0:00

Celebrate

0:00

the launch of David Rothkopf's

0:02

new book, American Resistance, The

0:05

Inside Story of How The Deep State

0:07

saved The Nation, by becoming a

0:09

member today. This month,

0:11

new members will receive a free signed

0:13

copy of the book along with the usual

0:16

member benefit including an

0:18

ad free listening experience, members

0:20

only bonus content, an

0:22

invitation to join the DSR network

0:25

Slack community and more. To

0:27

take advantage of this offer, visit

0:30

the DSR network dot com slash

0:32

buy and select the option type

0:34

enabled American Resistance. Upon

0:37

successful checkout, you will receive

0:39

a confirmation email with instructions

0:42

on how to redeem the book. The

0:44

book retails for twenty nine dollars,

0:46

but is included with this membership option.

0:49

You'll just pay for shipping. Please

0:51

allow two to four weeks for shipping.

0:54

Thank you very much. Hi.

0:55

twelve,

1:04

ten, twenty

1:06

eight, two,

1:10

three.

1:13

This is deep state radio.

1:16

coming to direct from our Super Secret

1:18

Studio in the third sub basement

1:21

of the Ministry of Snark in Washington

1:23

DC. And from other undisclosed

1:26

locations across America

1:28

and around the world.

1:30

Hello,

1:30

and welcome to the latest edition of our

1:32

podcast

1:34

pleasure to be with you today. I'm David Rockuff.

1:36

I'm your host, and we are

1:38

joined today from Washington

1:41

DC by a great group

1:43

beginning with, of course, Corey Shockey

1:45

Corey as the senior fellow and director

1:48

of foreign and defense policy studies

1:50

at the American enterprise institute.

1:52

How

1:53

are you doing, Corey? I

1:54

am exceedingly well, David.

1:57

Seatingly well. That is the way it

1:59

should be. And

2:00

Joining us from not too far from

2:02

Washington, DC, using

2:04

Internet connection that consists

2:06

of a paper cup and a long,

2:08

long piece of string We have

2:10

Rosa Brooks, who is

2:13

this Scott Higginsburg Chair

2:15

at Law and Law Policy at Georgetown University

2:17

Law Center, where she also serves

2:19

as the associate dean presenters

2:21

and institutes. How are you doing, Rosa? I'm

2:24

well, Thank you.

2:26

very,

2:26

very good to hear you. And

2:29

our guest today is

2:31

our friend Mara Rudman Mara is the

2:33

Expecting Vice President or

2:35

policy at the center for American

2:37

progress. She's held many senior

2:40

positions in the US government. How

2:42

are you doing today, Mara?

2:44

I

2:44

am doing okay, but I don't think I can match

2:46

Corey's exceedingly well, but I'm impressed

2:49

by it. Howard Bauchner:

2:49

Well, every single week

2:52

starts with us when Cory says she's exceedingly

2:54

well. She,

2:55

by the way, has said this while her

2:57

home was surrounded by

2:59

Boris Fire, so I'm not

3:01

And right now, I am experiencing

3:04

my first cold in three years,

3:07

having been

3:07

exposed to the biological weapons

3:10

that are the infants

3:12

in our Thanksgiving gathering.

3:16

then

3:16

those are those are dangerous

3:18

biological weapons. Well, in

3:20

in any event, what we wanna talk about here for

3:22

the next half an hour or so is

3:24

where US foreign policy is likely

3:26

to go over the next couple of years,

3:29

the second half of the first term of the Biden

3:31

administration? now

3:32

that we've got an election under

3:34

our belt. And of course, Ed,

3:36

we had this conversation as we

3:38

undoubtedly did, in the wake

3:40

of the twenty twenty election,

3:42

many of us might have

3:44

as I suspect, we did, that

3:47

much US foreign policy in the first term

3:49

would focus on China. Not

3:51

many of us would have suggested that

3:53

the signature foreign policy

3:55

issue for the Biden administration would

3:58

be waging

3:59

or supporting

3:59

Ukraine, waging a war

4:02

against Russia.

4:04

Now the Biden administration, I

4:06

think, has proven that it has

4:08

considerable foreign policy

4:10

and national security jobs, but

4:12

they're gonna be working

4:14

effectively with one hand tied behind

4:16

their back with a

4:18

Republican controlled

4:20

House of Representatives.

4:22

Mara, how

4:23

do you think that's likely to affect US

4:26

foreign policy over the next couple of years?

4:29

I actually do not think the Republican

4:31

controlled House will

4:33

affect US foreign policy in

4:35

terms of the direction that president

4:37

Biden is taking has taken. I

4:39

think it will make things more difficult

4:41

on the domestic front, it may confuse

4:43

some of the messaging and communications

4:46

that it's coming out because

4:48

of what leader McCarthy

4:50

has already indicated he intends to do

4:52

and make more difficult in terms of things

4:54

like Ukraine and the consistency

4:56

of US messaging toward it. but

4:58

I don't think in terms of actual

5:00

impact on the direction that president Biden

5:03

takes that they will be. I

5:05

hope and I expect that

5:08

they will not be able to do real harm

5:10

to the

5:10

direction of the policies. Okay.

