Pod Save the World - Harris-Walz Ticket, A Russian Prisoner Exchange

Episode Date: August 7, 2024

Ben and guest host Alyona Minkovski discuss how Harris’s pick of Tim Walz as a running mate represents a new generation of US foreign policy, the anticipation of an attack from Iran and Hezbollah in retaliation for the killing of Ismail Haniyeh, and a historic prisoner exchange between the US and Russia that included journalists, dissidents, and an FSB assassin. Then they talk about the resignation of Bangladesh’s Prime Minister, the Venezuelan opposition’s proof of victory, the role of AI and disinformation in the far-right riots in the UK, and favorite moments from the Paris Olympics. Then, Ben speaks to Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor to President Biden, about how the prisoner exchange came together and what it could mean for the prospect of negotiations on the war in Ukraine and the effort to reach a ceasefire in Gaza. For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast.

Welcome to Pots Save the World. I'm Alona Mankovsky. And I'm Ben Rhodes. Hello, hello. Nice to be here with you again. I love when Tommy has babies and goes on vacation. Or his wife has the baby. Yeah, that's true. But yeah, he's a big part of it, obviously. Have you continued watching the Olympics?

Yeah, my girls are like not surprised, but they're completely obsessed. I mean, we were up last night. They were up to like 11 way past her bedtime just to, watch the pole vault world record get broken. It was hard because we don't tell them, you know, that Simone, like I didn't want to tell them that Simone didn't get gold on the floor because I wanted the suspense, but they were like shocked, you know. Yeah. Well, at least it must be interesting watching that in real time. My daughter is only about to turn four, so she's not really in the loop of what's going on. But like, we're trying to get her into it. We were watching

the male, the guy, oh my God, I'm sorry, forget his name, the American on the pommel horse. Oh, yeah, Steve. Yeah, Steve. And, you know, like, my husband and I were like, go, Steve, go Steve, and she was looking around. And then she started cheering. I don't think she knew what she was cheering for. But, like, it's so, it's just so fun.

I love the Olympics. Well, Snoop, too, has been interesting for them because, like, they don't have any cultural form of reference for who Snoop is. And they see their, you know, see me getting all excited. There's Snoop. I'm showing them, like, Instagram. And, like, they're like, who is he? Like, and your normal instinct would be, like, plays music, you know?

Yeah, yeah. But I can't. So I was trying to figure out. Like, what from the catalog can I pull out? So I'm just like, oh, no, he's this great guy. The most amazing branding, like, remake of all time, I think, is Snoop Dog. And, you know, speaking of... I did tell my kids that he may be the greatest American, which, you know, is a debatable point.

Wow. Okay. Maybe, like, do I say a presidential medal of freedom in his future? There may be a medal of freedom in Snoop's future. I don't know. Anyway, speaking of Polvalds, maybe everyone go check out that video of the French guy. Swedish. Swedish.

guy, sorry, thank you. Swedish American, Swedish guy from Louisiana. I'm so immature I am. I like mix up all the details. Swedish guy from Louisiana, very strange, yeah. We have a great show for you today, and no shortage of news. We will talk about Kamala Harris's VP pick, what that could signal about her foreign

policy. We'll talk about the anticipation of a large attack from Iran and Hezbollah, the historic prisoner exchange between Russia and the U.S., the prime minister of Bangladesh resigning, far-right protests in the UK, and our interview today, Ben, who did you speak with? So I talked to Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor for President Biden. We mainly wanted to kind of break down the exchange of, well, I wouldn't even call the spy exchange because there's so many pieces of it.

But really fascinating behind the scenes color to how that came together, what some of the key moments were, who some of the key allies were, what Putin's thinking might have been around things like releasing opposition figures, what. that negotiation might mean for negotiations around the future of the war in Ukraine. And then also just kind of what they're looking at for the next few months in terms of the war in Ukraine, but then also we talked about the war in Gaza and the difficulty of negotiating given that one of the lead negotiations from Ramos was just killed. So we covered a pretty good amount of ground with Jake and people should check it out. Absolutely. I got to sit in and listen to the whole thing. So I can

vouch for that. It's a wide-ranging in a great interview. Let's start with the big story from the U.S. this morning, which is that Kamala Harris announced her VP pick with a text message. And it's Minnesota Governor Tim Walts. He is an Army National Guard veteran, a former teacher, a former football coach. He's got the Midwestern charm and the progressive bona fides. And he coined the weird angle that people seem to be picking up on against Trump and J.D. Vance. And of course, there's a lot to talk about on the domestic front, but what we do here is we talk about foreign policy. So Walt has been less outspoken recently on global issues than some of the other potential VPs who Harris was talking to, but we do know that he takes climate change and environmental policy seriously. He spent time living in China and speaks a Mandarin.

