Speak Loudly and Carry No Stick?

Danielle Pletka, senior fellow and foreign policy expert at the American Enterprise Institute, joins Sarah ...

By

Danielle Pletka, senior fellow and foreign policy expert at the American Enterprise Institute, joins Sarah and Steve to discuss all things foreign policy. The conversation starts with the fiasco that was the first bilateral meeting between the Biden administration and China, and then focuses on Pletka’s expertise related to foreign policy in the Middle East. The three also discuss Danielle’s recent piece for The Dispatch, a conversation she had with a Ph.D. candidate who was imprisoned in Iran for four years.

Show Notes:

–Danielle’s AEI page

–“What the Hell is Going On?” podcast

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By
Comments (30)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    JP Hunerwadel

    Okay, (almost) complete non-sequitur: Does Sarah have a link to, or remember where she saw, the Dave Barry column about the fate of popular kids in high school? I've looked through Barry's archive and can find no sign thereof...

    Collapse
  2. Addison Lin

    I am a Taiwanese Christian who served in the Taiwanese navy and is currently working as a nurse in the US. I hate the CCP because they threatens our freedom and sovereignty. However, I don’t think Ms Danielle Pletka is the best person to talk about Sino- Us relations. As she missed a lot of important events from the last few weeks.

    I follow a lot pundits in Taiwan, Japan, and China who are anti- CCP and some are suspect that Biden still has monetary ties with China so are suspect that he only talks tough . But most pundits are relatively fine or even praise the recent moves by Biden. Before the us- China meeting, the Secretary of State and defense met with the Japanese leaders and announced a pact to strengthen their alliance against China and defend Taiwan . Military vessels including aircraft carriers are still going through southern China strait and Taiwan strait ( international sea zone) like the trump era as China continues to protest against it . The state department strengthened the sanction toward Chinese and Hong Kong officials who are directly involved in breaking the freedom in HK. In fact, today, the us, EU and Canada announced sanctions against china’s oppression toward the uguyrs. Without a green light from the us, these countries, esp Canada and Germany, wouldn’t stand up directly to the ccp . Biden may not be as tough as pompeo, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a plan or action. . I suggest to invite a sino- us expert next time


    US, EU, Britain, Canada Impose Sanctions on Chinese Officials Over Uyghurs

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/us-eu-britain-canada-impose-sanctions-chinese-officials-over-uyghurs%3Famp

    US secretary of state calls Taiwan 'country'

    https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4148761

    U.S. Navy warship sails through Taiwan Strait for first time under Biden's rule

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1256695

    On topics related to the ccp Instead of a Middle East expert

    US sanctions 24 China and Hong Kong officials ahead of talks

    https://apnews.com/article/beijing-hong-kong-wang-chen-china-national-security-b5b1d92f37ca1fa6ac46ce40ccb7b123

    Japan, U.S. defence chiefs affirm cooperation on Taiwan: Kyodo

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2BD05O

    Collapse
  3. Dan

    Calling Putin a killer is mannish? How would a woman phrase it?

    Collapse
  4. Daniel Rabiner

    It's amazing that there was so much frustration at the lack of coherence on policy two months into an administration on foreign policy that didn't get a normal transition due to the previous administration's desire to not accept the results of the election and cooperate. Would have thought that would have come up a few times during the podcast.

    Collapse
  5. HB1973

    I subscribe to The Dispatch to hear respectable conservative viewpoints and positions as a means to find common ground and solve problems. Respectable means anti-Trump. I am disappointed to see Trump apologist Danielle Pletka on the roster.

    Collapse
  6. Bruce Moyer

    I self identify as a self interested voter whose current interests are represented by Dems. I subscribe to The Dispatch because of the intelligent conversation and even more inteligent push back when fundamentalism dogma is used as logic. I was on a pretty intense 8 mile run while listening to this episode. I literally LOLed hearing Pletka describe her reasons for voting for trump juxtapose to her surprise at 1/6. Taking anyone seriously who was surprised by 1/6 and who calls themselves aware/engaged enough to advise others on world affairs is a stretch for me. Most folks including The Dispatch regulars i’m sure would say they were horrified or even anguished even but not surprised.

    Collapse
    1. Mathew A

      I voted for Trump is 2020, because the left's slide into socalism/wokeism scares me.

      I did that full well knowing that Trump was a lying crook. I just figured the Dems would be worse.

