Dick Cheney dies: a look back at his towering influence on Republican politics

Summary

---

The Monocle Daily – Episode Summary

Title: Dick Cheney dies: a look back at his towering influence on Republican politics
Date: November 4, 2025
Host: Andrew Muller
Guests: Terry Stiasney (political journalist & author), Robyn Brandt (former BBC correspondent), and Clare Yorke (senior lecturer, Deakin University)

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on the death of former US Vice President Dick Cheney, reflecting on his profound and controversial legacy both within Republican politics and on the global stage. The host and panelists weigh Cheney’s career, the evolution of the Republican Party, and his impact on US executive power. The show also checks in on Ukraine’s energy crisis amid the ongoing war, Spain's diplomatic outreach to China, efforts to make the European Parliament more engaging, and closes with a discussion on the practical application of empathy in politics.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Dick Cheney’s Legacy – His Death and Impact

[03:33–14:46]

• Background and Ascent:

  • Monocle Radio delivers a wry, detailed obituary, charting Cheney’s rise: Yale dropout, early political operator, survivor of Watergate’s fallout, and a master of Washington’s backrooms.
  • Known as “the most powerful person ever to hold the Vice Presidency, and, for the first eight years of the 21st century, one of the most powerful people on earth.” (Obituary Reader, [10:43])

• Political Career Highlights:

  • Served as White House Chief of Staff, Congressman from Wyoming, Secretary of Defense (oversaw Panama and Gulf War interventions).
  • As VP (2001–2009), crucial in shaping the US response post-9/11: architect of the Iraq War, “enhanced interrogation,” and expanded executive power.

• Personality & Leadership Style:

  • “He was a significant architect of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, amplifying intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which was widely believed dubious at the time and eventually proved entirely bogus.” (Obituary Reader, [10:11])
  • Struggled with health and public speaking; protected his family’s privacy.

• Controversies & Reputation:

  • Left office with a 13% approval rating, “probably not all that far in front of Osama bin Laden.” (Obituary Reader, [11:27])
  • Later emerged as a vocal critic (“Never Trumper”) of the GOP’s Trump era, along with his daughter Liz Cheney.
    • “Cheney in his later years should have become an out and proud member of the resistance...made it publicly clear that he did vote for Vice President Harris last time around.” – Andrew Muller, [13:17]

• Lasting Influence on Executive Power:

  • Robyn Brandt points to Cheney’s “belief in unitary executive power”:

    • “We see shades of that in the way that Donald Trump conducts his presidency...and in recent Supreme Court rulings.” ([12:04])

  • Terry Stiasney: Cheney’s institutional memory and standards are fading from today’s GOP:

    • “...for all his faults, he did have a line to draw somewhere and he did see January 6th as absolutely the kind of line that should not be crossed.” ([13:46])

---

2. Ukraine: Facing a Third Winter of War

[14:46–21:39]

• Russian Tactics & Ukraine’s Energy Grid:

  • Discussion of Russia attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure aiming to weaponize winter.
  • Critique of President Zelenskyy over power grid decentralisation; skepticism about motives given internal politics and corruption charges.

• Ukraine’s Strategic Response:

  • Robyn Brandt reasons Russia’s restraint in attacks may derive from Ukraine’s robust countermeasures and Western supplied weaponry:
    • “Ukraine actually deciding to do to Russia what Russia is attempting to do to Ukraine.” ([15:55])

• Domestic Political Maneuvering:

  • Stiasney underlines how “wartime does not suspend normal politics” in Ukraine – internal blame games and the politics of scapegoating prevail even during war. ([18:02])

• Stalemate and Outlook:

  • The war remains stuck, neither side achieving decisive breakthroughs or strategic change.
    • Terry Stiasney: “There doesn't seem to be any further serious discussion about, you know, how this war actually ends...” ([21:00])

---

3. Spain’s Royal Outreach to China

[21:39–25:44]

• King Felipe VI’s Planned Visit:

  • Spain’s king is scheduled to visit China to promote economic ties; the strategy is similar to other European leaders seeking markets and cooperation.
  • Robyn Brandt: The relationship is driven by “trade particularly important for the Spanish contingent” and for China, “Spain is one very good place to put an EV assembly or manufacturing plants.” ([22:25])

• Risks of Closer Ties:

  • Terry Stiasney references Norway’s experience: remotely switch-off-able Chinese buses, and broader Western jitters over Chinese investment and tech. ([24:50])

---

4. Should the European Parliament Be More 'Fun'?

[25:44–29:32]

• Calls to Revamp Debates:

  • President Roberto Mezzola seeks to make debates less tedious and more engaging.