He is supportive of Ukraine. And on Israel and Gaza, in the past when he was in Congress, he voted for aid to Israel. He's met with Netanyahu before. He voted for the Iran nuclear deal. And after October 7th, he condemned the attacks, flew the flag at half-mast, but also spoke about civilians in Gaza and said that the vast majority of Palestinians are not Hamas. Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people. He also has both supported students who said that they felt unsafe on campuses due to anti-Semitism

and is called for strengthening Holocaust education in Minnesota schools. And at the same time, here is a very same time. what he has said about the uncommitted movement. The situation in Gaza is intolerable. And I think trying to find a solution, a lasting two-state solution, certainly the president's moved towards humanitarian aid and asking us to get to a ceasefire. That's what they're asking to be heard. And that's what they should be doing.

We've gone through this before. And we know that now we make sure we've got eight months. We start bringing these folks back in. We listen to what they're saying. That's a healthy thing that's happening here. That was, by the way, from an interview back in March that he did. So how do you, you know, read into this choice? Does it at all signal to you what Kamala Harris's leanings might be when she's looking

at a foreign policy going forward? You know, I don't overread into it. I think a couple things stand out. I mean, one is, you know, when someone is picking a nominee, a vice president, you know, they're usually looking sometimes to patch a hole in their own politics or their own resume. So when Obama picked Biden, you know, one of the things he was looking for is he knew that he was relatively young and had less experience on the national stage and doing the foreign policy. So one of the reasons that Biden was picked is that he'd been the chair of farm relations

committee, he'd been around. I see that because it's clear, not that Tim Walts doesn't have experience he does, but Kamala Harris is a deeply experienced person now. She's been vice president for three and a half years. She's dealt with foreign leaders. So I don't think. think she was looking to patch some foreign policy or national security vulnerability, I think that does speak to kind of her confidence in talking to, you know, people around her, you know, this is someone who thinks she's running full stride on foreign policy, you know, and so she's picking a partner for other reasons, you know. That said, you know, if you look at Tim Walts's record, he is experienced.

He was in a house, so obviously you interact with foreign policy when you're there. When you're a governor, you deal with issues like climate change and trade and industrial policy, so he's dealt with it from that perspective. And yeah, if you look at his record, you know, it's like the rest of his politics. It kind of shades progressive, right? He prioritized some co-sponsored some bills in Congress that were really focused on human rights in China, which is more of a progressive perspective into the U.S.-China relationship, related to things like Hong Kong. You know, he, on Gaza, you know, if you look at that uncommitted vote, some Democrats chose to ignore it, you know, including

Joe Biden, but I think his message is very in accord with hers in the sense that we've talked about that she's been more outspoken about Palestinian civilian casualties, more kind of visceral in her language in expressing kind of horror at what is an intolerable situation. She's used that same word as him intolerable, which is not a word you hear all Democrats using to describe the circumstances in Gaza. And so, yeah, in that way, I think he indicates a foreign policy that is in the mainstream, but shades progressive. And same thing on Gaza that is kind of in the Democratic Party mainstream, but shades to kind of an emphasis around Palestinians and the plight that they've gone through. But at the same time, I don't know that you can over read into it. I see the thing that is

exciting about the ticket and that also relates to firm policies, it's just a new, you know, these are two, this is a turning of the page. And that's not just a Joe Biden comment. It's, you know, Tommy's point last time that the first ticket nobody voted for the Iraq war, you know, nobody was even around for that vote, you know. You know, it just does feel like this ticket holds out that opportunity to kind of get beyond like a whole era of foreign policy debates and start fresh from a perspective of people that, you know, seem like they're kind of in the right zeitgeist for where we're headed. Yeah, there isn't foreign policy baggage.

They're not, yeah. It's nice that he's not carrying any of that baggage, you know. And it's, yeah, I think he's got the kind of pragmatism, right, that you look for. Pragmatism informed by progressive values is about as good as you could ask for from a Democratic Party ticket. Yeah, I think it's really interesting. Again, it's just been exciting and reinvigorating to be watching the U.S. election again, which I can't say was the case for me maybe a month and a half ago. I was like, thank God I work on pods in the world.

The other funny thing is I've made this point, and this is not to give me, because I've learned this from a lot of people, actually including Nika Kovic, who was on this podcast, that when we deal with the far right and authoritarianism, we get angry and we get scared. And so we can sound either scared in a way that builds up our opponents into 20 feet tall strong men or fearful or angry in a way that turns off voters. And actually, like, we have a lot of proof that mocking autocrats is the best way to cut them down to size and to beat them, you know.

And frankly, Obama was always very good at that, like kind of making fun of the extremism of the Republican Party. His thing about weird may seem like a simple talking point. I think it's a very powerful insight, you know, that one way to run against autocracy without either sounding really angry or without scaring people and making your opponents seem even more. like a strong man is just like, these people are fucking weird, you know, they're strange. And so I actually think that's, there's even more wisdom in that than it appears on this surface. Yeah, that's a really good point because he's minimizing in a way that also isn't like dehumanizing or offending anyone or anything.

