modern history where a European nation crossed over into Russia except for Nazi Germany which I would not declare as modern times.

& 1:26:59

@@kittens1951 👌

I'm just wondering if there's English version for Jacques Baud's books. Seems interesting to me some of his book. I'm searching for alternative opinion about Putin and Russia

Thanks for the recommendations

@@Zzzk155 I search for Baud's books in English, butI found only in french.

@@maxc7198 Try to find the last interview to Jack Matlock,in( YT) last american ambassador in the Soviet Union. I think it was published a few days ago. Really interesting, He thinks like Mearsheimer.

There's also the late professor Stephen Cohen, for those that understand neither french or italian (like me, unfortunately )

She's talking about how a nation can still use coercion to extort political demands without directly invading anyone or waging a war. This is the primary fear of China's rise by India, Australia, Japan, etc.

@@GaneshGunaji It will be a mistake underestimating the psychological component of the contemporaneous perception of any conflict and especially wars. However, all media imployed and exploit it but a few provide the whole coordinate system and vectors on it. I just noted there is an audience expecting less one-sided interpretations.

@@GaneshGunaji you mean like United States does to Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua?

@Jon Little thanks for your recommendation. But all the names you mentioned, they unrelated to the topic on this video conference. Zeihan, Sikorsi etc doesn't really participate in USA grand strategy debate between IR scholars in USA few years ago

@Jon Little Posen, Mearsheimer and Walt, Hugo Meijer basically in the USA grand strategy debate few years before. This issue of European autonomous strategic capability and USA deep engagement policy is go way back few years ago, it trigger the debate between IR scholar in USA. So, the names you mentioning basically absence from the debate few years ago (I'm not sure about Friedman, but Sikorsi, Zeihan surely not in the debate). Even if they had argument or idea about this issue now, it's basically irrelevant because USA will stay in Europe and European autonomous strategic capability is not the big issues anymore since USA is there in Europe (like Mearsheimer said in his comment)

@Jon Little lol. What is this? Now you basically don't engaged in more constructive conversation

@Jon Little pfft. I'm just arguing about what this video conference is all about and when I'm stating a fact, you suddenly go saying about alCapone etc. Sensitive, eh? I don't trying unilaterally define this debate, but arguing what this video conference is all about (USA grand strategy and whose scholar basically participate). So you feel other is in control? Lol. I don't think that way, but if you feel other are trying to control the discussion, it's just you think that way. When you can't give counter argument, you just divert the discussion in to another issues. Oh, I'm sorry about name calling I'm accusing you, that's not true. What are you doing actually is diverting the discussion to other issues rather than giving proper counter argument

@Jon Little regarding Alexander Stubb (thanks for reminding about him), he's not USA policy makers or IR scholar that engage in this USA grand strategy debate few years ago. This USA grand strategy debate between IR scholars from few years before deeply related to USA commitment in Europe and the question of should USA deeply involved around the world. About Zeihan, Friedman etc, I'm just want to make clear that I'm not arguing their view about international politics is irrelevant, I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying that in this context of USA grand strategy debate from few years before that surround about USA deep involvement around the world and European autonomous strategic capability, they don't really participate together with other IR scholar like Walt, Stephen Brooks, Hugo Meijer, John Ikenberry, Mearsheimer etc

yeah, make geo-politics more easy! some people have to watch tic-toc!

Curious, there is an answer here, but no one can read it. YT Censure?

i always wonder what happens if i post a reply then delete it. could this be how a comment is recorded then not found.

Thanks for the context.

@@1981idx you're welcome 👌✨

There seemed to be consensus that Russia military is performing horribly. I don't know where they get that opinion but your comment that they only follow Western MSM seems accurate in that sense.

@@uxpjsxu I meant to say, I would have thought these think tank professors had direct access to real information which the public media deem unsuited for the masses. Seems at least this guy doesn't have such access. Must come as a shock to him that Ukrainians are now surrendering in droves.

To be fair they're older guys, so I assume that despite themselves being "alternative" in outlook, they aren't really plugged into alternative media sources themselves.

@Jon Little "Russia wasn't winning spectacularly in Ukraine". What "spectacularly" did you expect?

@Jon Little Do you think I am PhD? Do you know what is the definition of "PhD"?

He's living in his own fantasy world.

And it comes from a so called International Studies Association. (?)

Welcome to Europe

Because they probably turn them off for the debate so no one interrupts them

Yes it's not in NATO, it's just controlled by NATO, especially its soldier slaves fighting Russia and dying on its behalf.

Mearsheimer speak at 53:43 & 1:26:59 For the context, the participants in this video conference discussing about European autonomous strategic capability. They discussing about the piece by Hugo Meijer and Stephen Brooks, title "Illusions of Autonomy: Why Europe Cannot Provide for Its Security If the United States Pulls Back"

John is brilliant, but the entire panel is worth watching for context. even the brightest aren’t correct all of the time, and being exposed to differing opinions is much more useful than just basing your opinions off of one specific person (or school)

Why wuold you modify what you are saying if what you'r saying is the truth ??

@Jon Little No, he is very much right on the point of the Hobbesian nature of the international system. It's a fact that almost all IR theorists fundamentally agree with in one way or another. The issue with him repeating himself again and again is that he does not really offer any new insight. His theoretical problams are many, but thay's not what I'm complaining about. His main body of work is very solid and very important, even if simplistic.

