Prof. John Mearsheimer : China and Trade.

Summary

In this interview, Judge Andrew Napolitano and Professor John Mearsheimer dive into the complexities of the Trump administration's handling of international politics, focusing on Iran, China, and Israel. They discuss the influence of neoconservatives, the economic effects of tariffs on Chinese goods, and the potential for conflict in the Middle East. Mearsheimer highlights the strategic moves behind Netanyahu's potential military actions and the broader geopolitical ramifications, including the impacts on American domestic politics and the changing global economic landscape.

Highlights

• Trump's internal conflict with neocons affecting foreign policy on Iran and Ukraine 🧐.
• Potential Israel-Iran conflict could be a strategy for dealing with Palestine 🌐.
• Trump's tariffs on China could backfire economically, harming American consumers 🚫.
• Viral TikTok from a young Chinese influencer criticizes the U.S. politics and economy 🔥.
• Senator Grassley confronted by Iowan farmer on constitutional issues with foreign detainment 🚜.

Key Takeaways

• The Trump administration sees internal conflict between neoconservatives and restrainers, impacting decisions on Iran and Ukraine 🤯.
• Potential attacks on Iran are linked to broader ambitions in the Middle East, possibly tied to Israeli-Palestinian conflicts 🌍.
• The Chinese tariffs are hurting both nations but might damage the U.S. more due to economic miscalculations 📉.
• A young Chinese influencer's viral clip critiques the American economic and political system, urging for a domestic revolution 🇨🇳.
• Senator Grassley's town hall highlights constitutional concerns over foreign detentions under Trump's actions 🏛️.

Overview

Mearsheimer's interview reveals the tug-of-war within the Trump administration between the hawkish neoconservatives and more cautious restrainers. This conflict has profound implications for the administration's stance on Iran and Ukraine, complicating the geopolitical chessboard.

The discussion pivots to the potential for a US-backed Israeli strike on Iran, viewed by Mearsheimer as a catalyst for broader conflicts possibly aimed at diverting attention from domestic issues, like the Palestinian question. He criticizes Netanyahu's motivations, suggesting they're tied to internal politics and regional dominations.