He's not saying deplorable. He's just saying these guys are weird. Yeah. All right. Let's go over the increasingly tense situation between Iran, Israel, Hezbollah. Basically, everyone has been on alert waiting for things to escalate even further. That's all in the aftermath of the killing of Ismail Hanea. He was the political leader of Hamas, and he was killed in an explosion in Tehran last week.

Now, Israel hasn't claimed responsibility, the assumption by, you know, Iran, Hezbollah, safe to say the rest of the world, as that Israel was behind it. They also killed a Hezbollah leader who is believed to be responsible for the attack on the Golan Heights. And since then, Iran has vowed to retaliate in a severe way against Israel. There have been back and forth attacks happening on the Israeli and Lebanese border, the U.S., the U.K., France. Other countries have all told their citizens to leave Lebanon. There was an attack on U.S. personnel at an airbase in Iraq that injured seven people. And then, of course, there's diplomacy that is just happening around the clock. But everyone seems to be preparing for something big.

Biden reportedly convened his national security team on Monday. And then Secretary of State Anthony Blinken had even said at the G7 on Sunday that there could be an attack within 24 to 48 hours. So basically, they're just pleading for de-escalation. Let's take a listen to something that Blinken said. We are engaged in intense diplomacy, pretty much round the clock, with a very simple message. All parties must refrain from escalation. All parties must take steps to ease tensions. Escalation is not in anyone's interests. It will only lead to more conflict, more violence, more insecurity. So, Ben, this feels very, very tense.

And at the same time, it feels like we've been here before over the last 10 months of this conflict. So what is your instinct telling you at this point? Well, first of all, I think it's worth emphasizing how dramatic the kind of dual assassination, because this took place within 24 hours, essentially, to take out a senior hisblood figure deep in Lebanon and then to kill the head of Hamas's political bureau, the head of Hamas in Iran, right after the

inauguration of the Iranian president. You know, on the one end, that speaks to a pretty extraordinary Israeli capability to kind of reach that far to take out adversaries. In Henea's case, this is a guy who's been, you know, a leadership role in Hamas for decades. But also, you know, whatever you think about that, it's hugely. provocative, you know. I mean, like, this is them saying, we are going to show that we can, we will punch you in the face in your house, essentially, to the Iranians. And, and so the idea that there would be no response, there's going to be a response, you know. Now, the question is,

sometimes that response can come like we saw last time within a period of days, you know, they launched a bunch of missiles at Israel. That may happen again. Sometimes with the Iranians, you know, weeks could go by and then there could be a terrorist attack somewhere and that's the response and so there are different ways this can go the thing i'm sure of is that there will be a response because if you know for them to do nothing their whole ideology is that we can't tolerate this kind of vulnerability this kind of sending a message that you can do this to us and there's nothing in return so so there'll be a response but i think the nature of it is unclear i think the other points i'd make are look this guy was and i asked jake about this but henea was clearly the person in the negotiations around

the ceasefire so you know for if you're killing the person who's at the table in the ceasefire i just don't know how you get a ceasefire done in that scenario i think i like tony's on the same talking points but like this is the inherent tension of like how can you negotiate the release of hostages while you're simultaneously killing all of the people across the negotiating table and demanding that as a condition of the ceasefire, essentially they admit that they're defeated and no longer exist. And so this is the problem is, do you want a ceasefire because you want a ceasefire or are you insisting on some negotiation with people that have no incentive to make a deal, you know? And so I think we're stuck in a limbo here where there's going to be this familiar

risk of escalation so long as there's a war in Gaza. That's the thing that Tony's right about. But the problem is there's going to have to be a ceasefire perhaps without the kind of negotiated agreement. The ceasefire is the end of itself. I think that's the kind of distinction that I draw with the administration that we should be pushing for a ceasefire, pushing Israel under ceasefire for the sake of having a ceasefire for getting aid in and then you can keep negotiating. You don't need to have the war ongoing to negotiate the hostage releases. You can have a ceasefire and then also negotiate. Well, and then not to mention, like, Hamas has now announced that Yaya Sinwar is the new

top political leader to replace Henea. He's known to be the mastermind of the October 7 attacks, but he's been hiding somewhere in Gaza. You know, again, Israel has been trying to kill him from what we know, right? That's at least how they've justified a couple major strikes that have had civilian casualties come alongside with them. And so so now, How are you negotiating with him if he is underground? They're definitely trying to kill him. I mean, and look, the elevation of Sinwar also makes the point that nobody's here to defend Henea.

The challenge of these kinds of assassinations in the past has been often the person that succeeds the assassinated person is even more extreme. And that is clear. It's the devil you know. Sinwar is a more violent, more nihilistic person than Henea. You know, and so it's not like you kill your way to a more moderate leadership. Usually you end up with a more extreme one. This is all an ongoing cycle.