5:13

I hope that's right.

5:15

Doctor Shaki, do you concur?

5:18

Yeah.

5:18

I agree with Laura.

5:19

My reading of

5:22

Kevin McCarthy's comments about

5:24

not giving Ukraine a blank check

5:26

struck me more as

5:28

caucus management than as

5:30

foreign policy. And

5:33

I say is

5:34

likely he's trying to balance

5:37

the budget hawks on the Republican

5:39

side. And

5:40

we're not now

5:42

giving Ukraine

5:43

a blank check. And

5:45

so I think that should be a pretty

5:47

easy standard. to me,

5:49

where I am worried about

5:52

the Congress controlled by

5:54

my own Republican Party

5:55

is

5:56

the performative

5:59

dragging of

5:59

national security officials. I

6:02

think Mark Milley is going to be first in

6:04

line to be excoriated

6:07

for anything he might

6:09

or might not have ever done,

6:11

and the delegitimizing

6:14

people who are trying

6:16

to serve America's national interest, I

6:18

think, is bad for our national

6:20

security. It's bad for our foreign

6:22

policy. and I very much hope

6:24

that my fellow Republicans will focus

6:27

on legislating

6:28

and doing the things

6:30

that that our congress'

6:32

power to do, providing

6:35

oversight of certainly one of them, but

6:37

passing the budget is the most important

6:39

congressional

6:40

prerogative, and they haven't done it.

6:42

And

6:43

it's hugely consequential for foreign

6:45

and security policy because

6:47

the forty eight billion

6:49

dollars that Congress added to the

6:51

Biden administration's deficient

6:54

defense budget has

6:56

now been wiped away by continuing

6:59

resolutions, not so

7:00

not passing the budget on time

7:02

and inflation. Congress

7:05

needs to exercise its own

7:07

constitutional prerogatives, the

7:09

failure of Congress to do that,

7:11

is actually hugely unbalancing

7:14

American policy writ large,

7:16

including foreign and defense policy.

7:18

Cory,

7:19

if only they were your Republican

7:22

party,

7:22

Rosa, what what do you feel

7:25

is likely

7:26

to change or be

7:29

a challenge or perhaps nothing.

7:31

What do anybody feel? I

7:32

I'm gonna be very boring and agree

7:34

with Corey and Mara. I, you know,

7:36

I don't think it's going to

7:38

change anything about the Biden foreign

7:41

policy agenda. I think

7:43

there will be more as as

7:45

Corey says, there'll be more performances, there'll

7:47

be more noise making, which will be distracting,

7:49

and it'll make everything a little bit harder

7:51

but the Republicans, obviously, even though

7:53

they have the house majority, they

7:55

are internally divided, and that majority

7:58

is very very small and

8:00

I don't think that they're going

8:02

to have the ability

8:04

to come together in a unified

8:06

way to block anything nor nor in fact do

8:08

I think there is a majority there

8:10

that would want to block anything in a

8:12

significant way right now. You know, it's

8:14

it's it's obviously we've got

8:16

the a tiny fraction of

8:18

the GOP members of the House who just don't think

8:20

we should be doing anything to support Ukraine,

8:22

but that's not a, at the moment, a particularly

8:25

powerful or large group. So you

8:27

know,

8:27

I I think it's gonna be more annoying,

8:29

but probably substantively

8:32

unchanged.

8:33

Okay. So we may get Ukraine

8:36

later. But, you know, I think there's a consensus

8:38

about what the Biden administration

8:40

wants to do there for the near

8:42

future. We can talk about what

8:44

that looks like getting closer to the election.

8:46

Let me start someplace else. Let me

8:49

start with an area that you have a lot of familiarity

8:51

with our which has a

8:53

domestic component to it. I actually have a

8:55

column coming out in tomorrow's

8:57

daily

8:57

beast.

8:58

about what I see as a

9:01

potential challenge to the historic

9:03

US relationship

9:05

with Israel. the new

9:07

government in Israel has

9:11

far right components to

9:13

it that have a lot of

9:15

people alarm. Now baby

9:17

Netanyahu has in the

9:18

past embraced the far right, but

9:20

he's now putting

9:21

people in his administration who

9:24

in the past have

9:26

been affiliated with terrorist groups,

9:29

taken a a radical stand

9:31

on

9:32

settlements are openly

9:35

anti LGBTQ. And

9:37

there are people in the US government who've actually

9:39

grappled with the question, should

9:41

we even talk to some of these

9:43

people. And

9:45

Netanyahu, of course, has

9:47

embraced partisan politics

9:50

in Washington in the past and

9:52

could

9:53

do so again in the future. What's

9:55

your prognosis for

9:57

this particular special

9:59

relationship? I would

10:01

say that this relationship is

10:04

going to go through yet another challenging

10:06

moment. It will not be the first.