Mearsheimer also examines the domestic economic effects of tariffs on Chinese imports, questioning the wisdom behind such policies. Alongside, a viral critique by a Chinese influencer highlights the perceived economic betrayals of American oligarchs, resonating with political undercurrents in American society and hinting at growing discontent.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 00:30: Introduction and Welcome This introductory chapter sets the tone for the book. It likely includes a welcome message and provides an overview of the content and objectives of the book. The recurring 'Music' annotation suggests there might be audiovisual elements or thematic emphasis in the chapter.
• 00:30 - 02:00: Interview with Prof. John Mearsheimer on Neocon Influence in Trump's Administration In this chapter, Judge Andrew Napolitano hosts an interview with Professor John Mearsheimer. The conversation centers around the influence of neoconservatives in the Trump administration. Judge Napolitano inquires if the neocon faction is becoming more dominant within the administration.
• 02:00 - 05:00: Discussion on Iran, Israel, and U.S. Foreign Policy In this chapter, a discussion takes place regarding the dynamics within the U.S. administration concerning foreign policy towards Iran and Israel. Two main factions are highlighted: the neoconservatives and the restrainers. The neoconservatives are referred to as one of the significant groups, with the restrainers being equally formidable. It is suggested that there is a stalemate between these factions, which influences the foreign policy direction under Trump. The chapter explores these internal conflicts and their implications on U.S. foreign policy.
• 05:00 - 09:00: Debate on Military Strategies and Oil Refineries The chapter discusses the dynamics of military strategies pertaining to Iran and Ukraine, as per a piece published by the New York Times. It delves into a surprising aspect where an influential member of the inner circle allegedly persuaded a leader to say no to a request from Prime Minister Netanyahu during his recent visit to Washington.
• 14:00 - 19:00: Implications of 245% Tariffs on American and Chinese Economies The chapter discusses the potential implications of imposing a 245% tariff on American and Chinese economies. The focus shifts to geopolitical strategies involving key players such as Trump and Netanyahu, with a mention of a possible military action against Iran. It highlights the internal debates within the Pentagon where Secretary Hegsth and members of his inner circle are noted as advocating for restraint.
• 19:00 - 22:30: Chinese Influencer's Perspective on U.S.-China Trade The chapter discusses the perspective of a Chinese influencer on the U.S.-China trade relations. It begins with a reference to recent events involving personnel being removed from the Pentagon, though the connection to the main topic seems indirect. The focus is on whether certain individuals believed to be close to Trump were responsible for leaks, but the main narrative does not find this surprising. The chapter appears to mix topics of U.S. internal security with broader geopolitical issues, seen through the lens of Chinese media and its influencers.
• 22:30 - 28:00: China's Peaceful Rise Debate The debate centers around the strategic implications of attacking Iran, where the article argues against such action due to its limited effectiveness. It highlights that any military action would only temporarily delay Iran's program rather than permanently dismantle it, emphasizing the lack of strategic sense in attacking Iran.
• 28:00 - 39:00: Critique on President Trump's Tariff Policies The focus of this chapter is a critique on President Trump's tariff policies, particularly in relation to Iran. The discussion touches upon nuclear enrichment and reprocessing capabilities. Despite concerns, it is noted that the American intelligence community has informed the President that there has been no development of nuclear weapons by Iran, and this has been reiterated multiple times. The critical point highlighted is Iran's nuclear capabilities, regardless of weapon development.
• 39:00 - 43:00: Senator Grassley's Town Hall Meeting and Critique of U.S. Policies The chapter focuses on Senator Grassley's town hall meeting where discussions revolve around U.S. policies and strategies concerning Iran's nuclear capabilities. It highlights the potential actions against Iranian nuclear facilities, particularly the enrichment and reprocessing capabilities. There is an exploration of the implications of targeting only certain installations versus a comprehensive campaign against Iran's nuclear infrastructure. The deliberation underlines the complexity and scale of a potential military operation.
• 43:00 - 45:00: Closing Remarks and Upcoming Events The chapter discusses the complexities involved in military operations, particularly when entering enemy territory. It highlights the challenges of dismantling ground-based defense networks and the need for strategic planning to create a corridor for sustained aircraft presence. The narrative also briefly mentions a close associate of the president, implying potential political or social connections to military decisions.