If I were to try to find some hope in this is that, you know, for the sake of a ceasefire, you know, nanao, the Israeli government, like, they could come out and say, we're done. We kill the leader of Hamas. This is over, you know. Like, unfortunately they're not doing that because I don't think they will. But, you know, you do see them. if they need some rationale to say they've achieved their objective, even though they're not going to achieve that objective of totally destroying Amas, like they could claim it now.

But, you know, nothing suggests. I mean, the point that Jake made to me at the end of the interview you heard alone and people should listen to this is that really the two decision makers are Netanyahu and Sinwar. And that kind of, you know, I don't trust either of those people to negotiate a ceasefire. And that's why I think the ceasefire should be the goal. It shouldn't have to run through those people, you know. Yeah. Well, and not to mention, of course, there's 38,000 people now estimated to have been killed in Gaza. And the Israelis are showing that they are capable of targeted operations. Yes, you didn't have to kill them with either of these guys with a 2000-pound bomb. I mean, even the Lebanon one, which was a strike, was fairly limited. I don't want to minimize that there were some civilian casualties. But, you know, it does show that there is a targeted capacity.

And again, to people wondering, well, how could you have a ceasefire without Nanyahu and Simmar? What I'm talking about is that, you know, this is why you would withdraw offensive military assistance. You say, like, this has just got to stop, you know, which is different than a negotiated ceasefire. It's the U.S. saying the goal is a ceasefire full stop. And that doesn't leave behind the hostages either because you could, there's still things that Hamas would want in a circumstance where there's not an ongoing war, you know. But we'll see. It doesn't feel. It feels very tenuous.

tells me by the time we record a podcast next, you know, we'll have a lot more to respond to. Yeah. Okay, well, back to feeling like there is a month's worth of news in every single week, speaking of that. Yes. Last week, the biggest prisoner swap since the Cold War happened, with a total of 24 prisoners being exchanged. Russia released 16 prisoners, and those included the American journalist Evan Gershkovich and also Kormacheva, the former Marine, Paul Waylon, as well as a number of Russian dissidents like Vladimir. Kareemurza, Ilya Yashun, and former Navalny staff members. In return, Russia got eight people who had all been convicted of crimes in five different

countries, like the U.S., Germany, Slovenia. And the one that's getting the most attention seems to have been the highest priority for the Kremlin is Waizym Krasikov. He is a former member of a special forces unit in the FSB. He was convicted in Germany of killing a Georgian citizen who had fought in the Chechen war and claimed asylum in Germany. some of the other people have been convicted of crimes like money laundering, hacking, and being spies. There's, of course, you know, the story that's been captivating people of the family that was posing as Argentinians living in Slovenia. And they had two young daughters who had no idea until they were on the plane back to Russia that they were even Russian. The literal plot of the American.

Yes, exactly. But, you know, this was the culmination of months and months of negotiations. I know you got some of the backstory from Jake Sullivan, but everyone from Roman Abramovich, the Russian oligarch, two members of Navalny's team played some part in the negotiations here based on reports. And, you know, from a human perspective, this is obviously incredible news for the political prisoners, their loved ones. We have spoken to family and friends of Evan of Alsu on this show.

And so we are thrilled for them and send them our best. Ben, you and I have been texting about this a lot. I know we have, we both have a lot of thoughts, but were you, first of all, just surprised at all by like the sheer size and scope of the exchange? Yeah, I mean, I, you know, you had a sense something was building to a crescendo. I was surprised. The two things that surprised me were, one, just the Slovenian, I just love that the kids didn't know, that it's literally out of of the Pilate the Americans. And it just kind of, you know, Germany, nobody was surprised that that was part of the deal. But just that many countries, you know, that, that surprised me. But the thing that really surprised me, Alona, was basically the emptying out of the, the most prominent, at least from a

Western perspective, opposition members, right? Because I just didn't, you know, Ilya Yashin, for instance, someone I followed for years, was a close colleague of both Boris Nemtsov. and, and, um, Alexei Navalny. And, uh, you know, I just, I, what? I did a double take that he, he was on the list. Um, and so I was surprised at how much the Russian opposition kind of joined what was otherwise kind of a spy prisoner exchange dynamic. And I'm still kind of unpacking my thoughts about that because on the one hand, I was overjoyed to see some of those people out of prison. I've met some of those people. Um, on the other hand, um, um, you know, I saw Putin's own interest in it, right? It discredits them and makes them look like

kind of their American agents in a way because we negotiated their release and it kind of further empties that rush of any opposition. So it's good, but I was like, hmm, I'm not sure how to think about this, you know? Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, I think that's a very important point, right? Because even Navalny, one of the tragedies here, of course, is that report. Amazing, by the way, yeah, because when it first came out after he's died that he was, about to be exchanged. I was like, I dismissed that report. Yeah, we didn't. It seems like it was true, you know. Yeah, but it's tragic that he could have been part of this and he wasn't, but I think