10:08

It will not be the last. but

10:10

the relationship itself

10:12

will

10:12

continue. I think it will force

10:14

even in even more compelling

10:16

terms what we've what has been

10:18

raised in the past about the nature

10:20

of democracy and the nature of our

10:22

partnerships in the region and the

10:24

reasons that we may have partnerships for a

10:26

range of reasons. But I

10:28

also

10:28

want to underscore one point you made

10:30

David. I actually think you treated

10:33

softly, though not intentionally so,

10:36

the description of who Netanyahu

10:38

is in bed with as far

10:40

right. These are Ben Gavir

10:42

leads myercony organization,

10:44

which Israel itself considered a

10:46

terrorist organization. I

10:47

in

10:48

ancient times did a

10:50

law school paper

10:52

law review piece on administrative

10:54

detention law. Israel's use of

10:56

it. It was first created for use in

10:58

Jerusalem because of Mayir

11:00

Khan'i's groups and what he did and what he

11:02

filed, and that's what Ben DeVir is about. SO

11:04

IT IS BEYOND RACIST.

11:06

IT IS ABSOLUTELY TERRORIST AND IT

11:09

IS -- THERE AREN'T WORDS FOR

11:11

HOW CONCERNING IT IS. that somebody like

11:13

this would be have a formal position

11:15

in government. So

11:17

really, we'll crystallize for the United

11:19

States. who we talk to within that

11:21

government. I don't think it's about whether we speak with the

11:23

government, but certainly whether we draw

11:25

lines on who we're willing to speak

11:27

with. and why

11:27

that would be. I would also note that it's gonna

11:30

split the American

11:31

Jewish community because then Gavir

11:33

himself, the minister,

11:36

the the most controversial actor in that

11:38

coalition, at the

11:39

same time that Netanyahu was

11:41

describing

11:42

publicly why everyone should be

11:44

willing to speak with him, was making

11:46

proclamations about the right of return

11:49

citizenship in Israel not applying to reform

11:51

Jews, but only to Orthodox Jews.

11:52

So even within the American Jewish community, there's a

11:55

number of reasons that he's extraordinarily

11:57

controversial. And so yes, it'll be a very

11:59

bumpy time for the the

12:01

relationship, which already had

12:03

challenges for various

12:06

reasons in terms of Israeli Palestinian

12:08

issues and and broader issues.

12:10

Yeah. I'm

12:11

no expert on Israeli politics,

12:14

but

12:14

it seems to me that

12:17

Mara is correct. that the

12:19

relationship is gonna

12:20

get even more difficult.

12:22

Netanyahu made a choice

12:24

during the Trump years. to

12:26

make support for Israel

12:28

or to make Israel support in the

12:30

United States stridently partisan?

12:33

it's interesting to me

12:35

how much of support

12:37

for the Israeli government's choices

12:40

in the United States

12:42

does not come from American jewelry,

12:44

but comes from evangelical Christians.

12:47

And

12:48

that strikes me as a worrisome

12:50

factor for Australian

12:52

American relations. I

12:54

also

12:54

think the increasing

12:55

closeness of Israel's relationship

12:58

with Saudi Arabia.

13:00

is

13:00

going to be problematic because

13:02

the Saudi American relationship is

13:05

also to boggining towards

13:07

possibly unrecoverable

13:10

debts,

13:10

and so

13:12

the association between

13:14

the two countries may actually

13:16

be negative for Israel

13:18

in its United States

13:20

relationships even if

13:22

positive in managing security in the

13:24

region. And

13:25

I think the behavior of

13:28

many Israeli firms, certainly

13:30

in the cyber surveillance

13:33

space, is

13:33

also going to make the national security

13:36

relationship incredibly

13:37

difficult.

13:39

And the

13:39

last part that I

13:42

think international security sense is

13:44

gonna really make the relationship

13:46

difficult. the Is

13:48

Israel's refusal to

13:51

provide support to Ukraine, to

13:54

join the fifty countries

13:56

assisting Ukraine against

13:59

Russia's

13:59

breech of the UN Charter

14:02

and Envision of

14:02

Ukraine. I

14:04

think all of those things are gonna make the

14:06

Israeli American relationship deeply

14:09

troubled. even before you

14:11

get to the constitution of who's

14:13

in the Israeli government. Howard

14:15

Bauchner: Right. But

14:15

of course, when you do get to the institution

14:17

of who's in the Israeli government, you get

14:20

conclusions that it is drifting further and

14:22

further down a road.

14:24

So

14:24

can I say one more thing, David?

14:26

which

14:26

is that there

14:29

are noises that the UAE

14:31

in

14:31

particular and possibly

14:34

also the Saudis are gonna

14:36

press the Israeli the Netanyahu

14:38

government on Palestinian

14:40

issues because this

14:42

is the constitution of

14:44

this Israeli government is

14:47

is such an affront on

14:49

that score. But I

14:51

see Mara is skeptical that

14:53

that's possible.