@Jon Little The fundamental precept of Hobbes' state of nature is that only a sovereign that has has a monopoly on force can end it. And it is the sole and undisputed sovereign, not the result of some nice voluntary liberal contractualism or abstract international law ratified only symbolically. Mearsheimer's entire point in "Tragedy" is that Hobbes' cencept of a sovereign who brings individuals out of the state of nature and into a state is an impossibility in international relations. There is NO global sovereign, and the closest we can approach such a thing is global regimes enforced at gunpoint by a temporary hegemon. All the crap about "bullying" is meaningless here, he does not make any moral argument about Ukraine submitting to Russia, it is a strategic argument - you're the one introducing moralism into it. And Ukraine suffers because thats what nations whose leaders make stupid strategic decisions driven by foreign powers do. They suffer. Also I have no clue what you're arguing here - international law is not a sovereign. It has no sovereign enforcing it - the U.S invaded Iraq with no reprisal from the international community of its client states and subjects, except Iran. Russia only suffers reprisals because it is globally inferior and has far more adversaries than clients.

@Jon Little @Jon Little @Jon Little @Jon Little It does not "empower a bully". You're talking as if Ukraine has a duty to the rest of the world to "disempower Russia" at its own expense, which us actually something that its rightists were advocating for since 2013. It does not. It has a responsibility to the peace and prosperity of its people, and that involves balancing between the militaristic giant next door and their opponent. Its to benefit from the competition between the two in ways that do not lead to escalation and being made a victim of either side. There is no point for me to argue against the counterfactual (and honestly silly) argument that we should just assume Hobbes is actually pro-democracy because if he could time travel he would be. The argument is about the state of nature, not what Hobbes would or wouldn't agree with in 2022. As for "moral superiority", that's also a meaningless argument for international relations. There is no "democratic superstate". There is no democracy at the United Nations either. The idea that all states are currently under some global democratic regime that Russia violated is silly in the extreme. The idea that passing a strategic judgement on what the best course of action to maintain sovereignty and prosperity of your nation - if that is your goal - is "morality" strikes me as wrongheaded. It is not a "moral argument" to tell a doctor that his goal of saving an patient would be best accomplished with this procedure or that instrument. It isn't "moralism" to tell someone that if they're interested in remaining safe while driving they should wear a seatbelt. If anything, the times when Mearsheimer does speak morally it is in the way Hans Morgenthau did (as outlined his "The Politics of Evil" essay), that is, arguing for prudent restraint instead of "values-driven" confrontations and impositions on reality that destroy for no good purpose. Mearsheimer believes that Ukraine has a right to defend itself - I don't know where you got the assumption he didn't. His argument is that Ukraine is going to have to accomodate Russia by the end anyways, which is the conclusion of every single analyst worth reading. That's not that they *should* accomdate Russia, but that they have to, and their attempts at deterring Russia to incur a cost on its demands is a self-defeating policy that is being driven by foreign powers. Its is quite clear from public polling among other indicators that the full-steam-ahead tilt towards the West was not at all a majority point of view in Ukraine, and the extremely corrupt nation had significant U.S-EU influence problem, as bad as its Russian influence problem ever was. Remember for example Hunter Biden being put on the board of Burisma as his father was Obama's pointman in Ukraine, mere months after the U.S-backed ouster of Yanukovych. As for the precious little "community" of the liberal international order - I don't care for it, as a third-worlder. Nor should I. Its not an order I am really welcome into. People like me are knocked into the Mediterranean to drown by "Europe whole and free", the U.S wipes its butt with our sovereignty every single day, we are dependent on it. Inasmuch as we are empowered by it, its to cast a meaningless vote at the joke of a forum called the U.N. We can't even assert our values or beliefs, in case our depedency on aid is turned against us as a tool of cultural imperialism by the West. In a few years when you all go vegan maybe you'll deny us food aid for abusing animals with factory-farming or whatever newfound morality emanates out of Euro-American urban centers. Putin feared NATO expansion - so did Yeltsin and Girbachev. Putin acknowledges Ukrainians identity, and even did so in his invasion speech. Putin has never spoken of "unretrained aggression" and has never said anything about international anarchy - he's a statesmen, not some IR theorist. Mearsheimer is respected across the U.S, but in typical McCarthyist fashion he's Putin's puppet for recognizing basic political realities even his Cold-Warrior par excellence predecessors acknowledged. You're boxing at shadows and bellowing liberal invective and pieties, exactly the sort of dispicable behavior that is leading the world into these messes.

@Jon Little You argued that Hobbes was a creation of his time, and that since then democracy has become the unassailably moral response to his position... which I took to mean that you think the Hobbesian conundrum is remedied by liberal democracy and sovereignty of the public. My point is that you're wrong - the historical circumstances that Hobbes experienced are not done away with and are still latent in every existing state.

why should russia live next door to an alliance headed by the most aggressive and expansionist country in the history of the world? russia does not want to have bullies on its borders.

@@TheDynamicmarket Russian threat comes before the desire for NATO membership. Finland and Sweden were fine sitting up north nice and quiet. Russia pushed them into NATO security. NATO still exists because of Russia. Russia had no reason to threat over NATO. And let’s not be foolish. Russia is the country that’s has invaded and murdered it neighbors over the past 20 years. Russia is just frustrated that it’s a failed autocratic state and the ONLY reason Russia is relevant is their inheritance of nuclear weapons. Sore losers.