• Panel Viewpoints:

  • Brandt is skeptical of attempts to glamorize legislative proceedings:
    • “The idea that you can suddenly transform and change that and make it into something more theatrical, more appealing, you know, I don't quite buy that myself.” ([26:38])
  • Stiasney: Genuine engagement and accessible formats are hindered by translation requirements and institutional limits. Political showmanship risks dominating over substance:
    • “...it allows people who know how to exploit the media...to attract all the attention.” ([28:15])

---

5. Interview: Empathy in Practical Politics (Clare Yorke)

[29:32–37:32]

• What Is Empathy in Politics?

  • Clare Yorke distinguishes sincere empathy (action-driven) vs. performative empathy (rhetoric for show).

    • “Empathy right now is such a buzzword in politics...it has to be matched by actual policies that start to go out to citizens and engage more with communities.” (Yorke, [31:14])

• Obstacles and Solutions:

  • Political systems and structures often block empathetic, people-centered policymaking.
  • Citizens’ assemblies like those in France offer promise for opening dialogue and bridging understanding.
    • “...creating these spaces where people get exposure to the issues and...where citizens learn the challenges that face politicians...” (Yorke, [33:31])

• Empathy as Bidirectional:

  • Empathy is needed from both leaders and the public: understanding government’s complexity helps foster better civic engagement.

• Is Empathy Teachable?

  • Yes, through practice and modeling.
    • “It's something that the more we do, the better we'll get at it. The more we learn to hold space for different perspectives...” (Yorke, [36:41])

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Cheney’s Vice Presidency:

  • “Cheney's vice presidency was a rebuke to that hefty lexicon of jokes about the impotence of the office. He made himself the most powerful person ever to hold it...” (Obituary Reader, [10:43])

• On Cheney's Enduring Influence:

  • “We see shades of that in the way that Donald Trump conducts his presidency...that is similar in a way that ties the Cheney era together with the Trump era.” – Robyn Brandt ([12:04])

• On Political Lines:

  • “...for all his faults, he did have a line to draw somewhere and he did see January 6th as absolutely the kind of line that should not be crossed.” – Terry Stiasney ([13:46])

• On Empathy:

  • “It has to be matched by actual policies that start to go out to citizens and engage more with communities about...what does effective politics mean for you?” – Clare Yorke ([31:14])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Dick Cheney Obituary & Legacy: [03:33–14:46]
• Ukraine Update & Winter Energy War: [14:46–21:39]
• Spain’s King Visiting China: [21:39–25:44]
• Making the European Parliament 'Fun': [25:44–29:32]
• Clare Yorke on Empathy in Politics: [29:32–37:32]

---

Conclusion

This episode provided a sharp, comprehensive look at Dick Cheney’s divided legacy within American conservatism, his influence on executive government, and the ideological transformations in US politics. It deftly wove together international developments in Ukraine and Europe with reflective commentary on the nature of modern political engagement and leadership. The closing interview offered a thoughtful case for practical, actionable empathy in democratic systems.

---

Transcript

[Narrator/Announcer]

Every day, the world presents you with hundreds of headlines. What do you believe? Who do you trust? The Financial Times cuts through complexity with clarity, accuracy and global perspective. Its journalism is guided by independence, not agendas. That's why leaders in business, policy and culture turn to one trusted source for facts, for insight, for what matters next. Source FT Read more and [e-mail] you're listening to the Monocle Daily, first broadcast on 4 November 2025 on Monocle Radio.

[Andrew Muller]

Dick Cheney, the most powerful US vice president, dies at 84. Russia attempts to make Ukraine's looming winter even colder. And how would you enliven proceedings in the European Parliament? I'm Andrew Muller. The Monocle Daily starts now.

[Unknown/Interjection]

Foreign.

[Andrew Muller]

Hello and welcome to the Monocle Daily. Coming to you from our studios here at Midori House in London. I'm Andrew Muller. My guests Terry Stiasney and Robyn Brandt will discuss the day's big stories.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

And we'll hear from the leadership lecturer.

[Andrew Muller]

Claire York about her new book explaining how the commendable sentiment of empathy can be applied as practical politics.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Stay tuned.

[Andrew Muller]

All that and more coming up right here on the Monocle Daily. This is the Monocle Daily. I'm Andrew Muller and I am joined today by Terry Stiasney, political journalist and author, and Robin Brandt, former BBC presenter and correspondent in China and the United States. Hello to you both.

[Clare Yorke]

Hello.

[Andrew Muller]

Hi, Terry. Do you join us once again with tales from the book flogging circuit?

[Terry Stiasney]

I do. I have most recently been in Ilkley, which is in Yorkshire, and actually a really lovely another of these places in this country that I had never actually been to before. And so, yes, I was up there talking about psychological warfare with another author who's also written an interesting book on the CIA and the Cold War. And it was, yeah, very good fun and got a chance to go and wander around the moors as you do.

[Andrew Muller]

What goes on in Ilkley, as far as you are able to determine?

[Terry Stiasney]

It seems to be an incredibly outdoorsy sort of place. I mean, everybody there on a Saturday morning had either been to Parkrun, was going on a bike ride, was hiking on the moors, every other shop in the high street sells fleeces. It's that kind of place.