14:54

The

14:55

look was having had a number

14:58

of very challenging discussions

15:00

with

15:00

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

15:02

at times with the Emirates, with

15:04

others in the Gulf

15:06

the asking

15:07

for help

15:11

in bolstering the

15:13

Palestinian case and

15:15

US policy in that regard. vis

15:17

a vis Israel at some points,

15:20

there's a lot of words and very

15:22

little action. And sometimes, I've got to say in

15:24

the case of Saudi Arabia, on my

15:26

most recent conversation on this, which

15:28

was sometime in the middle of Trump's first

15:30

term, not even words. I mean, it

15:32

was it was breathtaking how

15:34

little they were willing to

15:36

do and

15:36

their their choices is

15:39

with Israel, for sure, regards

15:41

what they may say publicly. And I would say

15:43

under almost any

15:43

circumstances. If

15:45

you're like me, you're probably a bit

15:47

frustrated with the state of our political

15:50

system today. So why

15:52

does American democracy look the way

15:54

it does and how can we

15:56

make it more responsive to the

15:58

people it was

15:58

formed to

15:59

serve. Democracy

16:01

decoded is

16:03

a podcast by the campaign legal

16:05

center. It examines our government

16:07

and discusses innovative

16:09

ideas that could lead to a

16:11

stronger, more transparent, accountable

16:14

and inclusive democracy.

16:17

In season two, Post

16:19

Simone Leoper covers

16:21

everything you need to know about voting

16:23

in the United States. She

16:25

speaks with experts from across the country

16:28

and voters representing impacted

16:30

communities about the deliberate

16:33

barriers to voting. that exists

16:35

today. She asked how can we make our

16:37

voting system more inclusive? Because

16:40

our democracy works best

16:42

when every voter can

16:44

participate. Listen

16:46

to the latest season at

16:49

democracydecoded dot

16:51

org or wherever you

16:53

get your podcasts? Well,

16:55

that I mean, I think that may be tested,

16:57

Rosa. Did they almost under any circumstances

17:00

part because some of these people are pretty stream and they

17:02

may do things with regard to the

17:04

Palestinians that

17:06

are

17:06

challenging to the

17:08

relationship I saw a

17:10

piece in Harritt the other day by

17:12

Minas Riley historian named

17:15

Yuval Harare, who talked

17:17

about Israel moving away from this

17:19

idea of a two state

17:21

solution to the idea of a

17:23

three class solution in

17:25

Israel. where

17:25

Israelis have rights, some Arabs

17:27

have some rights, and a bunch of

17:29

Arabs have no rights

17:31

at all. a friend

17:33

of ours has been on the podcast

17:35

on Pinkers as

17:37

as, you know, reiterated

17:39

that and has written about how

17:41

the

17:42

US and Israel were bound

17:44

together by shared values.

17:47

And there's

17:49

a real question on a bunch of these issues,

17:51

like

17:52

like democracy, like

17:55

human

17:55

rights,

17:56

i'd like like Ukraine?

17:58

Whether we

17:59

actually do share values, what's your

18:02

outlook risen?

18:04

Yeah. I

18:04

mean, I I think this is

18:06

going to be really tough. I

18:09

think that Netanyahu and

18:11

and the Trump King of the Republican Party

18:13

share values, but

18:16

it's not partic but but certainly, I think there's a

18:18

significant divergence

18:18

from, you know, where the American Democratic

18:21

Party and and nice Republicans

18:23

such as Cory, are

18:25

and where the Israeli government is an increasingly

18:28

significant percentage of Israeli society.

18:30

Obviously, it's it's not just people

18:32

vote for these people.

18:34

Right?

18:34

situating in terms

18:36

of the global democratic retreat and or

18:38

at least the global democratic per

18:40

per carrias' best case

18:42

for the US is right.

18:45

It's not just Israel.

18:47

It's part of that much broader trend

18:49

of of people losing

18:52

faith. in the ability of Democratic

18:54

elected states to protect

18:57

them while still abiding by

18:59

key commitments to human rights, civil rights,

19:02

social justice, he can etcetera, etcetera. You

19:04

know, that there there clearly is

19:06

a broader trend to say, we

19:08

don't care just fix things, make them work. And if

19:10

you have to lock up a whole bunch of people to do it or

19:12

you have to decide that a chunk of society gets

19:15

no rights to do it, that's that's okay

19:17

with us. And that's really scary.

19:19

Right? I also think that looping this

19:21

back to your your first question of how will

19:23

any how will the Biden

19:25

administration's foreign policy agenda

19:27

be changed after the election, both

19:29

as a consequence of the midterms and

19:31

as a consequence of Netanyahu returning

19:33

to his role as prime minister in

19:36

Israel I think that empowers the American

19:38

far right. I think we already saw

19:41

Trump

19:41

doing

19:42

his darkest to exploit

19:44

and

19:44

further create a wedge within the

19:47

American Jewish community by claiming that

19:49

that Biden, you know, is an an enemy of

19:51

Israel, etcetera. that's

19:53

going to continue. We're going to see the right in

19:55

this country use

19:57

anything other than

19:58

US blankets port

19:59

for everything that Yahoo!