Prof. John Mearsheimer : China and Trade. Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 [Music] [Music]
• 00:30 - 01:00 hi everyone Judge Andrew Npalitano here for Judging Freedom today is Thursday April 17 2025 my dear friend the good professor John Mirshimer joins us now professor Mir Shimemer thank you very much for your time thanks for accommodating uh my schedule do you have a sense that the neocons in the Trump administration are um becoming ascendant
• 01:00 - 01:30 ascendant is too strong a word uh I think that they're one of two factions in the administration uh let's call them the restrain let's call the other side the restrainers here uh I think the restrainers are a formidable force but there's no question uh that the neoconservatives uh are there in large presence as well and there's sort of a stalemate between the two sides which is why Trump is not
• 01:30 - 02:00 moving forward on either Iran or Ukraine the um New York Times published a very uh interesting uh piece uh claiming that um some of his inner circle one of whom surprised me if the piece is accurate talked him into saying no to Prime Minister Netanyahu when Netanyahu was last in Washington about a week ago about whether or
• 02:00 - 02:30 not Trump would give Netanyahu the green light to attack Iran i know sometimes you think it would be Netanyahu who would be giving a green light to Trump we can get into that if you want but according to the New York Times based on leaks from inside the Pentagon of all people um Secretary Hegsth was on the side of the restrainers now three people in his inner circle
• 02:30 - 03:00 were sumearily escorted from the Pentagon in the past 48 hours whether he or whoever made the decision to remove them believes they were the leakers or not I don't know but do you find credible the idea that some of the people around Trump well that the restrainers were triumphant in this respect no I don't find it surprising at all in
• 03:00 - 03:30 large part because if you read the article carefully uh it made no strategic sense to attack Iran i mean first of all the article makes clear and this is an extremely important point to understand the article said that the most you could do was set the program back for one or more years just think about that we're not talking about going in here and destroying this program once
• 03:30 - 04:00 and for all well what program are you talking about nuclear enrichment yeah you're talking well at least the nuclear enrichment and reprocessing capabilities okay because you know that the American um intel community has told the president there hasn't been any nuclear weapons development no there's been no nuclear weapons development and I've said that on the show many times right point is that what matters here is the fact that Iran has
• 04:00 - 04:30 an enrichment and reprocessing capability and that's what the Israelis want to eliminate uh so your question about what the target set would look like uh is an important one because it could be that we're just going after the enrichment and reprocessing capabilities or it could be that we're going after the entire uh nuclear uh set of installations in Iran in which case you would be talking about a massive attack
• 04:30 - 05:00 because you want to remember when we go in there and the Israelis go in there you have to tear apart their groundbased uh defense networks as well you just don't go in there and get a free shot there are lots of other targets that you have to deal with you have to cut a corridor into the place uh and then you have to be able uh to sustain uh aircraft over the targets for a sustained period of time the president's golfing buddy the senior
• 05:00 - 05:30 senator from South Carolina Lindsey Graham wants him to destroy oil refineries that would have a catastrophic effect on the world economy would it not yeah absolutely uh I've said before that I think what the Iranians ought to do is tell the Americans that if they attack uh their nuclear sites or they attack oil infrastructure that the Iranians will target oil installations across the
• 05:30 - 06:00 Middle East and shut down the flow of oil at least out of the Persian Gulf and you want to remember that 20% of the world's oil comes out of the Gulf so given the state of the international economy these days with all these tariffs uh having a crisis of that sort involving the flow of oil out of the Middle East would be catastrophic and I think it would have huge deterrent effect and by the way I'm sure that the Trump people when they were deciding whether or not to go along with this
• 06:00 - 06:30 attack in May by the Israelis uh had that uh in their mind right it is a serious question whether attacking Iran will not lead to attacks uh on oil production in the region is Netanyahu reckless enough to do this without the United States it's possible uh I have a very uh unusual view on what's going on here i actually Let me just say one more
• 06:30 - 07:00 thing about what the New York Times said it's clear from the New York Times piece that it would be better to do this in the fall in October uh than to do it now uh as the Americans pointed out to the Israelis we just need a lot more time to plan this we can't do this as a fly by the seat of your pants operation and furthermore it would be very helpful if we could use uh Israeli commandos and the newspaper story says explicitly that those commandos won't be ready uh until October so the question is why not wait
• 07:00 - 07:30 why go now my view is that the principal aim here not the only aim but the principal aim is to call is to cause a we a regionwide confilration all for the purposes of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians out of Gaza you need a major conflict you need a major war and that provides the cover for the Israelis to go to work on