even just in trying to understand his psyche, right, of why he went back to Russia or somebody like Yashin, who has been saying for a long time that he doesn't want to be part of a prisoner exchange, take older people, those who are sick before me, is Russian opposition figures understand that they're most effective when they are inside of Russia, you know? And so this is, it's a really, it's a double-edged sword. Like you said, like it's great on a human level that they're not there dying in prison, but otherwise every opposition figure has been killed or jailed or exiled. And so when they're outside of the Russian borders, they can't make a difference from within, you know, and they can write every op-ed they want. They can have media companies

that broadcast to the rest of the world and that obviously people within Russia are, some are listening too, but it's just not the same, you know. And I think just for me, like, paints a darker and darker picture of how and when does this end for Russia, because Putin is just kind of closing the door even further to make it more of an isolated country that way. And the people like that, you know, because that generation that I associate with kind of the 2011 protests when Navalny was, you know, cresting. And it does feel like he's just grinding down that, that opposition. Nemsov's dead. Nevolny's dead. You know, the, a lot of people are exiled.

The Naval, it did, you know, it made me think, we'll never know exactly how Navalny died. But, man, it feels like he was killed, you know. Like, if they wanted to exchange him, they would have been trying to keep him alive, you know. And it may have been that they weren't comfortable with him. He was the one person that even if he was abroad, he might have been too high profile for Putin, but we'll never know. Yeah, I think that's a good point. That said, there are other people in Russian prisons, right? Like this does not mean, like you mentioned, like maybe some of these are some of the names that are the most well-known.

Most well-known in the West. But there are lots of people who are still in Russian prison. And so it's not like, oh, every opposition figure is free. And that's why I chose those words, because there are thousands of Russians who are in prison for political offenses of one sort or another. But these are the people that I think are probably most well-known like Washington. Yeah. And just my one note on the family. I'm sorry. Oh, we had to talk about the family. The kids looked a little confused and Putin greeted them in Spanish.

Oh, he said, Buenos Noches when they landed that night. Yes, because they've been raised speaking Spanish with their family, you know, raised Catholic, thinking that they were Argentinian this whole time. And just as a Russian person, like, I can spot another Russian person from a mile away in a crowd because there's just something about the facial expressions. You mean they didn't look like they came from Argentina? I'm sorry, those parents look so Russian. How, how, like, they couldn't have been very good spies. I had to ask you, though, like, this Putin thing about getting people home is pretty, there's this obsessive kind of spy code, you know, like, he's obsessed with this guy in Germany, he's obsessed with Victor Boot, and let's face it, was probably a spy one sort of another.

These illegals, you know, he's talking, he looked a downright human greeting these children, like, what is this like a, like, what, what, What do you think the Russian vibe is about Putin's obsession with the security services? I mean, I think probably— Do you think he's that admired at home? I think we see it more as an obsession from here with the security services than Russians do, because, you know, it's—if you look at it from the other perspective, it's like these are people who either in the Russian point of view are also political prisoners or have been unfairly targeted or have served their country, right? I mean, the U.S. would act the same way towards anyone if they were an American spy, right? Or a member of the American military.

Exactly. And so it's the same type of kind of, you know, patriotism and like serving your country attitude that any other country would have. But with Putin, it seems like he's got this thing like their former colleagues. You know what I mean? Like, you know what I mean? Like he's one of them. Do you think there's the secret? Yeah.

Like, yeah, the illegals, you know, like he was trading them in the ring 30 years ago or something, you know. Yeah. Trump, by the way, is trying to claim that, well, I'll just, I'll let him speak for it. But he's trying to claim that Putin got the better end of the deal here. Let's take a listen. By the way, I'd like to congratulate Vladimir Putin for having made yet another great deal. Did you see the deal with it? Now, look, we want to get people in.

You know, we got 59 hostages. I never paid anything. They released some of the greatest killers anywhere in the world. some of the most evil killers they got and we got our people back, but boy, we make some horrible, horrible deals. And it's nice to say we got them back. But does that set a bad precedent? Bert, right?