20:01

wants as a way to try to

20:03

beat up the Biden administration as a way to

20:05

drive not only Jewish voters, but as

20:07

Edwardi said, evangelical voters, etcetera,

20:10

away from the Democratic Party and

20:12

towards the more extremist wing of the

20:14

Republican Party. And, you know, it may not be

20:16

enough, it may be it may be

20:18

insufficient to actually

20:21

lead those pressures to actually

20:23

change anything, but it will certainly be part

20:25

of what makes the Biden

20:27

administration's job more challenging in the next

20:29

two years. because there's gonna be kind of a

20:31

constant drumbeat of criticism. It's

20:33

gonna be linked to Iran. It's gonna be linked to

20:35

all sorts of issues. If Biden says

20:37

anything whatsoever that is critical, they'll

20:39

beat them up over it. So so, you know, it's again, will it

20:41

change things ultimately in the

20:43

final result? I don't

20:46

think so. But I do think it's

20:48

gonna be, you know, yet another irritation

20:51

and distraction for the next couple of

20:53

years for the administration. I

20:55

don't want us to

20:58

air on the side of which I think has

21:00

happens a lot in U. S.

21:02

discussion on the Middle East a a disproportionate

21:04

focus on Israel. I think

21:06

there are

21:06

the underlying things that that Rosa has

21:08

talked about. I also have to say that I think that whether

21:10

it's a lumpy us or

21:12

whoever described the what is essentially the one state

21:15

reality now. It's not what Israel is

21:17

getting toward. I think we still have to be

21:19

pushing for a two state solution, but

21:21

the one state reality that Israel now

21:23

is exactly what you laid out,

21:25

David. It is a set of

21:28

democratic rights for Jewish Israelis,

21:30

a lesser set for Arab Israelis,

21:32

which is not explicitly written into law,

21:34

but for people who do not serve in

21:36

the military. There's a whole package of rights and benefits that

21:39

accompanies service in the military with the

21:41

exception for ultra

21:42

orthodox Jews who don't but not the

21:44

same exceptions for Israeli Arabs. And

21:46

then the

21:47

the if you're West Bank or

21:50

Ghazan Palestinian, you don't have, you

21:52

know, rights in

21:54

any real sense at this point. So

21:56

that's the one state reality

21:58

I think it is a it has been

22:00

a steady trend of Israel for a long

22:03

time. I would also say though that I think

22:05

it is a a little bit of a rose

22:07

colored lens that the only reason the

22:09

United States, the basis for the United

22:11

States relationship with Israel is shared

22:13

values. I think it is a

22:15

component part. but there is a

22:17

strategic and security interest in the

22:19

relationship where there has been historically, which

22:21

is at times undermined by what

22:23

Corey pointed to, which is things like

22:25

Israeli tech companies are doing. We all know there

22:27

have been challenges in general on

22:29

the cyber side for a

22:31

long time

22:32

well with Israel.

22:33

So it's been a challenging partnership in a

22:35

number of ways for a long time. I

22:37

think, again, these

22:39

there are

22:39

new elements to it. but

22:41

we will continue to work our way through it. And

22:44

the bigger challenge to me is what Rosa

22:46

had pointed out in her comments about

22:48

what it takes for Democ proceeds to deliver

22:50

and to be shown to be delivering writ

22:52

large in how we, as the United States,

22:54

what opportunities we have to do better on that

22:56

which includes Israel in

22:58

that picture, but not exclusively focusing

23:00

there. Certainly not. But I am just in

23:03

the interest of eating your caution

23:05

there, but also in

23:06

the interest of time. Let me shift the focus a

23:08

little bit. At the outset, Corey, I

23:11

said we would have been

23:12

correct in predicting that

23:15

US, and

23:17

with China policy would be at the center

23:19

of Biden administration foreign policy. I

23:21

think we might have underestimated it.

23:24

look at the national security strategy,

23:26

the national defense strategy,

23:28

the speeches of the president when

23:30

he took off as first

23:32

major speech of the Secretary of

23:35

State, virtually

23:36

everything the US has done.

23:38

China has been a

23:40

subtext in the policy. Now

23:42

there has

23:43

it seems been

23:46

sort of a couple of

23:48

threads to US China policy.

23:50

And

23:50

one of them is from a group that exists

23:52

within the

23:52

administration elsewhere in

23:55

Washington that

23:56

is deeply

23:56

concerned about the China threat.

23:59

And has

24:00

been pushing the US in directionally what

24:02

some people called a

24:04

new cold war China.

24:07

counterbalancing

24:07

China wherever possible, penalizing

24:10

China in a number

24:12

of critical areas, But

24:14

the tone taken by president

24:17

Biden in his meeting

24:18

with President Xi and Bali

24:21

was

24:21

somewhat more

24:24

insiliatory

24:24

and constructive, included

24:26

an upcoming visit for

24:28

the Secretary of State, included

24:31

reengagement, issues

24:32

like climate.