• 07:30 - 08:00 the Palestinians in Gaza so I think they fully understand that there's no way they could take out Iran's nuclear capabilities uh for the long term maybe for a year or two or three but that's it but the reason they want to do it and the reason they want to do it quickly is they see that there is an opportunity now to cleanse fully cleanse Gaza if they can create a a regionwide confilration involving the United States where
• 08:00 - 08:30 everybody takes their eye off the Palestinian problem in other words it provides cover add to that the overwhelming desire of Prime Minister Netanyahu to get the Israeli public's eye off of his failures and the crumbling Israeli society and unite them behind uh a war against his professed demons yeah there's no question about that war is good for him the more conflict there is the more war there is the better for
• 08:30 - 09:00 him the problem is that huge chunks of his society and the IDF itself have had it with all these wars they need a break they need to put an end to all these conflicts and again he understands that which is why he wants to strike now before he's forced into a situation where he can no longer keep all those troops in Gaza and be in a position to cleanse Gaza you want to remember he has since the ceasefire broke down moved
• 09:00 - 09:30 large numbers of troops into Gaza they say they now control onethird of Gaza that puts them in an excellent position to cleanse Gaza but they have to do that uh undercover and I think a war against Iran would do the trick the same article also opined that uh Iran is weak militarily uh here is a clip of our colleague Colonel
• 09:30 - 10:00 McGregor making the opposite argument he's on another show Colonel Daniel Davis and he chastises Davis well you'll you'll hear what uh what he says chris number 15 what nation on the planet can have their embassy destroyed in another country and to have an assassination in their capital city on an inauguration and not go to war with somebody yet that's exactly what Iran didn't do because they don't have the power to do it so that should tell you wait a minute wait a minute false that's a
• 10:00 - 10:30 fundamentally false statement which part false false false false they don't have the power to go to war you haven't looked carefully at Iran iran's arsenal of missiles is enormous it could flatten Israel in a day they have the power to go to war they have chosen repeatedly to avoid war and I've said this a thousand times no one in the Middle East is interested in a war except Israel and the United States
• 10:30 - 11:00 agreed Professor Mir Shimemer uh Colonel McGregor has said it a thousand times i'm sad to say I've only said it 500 times but uh there's no question that it's Israel that's driving this train uh if you look at what happened in April and in October of last year in both instances the Israelis tried to drag us into a war with Iran and both the Iranians and the
• 11:00 - 11:30 Biden administration did not want a war and according to this New York Times story here we are again uh the Iranians obviously don't want a war and the Trump administration doesn't want a war but who wants a war it's the Israelis and the neocons around Trump yeah there's no question about that well the neocons around Trump want the Ukraine war to continue don't they yeah they're wararm mongers there's no question about there's no question about that so that
• 11:30 - 12:00 they would undermine um Mr witito's negotiations with Vladimir Putin with Hamas uh with the Israelis and with the Iranian foreign minister if they could they would undermine all of that they want both wars they want one to start and another to res to continue absolutely what's very interesting here is that Witco is Trump's right-hand man he's more or less his alter ego on these three big issues
• 12:00 - 12:30 that you're describing so in a very important way Trump has sided more or less sided uh with let's call them the restrainers uh the people who want to work out deals uh but the fact is he brought into his administration uh all of these uh super hawkish Zionists and he also has been acting in a very hamfisted way and the end result
• 12:30 - 13:00 is he's been unable to execute uh in ways that satisfy his basic inclinations regarding both Ukraine uh and Iran so he's in a really tough spot at this point in time why doesn't he just say to Netanyahu "We're not sending you any more weapons." Well we know the answer to that because of the donor class but he What does he have to fear and why doesn't he say to Zilinski "We're not sending you any more
• 13:00 - 13:30 weapons." He could stop both of those wars with a phone call he could and uh he look he's going to have it to in my opinion bite the bullet at some point let's just talk about the Ukraine war if he doesn't bite the bullet if he doesn't side with Witco uh if he doesn't go with his own inclinations the war is going to go on and he's going to end up looking just like Joe Biden he's going to end up employing the same policies as Biden and he's not going to end the Ukraine war unless it's ended on the battlefield and
• 13:30 - 14:00 he won't be responsible for that and he will be blamed for losing the war so he has a deep-seated interest in ending this war as quickly as possible but he's been unable to pull the trigger he said on Air Force One on Palm Sunday night "It's Biden's war it's his war now isn't it?" He knows it's his war now he's the president of the United States how could it be otherwise he's correct when he says that he didn't start it and I also believe he's correct when he says that