[Andrew Muller]

God, sounds exhausting.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

It is a beautiful part of the world.

[Andrew Muller]

However, you know, certainly you could end up doing book tours in worse places. You have, Terry, clearly remiss and have learned nothing from your experience, failed to seamlessly several times weave the title of your book into your narrative of my.

[Terry Stiasney]

Book, Believable Lies, which is about fake news and wartime black propaganda.

[Andrew Muller]

Okay.

[Terry Stiasney]

All right. Still available for film and tv. Stop there.

[Andrew Muller]

That title again. Terry, Believable Lies. Robin, you were promising in the waiting room that you would have some absolutely red hot light introductory banter for you.

[Robyn Brandt]

Look, I'm not a published author. There's much talk when I return from China about do you have a book in you, Robin? All the American journalists have a book in them. I had two dogs, three kids. I worked a lot. I kept good notes. But frankly, I didn't go anywhere near and I don't have the discipline that I know Terry has to be a published author. Author. I was talking today, funnily enough, with a colleague of mine about the potential of going back to China in March or April of next year. Incidentally, I think President Trump is going to be there at the same time. And that for me would be the first time back since 2022. So the prospect of that is exciting, perhaps potentially as well a source of some anxiety. But for me today, it's not so much about places we've been, but potentially places might be going.

[Andrew Muller]

China being China, though, are you braced for the fact that even after as short an interregnum as three years, you'll go back and go, God, what's happened? I don't rec. Recognize anything.

[Robyn Brandt]

Yeah. I mean, the place will be radically different, actually. And joking aside, in terms of technological and architectural progress, I think what's most interesting and you, you get this clearly from people you speak to, from what you read, is, you know, is sentiment. It is confidence among people, particularly in the city of Shanghai where I used to live, and that consumer confidence in particular and that confidence in their government and their ability to, to look after. And that's very different certainly to what it was in those in those pre Covid days of 2019.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Well, we will start in the United.

[Andrew Muller]

States where former Vice President Dick Cheney has died aged 84. We will have more on his legacy from our panelists shortly. But here first is an excerpt of Monocle Radio's obituary. The vice presidency of the United States.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Is one of the strangest jobs in global politics. The holder of the office is all at once extremely close to awesome power.

[Andrew Muller]

Yet miles away from any power at all.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

So long as the occupant of the White House stays healthy and lucky. The vice president is usually a ceremonial eunuch sent on diplomatic visits to ghastly.

[Andrew Muller]

Places the president can't be bothered with.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Engaged to speak at state fairs, teeming with uncomprehending riff raff, or confined to their Opulent quarters wistfully reading biographies of John Wilkes Booth. Richard Bruce Cheney was never going to be one of those Vice Presidents. He was born in Lincoln, Nebraska on January 30, 1941 and raised substantially in Casper, Wyoming. He was a bright but wayward young man, smart enough to get into Yale, not disciplined enough to stay there and a repeat customer of Wyoming's traffic police. He was, like many middle class young American men, a serial dodger of the Vietnam draft. In his case by being an apparently perpetual student, then a married man before 26, then a father. It was waspishly noted that his first daughter Elizabeth, later a politician herself, was born nine months and two days after the draft was extended to married men without children. Cheney's ascent of the political greasy poll began properly in 1969. Having finally completed his political science studies, he became an intern to Wisconsin's Republican Congressman William Steiger. Shortly afterwards, Cheney began making himself useful to former Illinois congressman, now Councillor to President Richard M. Nixon. Donald Rumsfeld. Dick Cheney acquired a reputation as an efficient functionary and survived his service in Nixon's administration unscathed by its implosion following the Watergate scandal. So did his mentor Donald Rumsfeld, who had been serving as Ambassador to NATO in Brussels. Nixon's successor, President Gerald Ford, engaged Rumsfeld as White House Chief of Staff with Cheney as his deputy. When Rumsfeld was appointed Secretary of Defence, Cheney inherited the Chief of Staff's job. Gatekeeper to the Oval Office. Cheney did not keep it long. Ford lost the 1976 presidential election to Jimmy Carter. But Cheney was not done with politics. In 1978 he sought and won Wyoming's only seat in the House of Representatives. He was re elected five times and rose to become House Minority Whip and Chair of the House Republican Conference. In 1989, President George H.W. bush named him Secretary of Defence, in which role Cheney oversaw the US invasion of Panama in late 1989 and the US led eviction of Iraqi forces from Kuwait in early 1991. Cheney's progress in politics was interrupted again.

[Andrew Muller]

By Bush's loss of the 1992 presidential election.

[Archive Audio/Former President]

I ask that we stand behind our new President. And regardless of our differences, all Americans share the same purpose. To make this the world's greatest nation more safe and more secure. And to guarantee every American a shot at the American dream.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

There was some vague talk of Cheney seeking the Republican nomination himself someday, but three key factors always weighed against it. His health was rickety. He suffered recurrent heart attacks. From his late 30s onwards, he would.