I got a couple comments. Yeah, let's hear it. One, I just have to note at the end there, like, Bert. I love whenever we play these Trump clips, and I was saying this before or another, there's always some guy he's referencing that you have no idea what he's talking about. And actually, Bert is the perfect name. he's talking about geopolitics and like ain't that right bert you know like like bird has like a lot of feelings about the exchange he's bird second thing is it like this happens a lot of Israelis too like

he he starts saying things as if everybody is aware of his thought pattern so when he's like yeah and i'd like to congratulate Vladimir Putin as if he's congratulating like the winner of the you know like simone biles for all around like the crowd is silent like they're not they're like oh shit where is this going like you can kind of feel like a tension in the room even through the audio clip, you know, like, what, why's he congratulating Putin? And then the other thing I'd say is that like, you know, he got 59 people and didn't pay anything. That's just not true. Like they, exchanges are exchanges. They gave up stuff for people and the Trump. By the way, Trump, I'd love to know what we don't know they gave up too, because I'm sure there was probably like Trump was more

comfortable moving stuff around under the table. But like, Democrats did not politicize, like, what I hate about how this hostage issue has evolved. And this is a very serious. point is that because this happened when we're in office if there was a an American in prison overseas it was the end of the fucking world understandably like people but the Republicans would really politicize that and attack us for not getting the people out of prison and then whenever we did any exchange they would go apeshit over what we gave in return right this was bobergdahl this was the you know the the Iranian exchange when Republicans are in office we don't politicize the hell out of American. We don't blame the president for every single American

who's in prison. And we don't like pounce on every exchange. This is wrong, you know. And it's kind of warped what should be like a unifying, almost patriotic shared commitment to bring Americans home in a pretty dark way. And so it just bears naming, you know. Yeah. I mean, I'm with you. I think that first and foremost, the priority should be to get innocent people home. Yeah. Okay, Alona, and before break, if people have more questions about this or any other topics that have been on your minds, we would encourage you to sign up as always for the Friends of the Pod subscription. This is the time to do it because you can join me next Tuesday, August 13th at 3 p.m. for a round of Ask Me Anything on the Discord. So get on that Discord channel, put a question in there. Get on there at 3 o'clock next Tuesday for a round of Ask Me Anything. I'll stay on. I'll answer the questions, personal questions, policy questions, what it's like to co-oises podcast, what it's like to work in the White House, whatever is on your mind. Head on over to crooked.com slash friends to sign up now.

Also, right when there's new energy on the campaign trail, we've got our ticket, we've got Tim Walts on board. The Crooked store has fresh new merch to match. For those of us in the middle of the Venn diagram, Kamel reference, between very online people, And very into politics, we have a shirt that says vote in the style of brat. And another shirt that says, let's fucking go with one of those letters replaced by, you guessed it, a coconut. If what I just said sounds like gibberish, congratulations on not being online. For the rest of us, grab a shirt right now. Let's keep the energy going all the way to November.

Head to crooked.com slash store to grab a tea for yourself and the most online person in your life. All right, let's move on to a couple other updates. There have been some major updates. And one story we've been speaking about a lot, which is in Bangladesh. This Monday, the prime minister, Chekhasina, fled the country. And that was following weeks of unrest. We spoke about those student protests, which more than 200 people were killed. Those demonstrations continued.

They were fueled by the violent response to protesters. They brought an out to oppose Sheikasina's administration in general. general. And on Sunday, around 100 more protesters and police officers were killed than on Monday. Despite a curfew, tens of thousands of people marched towards the Prime Minister's residence. And she announced her resignation and promptly fled the country on a helicopter to India. After the news broke, thousands of people stormed the Prime Minister's residence, taking with them souvenirs like houseplants and chickens. I just love that little detail. Initially, the military announced that they would lead an interim government, but the protesters opposed.

the military's involvement. They proposed Nobel Peace Prize winner, Muhammad Yunus, who on Tuesday announced he would lead the interim government. Now, we spoke again with independent journalist Redwan Ahmed earlier today about the mood in the country right now. Currently in Bangladesh, the both sides are existing. People are very jubilant, the very, the mood in generally, celebratory mood. And they are, they're, they feel like we're feeling free. It feels like they're comparing it to the independence of the country. So that is there. But also at the same time, what we have seen in the past couple of, I mean, tonight and the night before is a lot of looting and vandalism.

Lots of police stations, they came under attack from the angry mob. So there's practically, they have abandoned the stations. There's no police on the road and no traffic police, nothing. And we want to approach it very cautiously that we all. also have news of attacks on the Hindu groups, and this is very sensitive because this might create another communal tension, which is probably not needed at this moment where the country is already treating through troubled water. So, yeah, I mean, as I said, like, those both emotions are running high in the country. I think, you know, that's really interesting, Ben, because if you

think about it, there's this momentous event that has just occurred, right, which is at the protesters managed to get the Prime Minister to resign, but then the most important part is now what comes next and what kind of government do they build next? Yeah, I mean, I have to say, first of all, I was surprised to see that news. I mean, Chey Cassina had been pretty dug in like we talked about and is a pretty stubborn person. And so to have it all collapse that fast, I mean, I know it played out over a period of many weeks, but still, I was surprised. And it does show, I do think there's like a pendulum swinging back against a certain brand of autocracy around the world that appears to be building. And hopefully this country can fuel that further in our election.