      Still Trumps attempts to overturn the election surprised me as well.

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Adicesa14

    “Out over their skis,” indeed. I have no confidence that the Biden Administration will conduct foreign policy with U.S. interests as prime motive Rather, I suspect, they will base foreign policy on ideological considerations, and foreign entities will methodically outsmart them, just as they did Mr. Obama.

    From my point of view, every Presidential candidate since 2008 has been poorly qualified for the office except 2012, (the competent candidate lost). That said, in 2016 and 2020 it seemed to me Trump was the better, albeit reluctant, choice because his party was better able to resist him and temper his worst (of which there were many) impulses. It seems Danielle’s conclusion is similar, but her explanation more thorough and elegant.

    Collapse
  8. Nathaniel

    "So speaking of 11th grade taunting, [summary of facile Biden-Putin interaction], which I really felt we needed women in leadership positions. Women tend not to, you know, there's psychological warfare, but the stupid, like, dad-level bullying seemed particularly mannish."

    Really? I can't imagine that I'm the only listener who is tired of knee-jerk anti-male comments.

    Collapse
    1. Dan

      Agree. I don’t get the make bash either. Calling Putin a murderer is hardly what I would term stupid or bullying. The puerile banter discredits the host and guests.

      Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Patrick

    Pat Riot’s hatred of Danielle Pletka is no longer rational. Danielle could cure cancer, and Pat would question her motives.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Pat Riot

      It's really weird to read comments about an anonymous screen name.

      Collapse
  10. Griffin Gasink

    Good podcast but why the hate towards Puerto Rican statehood? It's for Puerto Ricans to decide and if they vote to join as a state, conservatives should welcome them with open arms.

    Collapse
    1. Mathew A

      Because Puerto Rico and DC statehood are transparently partisan attempts to get more votes in the senate.

      I'm 100% sure Democrats would be arguing for them if they voted like Wyoming

      To get something like that through, you would probably need to create the State of Jefferson out of Northern CA (plus most likely Eastern OR and Washington)

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Mudskipper

      Yes, this is another argument that doesn't make sense. The issue of statehood for Puerto Rico has been on the table for eons. Making Puerto Rico a state won't affect our democratic guardrails, nor would it lead to a tit-for-tat breaking up of California into separate states.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Paul Reichardt

        Do they have those "Taxation without representation" license plates in Puerto Rico like they do in DC?

        Collapse
      2. GregS

        Also, serious question, can Congress just break up a state without that state's consent? If not, then this California scenario is very far fetched. I guess Reoublicans could break up the Dakotas into four states...

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Mudskipper

          Yes, this is why I don't think a tit-for-tat breaking up of California is realistic. It is one thing to admit Puerto Rico if it wants to admitted; it is another thing to break up a state without its consent.

          The democratic parallel of breaking up California would be merging Wyoming, Montana, and the Dakotas into one state, which no Democratic is remotely proposing.

          Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      Pat Riot

      Like everything else she listed off as existential threats to America, doing so would presumably give the Democrats a slight political advantage (as in, helping to equalize the Republican advantage in the Senate with states like Montana and Wyoming), which for her is the same thing as death.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Mudskipper

        I would like to see her argument why increasing the House size would somehow tear at our democratic guardrails. I don't think there's any good argument to make on that score. Certainly, someone like myself, whose vote is worth significantly less than the vote of some people in other states, has a reasonable argument to make. My guess is that she doesn't like the idea simply because it would take away rhe advantage Republicans currently hold in having their votes count more.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Pat Riot

          Her reasoning is simple:

          1. The Democrats are evil and want to destroy our country.

          2. She perceives increasing the size of the House to be a Democratic priority (she never read Mr. Goldberg's arguments in favor I guess).

          3. Because of #1, you need to assume the plan is evil **even if it is exactly what you yourself advocated in the past**.

          4. Therefore expanding the size of the House is.... bla bla bla...

          Again, she's a pure partisan operative--an attack dog for the Republican party. Maybe there's nothing wrong with that per se, but you surely shouldn't consider that person an "expert" in anything...

          Collapse
    4. Avatar photo
      The Stray Goose

      PR's a basket case. I was down there recently. Even fast food joints have security in their parking lots because crime is so bad. No thanks. I'm not interested in seeing them as a state no matter how they vote.

      I think we should give PR to Cuba thereby screwing both.

      Collapse
Load More