[Andrew Muller]

Have a heart transplant in 2012.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

He was protective of his second daughter.

[Andrew Muller]

Mary, a gay woman whose private life.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Would have become public. And he was a notably dismal public speaker.

[Unknown/Interjection]

I have no restrictions at this point in terms of my own activities with respect to my background in the defense area. It's an issue that I've set of issues that I've been interested in for a long time.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Cheney spent much of the 1990s making money as CEO of the colossal energy services multinational Halliburton. He was summoned back to public office by Texas Governor George W. Bush, seeking to bolster his own tilt at the presidency by putting an experienced heavyweight on the ticket. If Cheney, once Bush's narrow victory was eventually confirmed in 2000, had doubts about.

[Andrew Muller]

What he might make of the vice.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Presidency, events, specifically the events of September 11, 2001, clarified matters for him. Significantly, at Cheney's urging, Bush presented the pair of them to the world, to the Middle east, especially, as bad cop and worse cop.

[Archive Audio/Former President]

All of this was brought upon us in a single day. And night fell on a different world, a world where freedom itself is under attack.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

While Bush gave the jut jawed speeches, Cheney seethed in an assortment of bunkers, scheming to vanquish enemies real potential and altogether imaginary.

[Unknown/Interjection]

The United States made our position clear. We could not accept the grave danger of Saddam Hussein and his terrorist allies turning weapons of mass destruction against us or our friends and allies.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

He was a significant architect of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, amplifying intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which was widely believed dubious at the time and eventually proved entirely bogus. He was an aggressive enthusiast of the brutal and debatably effective tactics which became known by such sinister euphemisms as enhanced interrogation and extraordinary rendition. Cheney's vice presidency was a rebuke to.

[Andrew Muller]

That hefty lexicon of jokes about the.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Impotence of the office. He made himself the most powerful person ever to hold it, and for the first eight years of the 21st century, one of the most powerful people on earth. It is probably arguable that some of what Cheney did with that power, even if furtively and unaccountably, made his fellow citizens safer. But that presents the difficulty of measuring.

[Andrew Muller]

Terror attacks which never happened.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

It is certain, however, that Dick Cheney played a key role in unleashing a war which grievously and lastingly damaged America's reputation and moral authority. He left office with an approval rating among his FELLOW Americans of 13%, probably not all that far in front of Osama Bin Laden.

[Andrew Muller]

And that was Monocle Radio's obituary for US Vice President Dick Cheney, who has died aged 84. Robin, first of all, I mean, the thing that struck me about listening to that obituary back, which I did record a while ago, is how long ago Bush and Cheney now seem, and it's not that long ago at all. Is there, though, a legacy as such? Or has the world, the United States in particular the Republican Party, moved on so dramatically that you can't see any traces of Dick Cheney, for better or for worse, anywhere?

[Robyn Brandt]

Well, the Republican Party is very, very different, a vehicle dominated by Donald Trump and his MAGA acolytes. And so different, in fact, that of course, Dick Cheney famously turned against Trump's Republicans and turned against the Republicans Republican Party and voted, we're told, for Kamala Harris at the last election. But if we look at things like Cheney's belief in the presidency, the belief in unitary executive power resting within the presidency, his belief that post Nixon things had, the pendulum had swung too much towards the Congress, too much away from the White House, then we see shades of that in the way that Donald Trump conducts his presidency. We see shades of that in recent rulings by the Supreme Court that has appeared to give Donald Trump, the current president and future presidents to come, an immunity almost around their decisions whilst whilst in the White House. And so that is similar in a way that ties the Cheney era together with the Trump era and the kind of that shared belief in what the presidency is and the power, the executive power that it should have.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

I mean, it does tell us, I.

[Andrew Muller]

Think, something about the state of the modern United States, Terry, that the current Republican Party managed to alienate even Dick Cheney. But is it necessarily surprising, again, for better and for worse, that Cheney in his later years should have become an out and proud member of the resistance, you know, a total never Trumper, as was his daughter, Liz Cheney, and as Robyn said, you know, made it publicly clear that he did vote for Vice President Harris last time around.

[Terry Stiasney]

Yeah, I think it's a sign of exactly, as Robyn says, how much the Republican Party has changed and how much even, you know, an arch hawk, an arch conservative in every respect. You know, Dick Cheney, for all his faults, he did have a line to draw somewhere and he did see January 6th as absolutely the kind of line that should not be crossed. And I think one of the other interesting things about him and the politicians of his generation and say, of Joe Biden's generation, which I think is not the case now, I mean, there's a lot of People who've been around for an awfully, awfully long time in American politics, which is not always a good thing. Just how long he had been working in Washington and in U.S. politics. I mean, someone that came in, you know, as you said there in, in the sort of in the Nixon Ford era and went on to have positions in government in one way or another for, you know, a good 30 years. I mean, it's just, you know, amazing the sort of, the length of the sort of institutional memory that is there. And I think, you know, a lot of that is probably going to be lost within the next few years.