• 14:00 - 14:30 if he had been president it wouldn't have happened okay I believe that but the fact is it happened he got reelected he's the president and it's his responsibility now and he has two choices here he can either continue the war or he can end the war what are the short and long-term effects of 245% tariffs on Chinese goods uh I think that there are going to be
• 14:30 - 15:00 very few goods except the ones that he exempts uh you know like computers and iPhones that come in to the United States uh I think there's no question that the American economy is going to be badly hurt uh I think there's no question that the Chinese economy is going to be hurt as well the question of which side is hurt more is an open question uh if I had to bet I would bet and I'm not an economist so this is just you know my gut uh based on reading lots
• 15:00 - 15:30 of stories in the newspapers that the Chinese will come out of this better than we will uh I think we have done a lot of damage to ourselves uh in terms of dealing with the rest of the world as a as a result of the way these tariffs have been handled and I think it's going to cause Trump a lot of trouble on the home front i think I think you're right i think he's going to end up with a Democratic Congress elected in 2026 unless he somehow reverses this and brings people's shareholder value back
• 15:30 - 16:00 to where it was before he started it hasn't it it isn't anywhere near back uh to where it was before he put a a 90day pause it seems uh reckless to me i want him to succeed but it seems awfully reckless to me but on the Chinese as it matter can I just say one thing about what you just said sure i think I think what you said applies uh to the rich people who support him but you want to remember this has devastating
• 16:00 - 16:30 consequences as well for his base the MAGA base oh absolutely you know Joe Six-Pack goes to buy a um a Ford pickup it cost $3,000 more because the so many of the parts come from Mexico Canada and South Korea and and Mrs joe Sixback goes to buy a toaster at Walmart used to cost 30 bucks now cost 225 bucks she's not going to buy it yes and this is why Bernie Sanders is drawing huge crowds as
• 16:30 - 17:00 he wanders around the country because there are huge numbers of people uh who don't have a lot of money who are hurting and expect to be hurt even more because of President Trump's policies and most of those people voted for President Trump right right uh a young uh Chinese influencer uh on Tik Tok uh who speaks English uh
• 17:00 - 17:30 has made a fascinating clip directed at the American people and the first time I saw it I said to Chris we got to pay play this for Professor Mir we got to have his comments on it so it's a minute and a half long but it's in English and it's fascinating um and I want to discuss it with you after we watch it together chris cut number 20 they robbed you blind and you thank them for it that's a tragedy that's a scam
• 17:30 - 18:00 that's why I'm saying this right now americans you don't need a tariff you need a revolution for decades your government and oligarchs won't ship your job to China not for diplomacy not for peace but to explore cheap labors and in the process they hollowed out your middle class crashed your working class and told you to be proud while they sold your future for profit and yes China made money but we
• 18:00 - 18:30 used it to build roads leave millions out of property fund healthcare raise living standard we reinvested in our people my family also benefited from it what did your oligarchs do they bore yaks private jets and mansions with golf course driveways they manipulate the market dodge attacks and poured billions into endless wars and you you get stagnated wages crippling healthcare cost cheap
• 18:30 - 19:00 dopamine debt and flag wave property made in China well they pick your pocket for 40 years both China and the United States benefit from the trade the manufacturing but only one of us use that wells to build this isn't China's fault this is yours you let this happen you let go feed your lies well they made you fat poor and addicted now they blame China for mess
• 19:00 - 19:30 they made i don't think so i don't think you need another tariff you need to wake up you need to take your country back i think you need a revolution the one correction I would make I realize a lot of this is ideological is we haven't spent billions on useless wars we've spent trillions on useless wars but take it from there Professor Mir Shimemer well if you listen if that
• 19:30 - 20:00 young man were your student in your class and he stood up and gave that minute and a half statement how would you respond i would tell him I basically agree with him i think he's correct and I think by the way that this is a message in large part that Trump made as a candidate before the 2016 2020 and the 2024 election and it's what helped get him elected in two of those three cases i think there are huge number of people in this country who feel exactly the way
• 20:00 - 20:30 that Chinese gentleman uh feels about what has happened i would note to you you know uh on a subject that you and I disagree on which is whether China can rise peacefully uh I argued uh for a long time that China could not rise peacefully and I was always very perplexed that all sorts of very hawkish people in the national security establishment disagreed with me they argued that China could actually rise