24:34

And then

24:34

on top of all that you've got the

24:37

upheaval that's going on in China,

24:39

which

24:39

age includes some structural

24:42

weakness and also includes

24:45

reaction to some terrible

24:47

policies. most

24:48

recently in the past few days,

24:51

major

24:51

protests

24:52

calling out president

24:54

Xi in ways

24:55

that would

24:56

have been unthinkable in

24:59

in in the recent past

25:01

for his

25:01

COVID policies and for his

25:04

policies with regard to the

25:06

weekers.

25:06

So what is your

25:09

expectation for the US China

25:11

relationship in the next couple years?

25:13

My

25:13

expectation for the US

25:15

China relationship is that

25:17

it is going to continue to

25:19

be incredibly difficult

25:22

and conflictual

25:23

because I agree with you

25:26

about a lot of the emphasis the Biden

25:28

administration has put on China,

25:30

where it has not

25:31

put that emphasis is

25:33

either in the spending in the defense budget or the

25:36

disposition of American military

25:38

forces. So

25:39

they are talking a

25:41

better game in the national

25:43

security strategy and the national defense

25:46

strategy than they are actually delivering

25:48

For example, the Biden defense budget did not

25:51

include the Pacific Defense Initiative

25:54

to provide near

25:56

term resilience to US

25:58

forces in the Pacific.

25:59

So on the military piece

26:02

of it, they are

26:03

talking a better game than they're

26:05

delivering. on

26:05

the economic and technology

26:08

piece of it, they are

26:10

delivering amazingly

26:13

incentivizing chip production

26:15

not just in the US, but potentially

26:17

in allied countries. I really like the

26:19

way the Secretary of the Treasury talks

26:21

about

26:21

French maturing.

26:24

I wouldn't

26:24

describe the Biden administration policy

26:27

as seeking to isolate China.

26:30

What it

26:30

feels like to me is

26:32

trying to force China to play by the

26:34

rules

26:34

that everybody else plays by

26:37

and that we for understandable

26:40

reasons across four or five

26:42

American presidential administrations

26:45

gave China a pass

26:47

on before realizing the

26:49

deleterious disadvantage

26:51

that they were imposing on

26:53

us and others. Walter Russell Meade has

26:55

a nice piece in the Wall Street

26:58

Journal today. arguing

26:59

that America's superpower is

27:01

the ability

27:02

to bring strong,

27:04

wealthy, assertive countries

27:07

on side in

27:08

the challenge that China poses, and

27:10

it uses the example of

27:13

Japan, which

27:13

has made the most interesting strategic

27:15

choices of

27:15

anybody in about the last fifteen

27:18

years. but it's China's behavior that's

27:20

driving this. The Biden

27:23

administration's success on China would not

27:25

be possible if

27:27

China wasn't scaring and

27:29

intimidating, everybody else.

27:31

And so what you see is

27:33

that once again, the success of

27:35

American foreign policy

27:37

is that

27:38

we make it safe for others to

27:41

do what is in their own

27:43

And

27:43

I think the Biden administration's doing a pretty good job

27:44

on that on China. I also like

27:47

that the president wasn't Fire and

27:49

brimstone in talking to his

27:51

Chinese counterpart. Because it brings

27:52

to mind one of my favorite Republicans, Teddy

27:55

Roosevelt, talking softly and

27:57

carrying a big stick. I just

27:59

wish he'd invest in

27:59

a bigger stick.

28:02

Rosa, I'm gonna

28:02

change the subject. I would

28:04

encourage you if you wanna start off with

28:06

a comment on China to do so.

28:09

but I'd like to ask you you think US policy

28:12

towards Ukraine is likely

28:14

to change in the next couple of

28:16

years if at all? Yeah.

28:18

Well, so

28:18

one thing I did wanna say about China before

28:20

I

28:20

talk about Ukraine. One

28:22

thing I wish was different, but

28:25

is almost certainly not going to be within

28:27

the Biden administration's ability to control.

28:29

Part of what China is doing very successfully

28:31

around the world is being there

28:33

in Africa, being there in Latin America,

28:36

etcetera, investing heavily. Being

28:38

generally helpful. Right? to governments down there.

28:41

From their perspective. Right? From their perspective,

28:43

the US is basically absent,

28:45

and China is there. And if we

28:47

can't counter that, you know,

28:49

I

28:49

think all of the things that Corey says, oh,

28:51

we should do this, we should

28:52

do that. That's right. But we can do

28:54

all of those things. But if we, you know

28:57

I mean, this is this sort of people

28:59

vote their pocketbooks to some extent. You know,

29:01

if China is there dangling

29:03

carrots and we are are absent,

29:06

that gonna be really hard to combat that in term

29:08

when it comes to sort of the battle for global

29:10

influence and global leadership.

29:12

Now I think the Biden administration agrees

29:15

with this. The trouble is that we do not

29:17

have a Congress that has

29:19

any willingness to put in the

29:22

funding that we would need to combat it. We maybe don't even

29:24

have the money, which is

29:26

another story. But anyway, that that that's

29:28

what, in some ways, worries me.