[Andrew Muller]

Well, to Ukraine now currently contemplating a third full winter of war. And a reminder at this point that winter comes in most of the country. Kyiv is anticipating its first sub zero temperatures of the year next week, its first snow the week after. Russia's recent barrages have been pretty clearly directed, with a view to making winter as long and as cold as possible, striking gas facilities and other energy infrastructure. There has been criticism directed at Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for not attending to the decentralisation of Ukraine's power grid as swiftly as he might have. But as much of that criticism is being directed a former CEO of state power company ukrainergo, who is currently on the hook on embezzlement charges, it may not be altogether unbiased. Robyn, is this one of those things where we might actually be looking at this the wrong way, that it's actually surprising that Russia hasn't hit Ukraine's energy harder over three years? And I'm thinking back to when the war started three and a half years ago, there were widespread assumptions that Russia would just close Ukraine down, would just switch off all the lights.

[Robyn Brandt]

Yes. And there was an expectation, I mean, firstly, let's remember that certainly by those around Vladimir Putin, that they would walk into Ukraine, that it would be over very, very quickly. But what fascinates me about the story that we're particularly talking about today is that much of this war is likely to turn not necessarily on those tactical gains on the field around the line, which we continue to see some for Russia, but nonetheless, it would appear a much more broader military stalemate between these two countries. But the efforts to bring the country to a halt in a way away from the military field, I think is something that we all expected would be far more effective and would be far more ruthlessly prosecuted by Russia and by its military. And yet it hasn't. And in fact, in fact, what we have seen is Ukraine managing to turn the tables and with the support of the UK and others in Europe, in terms of some of the most sophisticated and some of the most long range military missile hardware, is that Ukraine actually deciding to do to Russia what Russia is attempting to do to Ukraine. And I wonder if that has changed the kind of the military calculations in Moscow and made things even more challenging and of course, a much higher risk as well for Putin and for Russia's military leaders.

[Andrew Muller]

Terry, it is difficult to tell at this distance whether there is anything to the charges against Volodymyr Kudrytsky, who is the former CEO of Ukraine.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

But it is noticeable that he does.

[Andrew Muller]

Have a lot of people, certainly outside Ukraine, who are usually favorably disposed to President Zelenskyy on his side. This is not for the first time a suggestion that Zelenskyy is using the rule of law as an apparatus for, for whacking his domestic political opposition.

[Terry Stiasney]

Yes, I mean, I think, you know, this is just another example of how, you know, we tend to think and looking back at so for say, for instance, you know, the Second World War, that during wartime normal domestic politics stops. And of course it doesn't. And there are, there is always infighting, there is always political blame. And you know, Ukrainian politics has always been incredibly complicated in terms of, you know, people making accusations against one another. So I think, you know, possibly, you know, of course, you know, Kudritsky thinks he feels, not surprisingly, that he's being made a scapegoat. But you, you know, it is must have been very difficult to run a, an energy sector where you are constantly trying to rebuild something that is being damaged. And yes, there seems to have been a disagreement about, you know, what's the best way to, to plan for the future. But I think anyone who had been in that job, I mean, yes, Zelensky's got ideas about let's have more foreign investment, let's have alternative energy plans, but constantly you must be just repatching something that unless you keep doing, it just isn't going to work anymore.

[Andrew Muller]

Robyn, I want to go back to that point about you did mention Ukraine in recent weeks and months, indeed deciding to sort of see how Russia likes it and taking potshots at Russia's energy infrastructure. Is there any reason to imagine that might actually change the dynamic, though? Because we've seen two winters that Ukrainians have fought through and their morale has not cracked. Is there any reason for hoping that it would be any different in the other direction?

[Robyn Brandt]

No, I don't think there is. But what it is is proof that Ukraine can procure this weaponry, is able to effectively use them, and is able to counter what Russia's military is doing to it in terms of its energy network. And of course, it also demonstrates to Russia's, many of whom don't support the prosecution of this war, that they are just as vulnerable as the people in Kyiv and around Ukraine when it comes to where their opponent may choose to target. And the idea, as I said at the beginning, that this was gonna be a war prosecuted quickly and effectively and over within weeks, as we all know, has not come to fruition. And attacks like this, using military hardware given or bought from the Brits and others, are both a demonstration and a reminder to Russia's people that they are just as vulnerable. And it is not the easy win that President Vladimir Putin said it would be.

[Andrew Muller]

And on which subject, Terry, and just finally, it is hard to know whether to be encouraged or despondent at the fact that after three and a half years of this nonsense, Russia, having failed to take much more of Ukraine than it had three and a half years ago, has not come up with any other ideas, any better ideas, ideas even by Russia's own merits and from Russia's own viewpoint.