• 20:30 - 21:00 peacefully i remember when I had a debate with big New Brjinski in the early 2000s on this issue i remember I was sitting up on the dis and I said to myself why am I arguing that China cannot rise peacefully and big who's about five to 10 notches to the right of me is arguing that China can rise peacefully and the fact is that almost all the national security elites in this country uh were making huge amounts of
• 21:00 - 21:30 money consulting in China and they had a deep-seated interest in having very good relations with the Chinese and hardly any of them were willing to say that if we turn China into a really powerful country there could be serious problems so I think in a very important way what you saw happened here was that the national security elite was not as interested with the welfare of this country as it was with their own personal welfare and uh the end result is uh a lot of people in the body
• 21:30 - 22:00 politic figured out what was going on uh and they turned against the elite and they elected Donald Trump two out of three times how I uh I I found very attractive what the young man said and I wish that Donald Trump would listen to it i don't know what the neocons around him uh would say i really don't think that the tariffs were wellthought out i think they were a product of his at times
• 22:00 - 22:30 pugnacious uh personality rather than a deepseated uh understanding of economics 101 i mean our colleague with whom we agree most of the times I know the two of you have debated Jeff Sachs agrees entirely i haven't played this clip for him we didn't have it when Jeff was on uh this week but I suspect he would agree so that's the problem with a Congress
• 22:30 - 23:00 that rolls over when a president assumes powers that were given to the Congress what's a tariff it's a sales tax who in the Constitution is the only power that can impose taxes the Congress and yet they let him do it with catastrophic results economically and with catastrophic political results for their party well as you well know there are no guard rails on Trump this time i mean I think Trump was quite successful in his first
• 23:00 - 23:30 term from 2017 to 2021 and it was in large part because there were just lots of guard rails there and there were limits to how much trouble he could get into but there are virtually no guard rails at this point i mean he can do pretty much anything he wants and that's a very dangerous situation we have balances for a good reason here's a here's a conservative Republican farmer from Iowa ripping into a conservative
• 23:30 - 24:00 Republican senior senator he's the president of prom of the Senate and I've known him well for many years senator Chuck Grassley uh at a town hall meeting and I suggest to you everything this farmer has said is correct as a matter of law and constitutional principle chris number 21 we would like to know what you as the people the Congress who are supposed to reign in this dictator what are you going to do about these people have been
• 24:00 - 24:30 sentenced to life imprisonment in a foreign country with no due process our government cannot do anything the constitution the framers of the constitution said that every person not citizen every person within the jurisdiction of the United States has due process his answer was a non-answer which is why we didn't bother uh playing it but that
• 24:30 - 25:00 too will get Trump in a lot of hot water politically unfortunately innocents will will suffer i mean he's talking about sending Americans to this hell hole in El Salvador where the federal courts can't reach him and the president of the country will do whatever Trump says because we're paying him a million dollars a month to house these prisoners i have to tell you I just find this all
• 25:00 - 25:30 unbelievable i don't know what else to say i never thought I'd see the United States behaving like this it just this is all almost incomprehensible it's such a direct violation of all the values that we represent it's going to do so much damage to the basic fabric of this country and do so much damage to our reputation around the world i don't understand why more people aren't standing up and protesting you know I'm I'm I'm not uh a student of
• 25:30 - 26:00 the political side but in my view when these Republicans feel heat like Senator Grassly just did when they think that not enough of them will be returned to Congress to keep them in the majority then they'll do something not to save the Constitution not to save personal liberty but to save their jobs but this still tells you the still tells you that we are in trouble the fact that it we need political heat to get them to act correctly they should understand the
• 26:00 - 26:30 basic principles that are at stake here they should understand that the welfare of this country is at stake and they should be doing something instead of sitting on their rear end and letting Trump do whatever he wants on that note a happy Easter to you and your family Professor Mayor Shimemer it's Holy Thursday and uh Easter is on my mind thank you very much for your time as always thank you for letting me pick your very fertile brain look
• 26:30 - 27:00 forward to seeing you next week thank you and happy Easter to you in these very depressing times yes thank you professor all the best and coming up tomorrow Friday where am I somewhere there I am coming up tomorrow Friday Good Friday uh at 4:00 in the afternoon the intelligence community roundt with uh Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson and of course all of your regulars on Monday
• 27:00 - 27:30 happy Easter my friends thank you for watching judge Judge Npal Tenno for judging freedom [Music] [Music]