I will say, though, he put his finger on it. These can be very dangerous moments too because the worst thing would be either a complete implosion or like an implosion that leads to a vacuum that leads to a military dictatorship or intercommunal violence. You've had a very polarized society politically for a time in Bangladesh. And so, Muhammad Yunus is actually, even though he's been associated, obviously, with the opposition, you know, he's the kind of bridge figure. You would hope that there could be some transition. And what you don't want to see is anybody, you know, seeing this as an opportunity to get revenge on other people, you want to set up some kind of constitutional process of transition to an election that is fair. And so this is hopeful and dangerous time. And that's what we've learned a lot of these revolutions after like the hopeful

ousting of the person can turn dark. And so here I think a lot of international support for just a process that doesn't allow it to tip that way is the most important thing. And how can that, I mean, just from a logistical point of view, right, when we say international support is important in this critical moment from your experience. What does that mean? You know, a lot of it is, you know, when there's a gap, a vacuum, sometimes it's like just a lot of contact, you know, like so that you're, you've got the U.S. people from the U.N., leading people from neighboring governments, leading people from powers like the United States, kind of constantly calling, you know, you want to make sure you're tracking what's happening. You want to let the people there who are decision makers in Bangladesh know that your trading partners in the international system is watching and is in touch and wants to know what the plan. plan is and you want to be talking to people on both the government and the opposition, or not government, you know, whatever the transition government, but whatever the, you know, qualifies as the opposition now so that they're, that both sides are saying the same thing,

that there's not different realities emerging. So you want to kind of just fill a void and make, and then, and hopefully have some structure to have, you know, people, sometimes you need a third party to almost be like a witness to your agreements. If there's some negotiation in the country, it's helpful often to have diplomats who are there who can just kind of be almost like witnesses to the agreement and just trying to get clarity about what's the pathway to and agreed upon electoral outcome to determine the future of the country. And I think, you know, there's a very large void too

just to understand a little bit about the history in Bangladesh too is that like she Kisina has been in power since 2009 but she came from a family where her father actually led Bangladesh's fight for independence in the 70s. He was later assassinated, along with much of her family. She was in exile, then returned, then led an opposition uprising against military rule. So she is somebody who has just been in the political system in Bangladesh for such a long time. And same with the other people who have been in power in the other times.

It's a couple of families, basically. Yeah. Yeah. So just to say that it's very complicated, right? Like when power has been so kind of centralized and solidified just between two big families. Because it's also probably been a bunch of patronage networks, you know. And so the opportunity of this is to move beyond all that. But you're moving into a big unknown, you know.

And that's where a guy like Eunice can be useful because he's just, he's well-known internationally. He's well-known domestically. He probably doesn't have like long-term ambitions to rule the country. And so that's what we're missing in a place like Egypt. you know, where the military filled the gap. You want someone like that to just be a bridge, not to take a job on line. Right. On that note, I want to update Venezuela's election.

We used a bridge in Venezuela. Yes, which we spoke about last week. So the opposition, which was led by presidential candidate, Edmundo Gonzalez, has tallied its own results. And they have shown a decisive victory for Gonzalez at 67% to 30% to Washington Post. analysis corroborated those results, calculating that Gonzalez likely leads by millions of votes. Maduro, of course, is still not going anywhere. But it's just like, what happens?

You know, we're still here in this very weird limbo and in between phase a week after we spoke about it on last week's show. Do you see this progressing at all? Not right now. I do think it's useful to, you know, because as we talked about in our interview last week, this isn't just opposition numbers. They have data to back it up because there's like a kind of receipt type process to how the voting system works there. I think it's really important to kind of solidify the impression globally that Maduro lost this election. And so that's what

should happen right now. Like everybody coming out and saying, you know what, you know, people should audit this, investigate it and come out and say, yeah, we actually believe that not only Maduro lose, he lost overwhelmingly. You're in the period of trying to legitimize the actual election results versus the kind of Trumpy Medro claim that the election was stolen, or not stolen, but that he won the election. He's the one trying to steal it in that way. And then, you know, you've got to just try to keep an international coalition together around trying to negotiate some outcome.

And frankly, I think, leave open some pathway. You know, you're still in a window where you want to. to leave a door open for Maduro to accept some exile. I don't put a lot of hope in that. Like I was saying last week, I think he's super stubborn. But this is still a window where you try to negotiate something like him leaving through voluntary exile, which it's fresh enough after the election that that's where you're still pushing. I'm not optimistic about that, but that's what I think I'd be doing right now. Okay, let's turn our sites to the UK.

there have been far-right riots across the country in London, Manchester, Belfast and Moore. Those come after a stabbing in the northern town of Southport that killed three children, wounded eight at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class. And after that attack, there was a lot of misinformation that circulated online. The violence was attributed to an undocumented Muslim immigrant. Turns out the attacker is neither Muslim nor an immigrant. And the rioters that we're seeing are a mix of far-right groups. That includes the English Defense League, the neo-Nazi group, British movement.