[Terry Stiasney]

No. And we don't seem to have got any further, you know, for all, you know, we had sort of meetings, discussions between Trump and Putin that seem to have, you know, run into. Run into the ground again. There doesn't seem to be any further serious discussion about, you know, how this war actually ends because it comes up against the fundamental issue that Ukraine says, well, no, we are not giving up the territory that we have been fighting for for the last last three and a half years just like that. And we're not going to agree to people coming in over our heads and doing it. And so I think, you know, these things we. The international attention goes away from it for a while, but, you know, as. As time goes on, we're going to have to try and think about. About this again. And I don't think we have the solutions to that.

[Andrew Muller]

Well, to China, which is exactly the journey that King Felipe VI of Spain will be undertaking next week, this is not an entirely unprecedented endeavor. Felipe's predecessor and father, Juan Carlos, went 18 years ago, though he abdicated in 2000, 2014, amid an assortment of picturesque scandals, and is now resident in Abu Dhabi. King Felipe is being sent abroad, as constitutional monarchs usually are, as essentially a greeter for his nation's commercial interests. And the visit appears kind of a crescendo of a determined pitch for China's business Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has been three times in the last three years. Robyn, China, obviously a country, you know, well, possibly even better than Pedro Sanchez.

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

Is it strange to.

[Andrew Muller]

I mean, I assume the Spanish have done this, their research into this and have sent their advance teams, but is it weird to assume that revolutionary communists are going to be terrifically excited about meeting a royal.

[Robyn Brandt]

No. I mean, what China wants from this is healthy and improving bilateral relationships with significant European Union member states. That's partly to drive a wedge to an extent amongst the whole bloc and its leadership in, in Brussels, when it comes to the trade relationship, it wants to have a good trading relationship with a significant EU member state like Spain. You know, tourism is very important for plenty of hundreds of millions of rich middle class Chinese who want to come to Europe more, they want to go to Spain more. And likewise, the reciprocal side of that is a Chinese market that wants to buy increasingly Spanish fashion, Spanish food. And so there's, there's multiple dynamics to what's going on here. You know, these trips are. Let's talk of Kerma, the UK's prime minister, going maybe next year. President Trump is going to go in April. As I think I said a little earlier, Emmanuel Macron seems to go every other week. You know, they are. Protocol is important. Your head of state going and meeting Xi Jinping and others is a sign that China treats the relationship in the most serious of ways. And so this is a sign of, of a healthy relationship between Madrid and between Beijing. And as I said, there are multiple elements to it. Trade particularly important for the Spanish contingent. But likewise, you know, China and its behemoth automotive manufacturers, particularly when it comes to EV manufacturing, wants to have manufacturing bases increasingly within the European Union to try and skirt around those tariffs. And Spain is one very good place to put an EV assembly or manufacturing plants.

[Andrew Muller]

Counterpoint, Terry, shouldn't European countries be attempting to do actually less business with China? I bring in at this point the lesson offered in the last day or two by Norway, which has discovered that a bunch of electric buses in order from China can in fact be switched off remotely.

[Terry Stiasney]

Well, yeah, that's. It is a risk. And I think, you know, certainly within the British context, particularly over recent spying allegations and so forth within Westminster, there has been quite a lot of pushback and skepticism in terms of how close particularly the British government should be in terms of Chinese investment and which, which country, which companies should be allowed to invest and how much supervision there should be of that. But I think, you know, as Robin's saying, you know, it's in China's interest to try to look, you know, work with different countries within the EU or like Britain outside the EU to try and say, well, look, you know, we. What, what deals can we do on the side that don't necessarily aren't just sort of one block to another big country, but to try and persuade people, like in terms of the tariffs on, on electric vehicles, that you know, maybe bit by bit you can, you can sort of get these, get these deals done.

[Andrew Muller]

And we turn now to the European Parliament, which is apparently contemplating ways to make the European Parliament more fun. As if anything could be more fun than arguing over the minutia of herring, quote voters. The Parliament's president, Roberto Mezzola, has noted correctly that what are supposed to be debates are much more often the dreary recital of tedious talking points which even the people reading them out loud don't want to listen to. She has therefore solicited suggestions from the political group chairs, none of which include, regrettably, sword fights or a gunge tank. Robyn, is this actually a reasonable concern? Like, I'm sure it's. It is terrifically, terrifically tedious. And Lord knows I don't sit down of an evening and tune into the European Parliament. But are they perhaps slipping towards the delusion which has had such dreadful consequences all over the world, that politics must be exciting and entertaining?