29:30

Most most in the long term. Right? There are all sorts of short term

29:32

potential flash points. But in terms of

29:34

long term influence, that I think is what is going

29:36

to be most significant On

29:38

your question about Ukraine, I don't

29:41

actually think things are

29:43

going to change dramatically

29:45

as a result of the

29:48

midterms. you know, I think that already

29:50

Well, or at all. At all. I I

29:52

get out of Well, out of changing

29:54

situation on the ground. Yeah.

29:56

I

29:56

mean, it's it's gonna be really tough to to know. Right?

29:58

I think that I think that the

30:01

recent Ukrainian successes

30:03

have temporarily sort of

30:05

bleed US willingness and

30:07

US popular support. As we

30:09

know, as we've discussed many times, the,

30:11

you know, Americans have a short attention

30:14

span, We don't like long boring conflicts. We don't

30:16

like them when there are other peoples. We don't like them when

30:18

there are hours. Right? And I think

30:20

that depending on how things

30:22

go, especially with the Republican

30:24

majority in the House. There's certainly gonna be

30:26

more foot dragging, more opposition, and more scrutiny

30:28

of of aid to Ukraine.

30:31

to some extent, the scrutiny is not

30:33

necessarily a bad thing. Foot dragging is not a

30:35

great thing. But, you know, being sure

30:37

that we know what we're doing, what is our plan,

30:39

etcetera, those questions not

30:41

necessarily a bad thing for them to be asked.

30:43

I think the thing that is most likely

30:45

to change Ukraine policy

30:47

if anything is not gonna be

30:50

the

30:50

Republicans controlling the

30:52

house, it's more likely to be just generic

30:54

American fatigue, especially if

30:56

we don't have you know,

30:58

big obvious, flashy victories that we can all say, yay

31:01

about. If it does turn

31:03

into a quieter, more quagmire

31:06

ish conflict, I think it's going to be very, very

31:08

hard to sustain congressional interest

31:10

and continuing to provide support

31:12

at the level we're providing it

31:14

now much less stepping

31:16

it up. Okay.

31:17

So we've we've got just four or five

31:19

minutes left. I'm just gonna pose each one of you

31:21

a quick question on a different part of the world.

31:23

feel free to ignore my question as

31:25

you often do and answer any question you'd

31:28

like or respond to what

31:29

your colleagues

31:31

have said. Mara,

31:31

in the next two years, what's the

31:33

flashpoint you're worried about the most

31:35

and why isn't it North Korea

31:37

or is it? So,

31:40

actually, the false point I'm worried

31:42

about most is the inability

31:44

to raise the debt ceiling

31:46

in the United States So that

31:49

is a place where leader

31:51

McCarthy and it may not seem like a foreign policy

31:53

topic, but it absolutely is because

31:55

it will if we have huge

31:57

and extended debates about raising the

31:59

debt ceiling,

31:59

never mind. Court's concerns about a higher

32:02

defense budget arosa's interest in

32:04

Greater Foreign Assistance, we will be

32:06

jeopardizing every aspect of not

32:08

only the United States economy, but

32:10

the global economy as

32:12

well. and an extended

32:14

debate on those terms as well

32:16

or different items being

32:17

held hostage, which is what has happened in

32:20

the past. with Republican controlled

32:22

houses in which leader McCarthy has given every

32:24

indication he's going to be going

32:26

forward to do as he

32:28

becomes speaker. that is what I think is

32:30

actually the single most worrisome flash

32:32

point. And it also goes to I will just use

32:34

my time to say of the points that points

32:36

that Cory and Rosa made might

32:38

kind of head back and forth on,

32:40

China is cleaning our clock

32:42

in various ways. In the United States,

32:44

position in African in

32:46

the African continent and in Latin America, but

32:49

it's not because of off brand carats. It's

32:51

because they're there. They seize opportunities. It's the reason

32:53

they can role, the critical mineral supply

32:55

chain. Globally, Japan actually is an example

32:57

of breaking away from that control. And we

32:59

need we the United States mean to get

33:01

more effective, not system of foreign assistance we

33:04

provide, but in our ability to

33:06

provide investment that will be on far

33:08

better terms for these key

33:10

countries than China offers. And we

33:12

are just we had been lagging on that. There were some provisions in

33:14

chips and science that were actually meant

33:16

to improve how we

33:18

offer investment. through trade development

33:20

agency and development

33:22

finance corporation. I'm not sure those made it into the

33:24

final version of the law. And

33:26

those would not require additional

33:28

assistance, by the way, just change changing the terms

33:30

of of our legal provisions. So

33:32

long response, it

33:33

starts with the debt ceiling, and I think ends with the

33:35

debt ceiling, but because that still

33:37

encompasses everything else we'd wanna be able to do in the

33:39

world. Howard Bauchner: Okay, Cory. Well,

33:41

let me rephrase the question to you, Cory.

33:44

North Korea?