[Robyn Brandt]

Yeah, I think a better way, I would suggest, I mean, look, it's important that we have transparency when it comes to the legislative process, of which of course, the UK is no longer a part, but for the other member states, you know, having that transparency, having being able to have that access, being able to see their countries legislators doing their job is very important. And so, you know, that might sound slightly high and mighty, but having being able to see the proceedings, being able to understand the proceedings and having a level of transparency there, I think is important. I would suggest a better way to make this seem more relevant, make it seem more accessible, make it seem, dare I say, just a bit more fun, is to encourage the legislators independently and individually to pursue their own kind of, you know, communications strategies, whether that's TikTok, whether that's insta or whatever it is. I think the idea that you can change these proceedings, which of course are built around, you know, heavily institutionalized rules and regulations and are often dominated by, you know, politicians just trying to make a particular point for our own domestic audience. I think the idea that you can suddenly transform and change that and make it into something more theatrical, more appealing, you know, I Don't quite buy that myself.

[Andrew Muller]

Is there though, Terry, somewhere at the heart of this a genuine question or, or indeed crisis of legitimacy for the European Parliament? Because turnouts in European parliamentary elections are by and large shocking. It's barely covered by media. I suspect if you walk the streets of EU capitals asking passers by, can you name a single member of the European Parliament? You might be trying a while before you got a correct answer.

[Terry Stiasney]

Yes, and I think that this leads to one of the problems. I mean, I've, from my sins, I have covered like quite a lot of European Parliament plenary sessions in Brussels and Strasbourg and they are mostly incredibly dull, but because they are dull, that allows people who know how to exploit the media. And I'm thinking of Nigel Farage in the past or Le Pen and we always had these characters. So you had, you know, Danny Cone, Bender or Otto Habsburg, those are the people that people could latch onto and say, well, that person's quite interesting. But then they would sit and just kind of go off on one and protest or kick off. And so that attracted all the attention. But if you could actually say we will have a decent recent kind of a question time to the commissioners where we will be a bit more like Prime Minister's questions and ask them hard questions rather than a very, very dull set of questions. And it's, it's always made more dull by the fact it's got to be translated into several languages. So you can't really have that cut and thrust because if someone makes a witty bar that's then got to be translated into, you know, 25 languages. So it is quite hard to do that. But there is, yeah, because, you know, the Parliament can't do that much. And so unless you are, are questioning the commissioners, I mean, it's ultimately the commissioners and the member states that have still got the power. And so, yes, you know, they were always talking when I was there about having more democratic accountability and getting people more engaged and it's, it's really, really hard to do.

[Andrew Muller]

Terry Stney and Robyn Brandt, thank you both for joining us. Finally, on today's show, it has become axiomatic in Leftwood political circles that empathy is a self evident virtue. It is at the very least hard to argue that it isn't preferable to the venal sociopathy often witnessed at large among the contemporary right. But what does empathy actually look like or result in when practically applied?

[Narrator/Obituary Reader]

This is considered in a new book.

[Andrew Muller]

By Clare Yorke, senior lecturer at the Centre for Future Defence and National Security at Deakin University in Canberra. The book is called Empathy in Politics and Leadership the Key to Transforming Our World. I spoke to Claire at Midori House earlier and began by asking if she had a hard and fast definition of empathy or if we just kind of know it when we say so.

[Clare Yorke]

For me, empathy is something that in many ways is built into politics. I think a lot of politicians, against the perception we may have of them, actually do enter politics because they care about issues, they care about people. But what I argue is that actually there's different ideas of empathy, it has different roles. And I make a distinction especially between sincere empathy, which is that real kind of care motivated idea of transforming politics to help people, and then performative empathy, which you see in the more rhetorical use of it, which a lot of politicians maybe use but don't follow through on.

[Andrew Muller]

Which is a partial answer to a question I wanted to ask, which you do write, I think in the conclusion, spoiler alert, that empathy in politics should be empathy in action. So is it often used as a device to actually avoid doing anything? This is the politician who says, I feel your pain and then does absolutely nothing to ameliorate it.

[Clare Yorke]

Exactly. And that's the danger, is that empathy right now is such a buzzword in politics that it can become something that we hear a lot of and it's rolled out to signal care, but it has to be matched by actual policies that start to go out to citizens and engage more with communities about. Well, what does effective politics mean for you? How can we make more people feel seen and heard by political systems? And how do we actually recreate some of our politics so that it's much more people focus, focused people centric and deals with the real issues. Because we're missing that in a lot of politics. Some of the real tough issues of the day, economic inequality, social justice, welfare, it's not really being tackled head on. It's always around the margin with the language of care, but not the action.

[Andrew Muller]

How would like then a greater application of empathy as you see it, get us towards positive outcomes in any of those spheres, for example, cost of living. And I guess that's when you're asking politicians to empathise with how tough it is to feed an entire family when you don't own your own place and you're making less money than they do. But how do we get from that to actually something being done about that?

[Clare Yorke]

It's about creating processes and systems where we open up politics. So it's not just done by a very narrow group of people that we Start to bring citizens more into the process of doing politics, of thinking about what we need. We need more politicians to be listening to what people need, to see what challenges they're facing and being able to also ask the questions and interrogate what's going on here beneath the surface. And I actually think a lot of politicians do that. But often the systems and structures of politics itself makes that harder. It often obscures the capacity to create change. So it's about building in dialogue. It's getting better at tackling the real issues and listening to diverse perspectives to really figure out, well, what is needed here. And a core argument of the book is we've got to start empowering more citizens because the people on the front line of our politics, the people who are on the front line of, of welfare cuts, who are on the front line of health services, they're the people who know what's needed and what needs to change. So how do we bring that back into the centre?

[Andrew Muller]

I mean, have you seen or did you encounter in your research any practical examples of somebody having a crack at this and actually getting results with it?

[Clare Yorke]

I've been really encouraged by citizens assemblies. I know that they maybe have their critics as well, but I find that by actually creating these spaces where people get exposure to the issues and also in turn where citizens learn the challenges that face politicians who are trying to make complex decisions with a wide array of information, that these citizens assemblies create space for those conversations and also for exposure to evidence. We need to still have evidence based politics and decisions based on that. And so there's some interesting initiatives in France and there's interesting organizations as well, like Democracy Next, who are really trying to change the culture and make it far more normal that we, we hold these assemblies, that we start to meet with people who think differently.

[Andrew Muller]

Is the argument there that empathy is a two way street, that there perhaps needs to be a little bit more of it among the led for the leaders? Because what you talk about there is a common complaint that I've had heard from politicians when talking off the record, a thing they could not possibly ever say in public, that they're just incredibly frustrated with the fact that people don't understand how government and politics actually work and don't want to listen when it's explained to them.

[Clare Yorke]

Yeah, I definitely think it has to work both ways, that we need to get a greater sense of what is involved in politics. What are the compromises, what are the trade offs, what are the decisions they're making and the complexity of it. And I think that's partly to do with the exposure we have to news. Do we have news media that's actually giving us access to that complexity? That's not just reducing what's going on in the world to neat sound bites? And do we have politicians who don't just play to the gallery? We need to have politicians who can stand up and really say, look, this is what we do dealing with. These are the trade offs we've got. And that requires integrity as a leader and it requires courage, because it's often not going to be popular. You're not going to get that immediate boost in your polls when you come out and you say, the situation we're facing is actually a bit difficult, but here's how we're going to do it.

[Andrew Muller]

Should there be limits to that empathy, though, in a political leader? And this is me shamelessly inserting my own personal prejudice into the conversation. Is there ever a case for a leader with due sincerity, integrity, addressing specific people on a specific issue and saying, you're just wrong, you're mad?

[Clare Yorke]

I mean, I wonder if it's helpful to call people just mad. But I think we do need leaders who can say, I don't agree with you on this point, and this is why. And this is the thing. Empathy can have boundaries and it can have standards. And there's often criticism that empathy is just being nice or it's too soft and actually it's very hard. It takes a lot of courage to do empathy well. And we need to have people who can stand up and say, this is what I think, this is why I think it. I'll listen to you and I'm open to you changing my mind if you have a compelling case. But there's certain standards that we need to hold at the same time. But I think most people trust politicians when they express conviction and when it's matched by action. But that can often be hard to come by.

[Andrew Muller]

Final question, then. If any particular politician may happen to pick up your book and think, this, this all sounds great and I'd like to have a go at it. Unfortunately, I am an unregenerate sociopath. Is.

[Robyn Brandt]

Is.

[Andrew Muller]

Is this something that can actually be taught, or do you need to be sort of bored with it?

[Clare Yorke]

Absolutely. You can teach this, you can practice it, and I think it's important that we accept that it's not always going to be perfect. It's variable, and we're going to encounter certain issues where we struggle more than others in our own politics. And I've studied this for 10 years now. And I still have gaps in empathy, but it's something that the more we do, the better we'll get at it. The more we learn to hold space for different perspectives and to have those conversations and to lean in and be curious, the better we get. And also the more we model that it's possible. And that's the challenge. Right now. We're not seeing this. We're seeing divisive rhetoric. We're seeing that easy division into camps. And we need people who can say there's another way of doing politics and who can then model ways of holding those conversations, of showing they can look at people who think differently to themselves with dignity and respect, even if they fundamentally disagree and stop really humiliating or putting down those who think very differently.

[Andrew Muller]

That was Clare Yorke speaking to me earlier. Her new book is called Empathy in Politics and Library Leadership the Key to Transforming Our World. And that is all for this edition of the Monocle Daily. Thanks to our panelists today, Terry Stasney and Robin Brandt. The show was produced by Hassan Anderson and researched by Joanna Moser. Our sound engineer was Steph Chungu. I'm Andrew Muller here in London. The Daily is back at the same time tomorrow. Thanks for listening.

[Unknown/Interjection]

Sam.