33:45

I am less

33:46

worried about North Korea than you are,

33:49

David, for two

33:49

reasons. First, because

33:52

I'm not

33:53

sure what

33:56

they are

33:56

trying to accomplish

33:58

beyond you

34:00

know, the paranoia that

34:03

we

34:03

or others will attempt to overthrow

34:05

their government. So I

34:07

don't see a political objective that them doing more

34:10

than showing the

34:12

plumage of their

34:14

weapon rate achieves for

34:16

them.

34:16

And second, I noticed that

34:18

the Kim Jong

34:19

Un has

34:21

started showcasing

34:24

his daughter which means he cares about the

34:26

future and possibly even a

34:28

succession plan. And since I

34:30

think the

34:30

right response to any

34:34

threat North Korea would pose to the

34:36

United States or its

34:38

allies is not retribution

34:40

in

34:42

but the destruction of

34:44

the leadership in this career,

34:46

I

34:46

think we have a pretty good

34:50

counter to deploy in any potential crisis. Howard

34:52

Bauchner: Okay. Well, we're talking about flash

34:53

points here, Rosa. What

34:56

is

34:57

the completely unforeseeable thing

34:59

that you foresee? None of the

35:01

things I foresee are completely unforeseeable

35:02

because if they were, I wouldn't be able

35:05

to foresee them. But III actually well,

35:07

first of all, I agree with Corey, I

35:09

think North Korea is sort of the least of our worries right now. And Laura,

35:11

thank you. Absolutely right. It's not just

35:13

foreign assistance. It's also a clearing path

35:15

for private investment.

35:18

in in terms of countering China's role in Latin

35:20

America, in Africa. I will

35:22

stick to my usual

35:24

theme in terms of

35:27

not unforeseeable, but stuff

35:30

people don't like to think about in terms of

35:32

flashpoints, which is which

35:34

is the future of

35:36

American democracy. I don't think we're out of the woods, as you

35:38

know. I think we have a

35:40

reprieve. Things could

35:42

have been awful. Right?

35:44

We there was one potential outcome of

35:46

the midterms that I think would have pushed us past

35:48

the tipping point when it comes to the

35:50

future of American democracy,

35:51

and that didn't happen. we're

35:52

still on the good side of the tipping point, and we have two years to

35:55

try to help make sure that we stay

35:57

there. But as ever,

35:58

I

35:59

worry that in particular,

36:02

the sort of democratic instinct

36:04

is to go, that threat's over

36:06

who? Now

36:06

we don't need to worry about that too much anymore. You

36:08

know, maybe we'll pay

36:09

attention to it again. You know, when it's say,

36:11

you know, September, October, twenty twenty four, but until then, we're

36:13

not gonna fret. And that I

36:15

think would be the worst possible thing to

36:17

do. I think that the

36:20

threat of right wing extremism, the threat of sort of election deniers,

36:22

the threat of election interference

36:24

by those who purport to

36:26

believe that the twenty twenty election was

36:30

stolen is still out there and is still very we

36:32

are not able collectively to

36:34

ensure that the reprieve

36:36

we got in the midterms

36:38

becomes more permanent that we are genuinely returning to

36:40

a state of normalcy. Everything we

36:42

care about will be totally upended. excellent

36:47

points.

36:47

And I think very telling that two two of you have

36:49

observed it on domestic points which

36:51

were presaged by the

36:55

third among you. I would

36:57

add that one thing that worries me

36:58

is the potential threats

37:00

to the stability of

37:04

the bad

37:06

that

37:07

autocrats.

37:08

Whether it's that

37:10

they falter and that causes chaos

37:12

or whether it's that they overreact

37:16

in a in a in a brutal

37:18

way to the threats.

37:20

And that could

37:22

be a group that included

37:24

potent could include Xi Jinping

37:26

and could include the

37:29

government of Iran. And

37:30

I think we'll have to watch

37:34

we'll

37:34

have to watch in those cases. There are legitimate

37:36

voices being raised

37:37

up and legitimate

37:39

reasons to think they

37:41

may face some internal challenges.

37:44

And as we've

37:44

seen, you know, in the past couple

37:46

of years and through all

37:49

of human history, Governments

37:50

are seldom quite as

37:52

quite

37:54

as set in stone as we think they

37:56

are. because last April,

37:58

we wouldn't have predicted three

37:59

British prime ministers in the course of

38:02

a couple

38:02

of months either. In any event,

38:04

talking to you three is always

38:06

extremely illuminating. I am very grateful as

38:08

I am sure

38:09

the audience is

38:12

Thank

38:12

you, Mara. Thank you, Corey. Thank you, Rosa. Thanks

38:15

to everybody for listening. Come

38:18

back tomorrow,

38:18

we'll do a special deep

38:21

dive

38:21

podcast with the author of a new book

38:24

on China. And

38:25

then on Thursday, we will

38:27

do take a look

38:29

at

38:29

some of the shifting political sands here

38:31

in the U. S. plus all of our

38:33

other podcasts. So those are just

38:35

the the DSR ones. So

38:38

please stick with us, check your feed,

38:40

and we'll be back

38:42

with you again real soon. For

38:45

now, bye bye.