They have attacked a mosque in Southport, vandalized property. And then further stoking that violence was an AI-generated image that made the rounds on Twitter that depicted a man in traditional Muslim clothing, brandishing a knife at a crying child that was wearing a Union Jack shirt in front of Parliament. So there's just a lot happening here. Yeah, there's a lot happening. Yes, both in terms of, of course, you know, far-right political movement in the UK and also just this now increasingly unavoidable power of AI online disinformation. Yeah, there's so many converging storylines here.

I mean, first of all, it is a very worrying sign of like the continued kind of radicalization of the far right in the UK. And, you know, we talked about the Nigel Farage party. look, even if Nigel Farage and his party aren't, you know, endorsing these kinds of protests, when you see the kind of legitimization of this degree of anti-immigrant views, of anti-Islam views, it can get out of control fast, you know. And so I think I would hope that the wake-up call in the British right is like, you know, don't play footsie with these forces because they're very dangerous. And they're complete bullshit, we should point out, right?

I mean, not only was it just wrong in this case, the person who committed this attack was born in Wales and is not a Muslim, but even if that wasn't the case, it's wrong to stigmatize whole populations. Then the other piece of this is the online piece, because it does, if you read about it, a lot of this spread through really aggressive use of AI generated images. There were kind of some mysterious accounts that were reaching a lot of people. very fast that it had just been started. So whether that was an opportunist far right figure in the UK trying to, you know, stir things up or a foreign actor, you know, that might have an interest in kind of creating divisions in UK society. So the online piece of this is compelling, too, because that could happen here, you know, like you could easily see in a moment of kind of cultural division, like an effort to really turbocharge it. And so we have to be wary of that as well. But I do

hope that this, look, the UK should see its diversity as part of its strength here. And and the kind of anti-Islam, anti-immigrant, anti-refugee sentiments on display are, you know, they're dangerous and damaging and don't, I think, reflect, it should not reflect at all any kind of mainstream politics in the country. Yeah. I mean, my only thought there, too, is that I feel like a lot of the time when we talk about disinformation, you know, you mentioned, like, of course, it could be a foreign actor. But at the end of the day, the reason why this stuff works is because there is so much internal division, right, that it's so easy to light that flame, whether it happened here in the UK and so many different countries.

And so it's like it's something we have to grapple with because it could very easily, you know, kind of tip over. Yeah. And look, it's totally unfair, too. Like the UK has benefited a great deal from immigration. And also, it makes you feel for refugees. populations, in particular, you know, people who left violence to find a literal asylum, you know, all of a sudden they've got like, you know, right-wing mobs walking to the street.

We should all be better than that in countries like the UK and the U.S., you know. All right. When we come back, we're going to hear Ben's interview with Jake Sullivan. All right, we are very pleased to be joined by the National Security Advisor for the President of the United States. Jake Sullivan, Jake, good to see you. Hey, good to see, Ben. All right, a lot going on. Actually, you know, I need to start here. I know you're apolitical, but you're also a Minnesotan, right? So what does it like to see your governor on the ticket? It's kind of exciting day for Minnesotans everywhere, huh?

Well, the lawyers will tell me otherwise that I don't think the Hatch Act forbids me from saying it's awesome to see Minnesotans doing well. And so I'm always going to root for the home team. All right, good. Well, we'll leave you there with the Hatch Act. Okay, so we want to talk about this, this, this, massive exchange that took place, brought back a bunch of people that we really wanted to see back with their families last week. You obviously were in the middle of this. I just want to start by asking you, like, was there, this was so complicated, so many twists and turns, what was the moment, because I remember being in some exchanges, in some negotiations, and in that moment when you know it's actually going to happen. What was the moment in this kind of dramatic series of events where you felt like, oh, this is actually going to get done?

Well, there were kind of two moments. One, when I was at 95%, and then when I was at 100%. And the difference between the two was I didn't get to 100% until I actually got the call from our team on the tarmac in Turkey that the Americans were safely in our custody and the Russian dissidents were safely out of Russia's hands. But the 95% confidence came actually on a, Sunday afternoon in July when the president spoke with the Prime Minister of Slovenia

and the Prime Minister of Slovenia agreed to put the last piece of the puzzle in place, which were these two what they call illegals, two people who were serving undercover for the Russian intelligence services in Slovenia that had been rolled up by the Slovenians. When the Slovenian Prime Minister told the president, you can put them in play as part of this exchange and we can get that done by August 1st, that was when I knew we had it. We had the elements. We had the agreement from the Russians. We had the pieces we had to put on the table. And the Russians had agreed to release the folks that got out. But it was pins and needles for the next 10 days because any number of things could have gone wrong. And the Russians could

have pulled the rug out at the last minute. And so right up until the last, I had this little voice in the back of my head saying, hey, don't get too comfortable. This might not happen. Yeah, and I'm going to ask you a couple questions about the Slovenia call. Because first of all, you know, and again, hatchacked and all the politics aside, but still, like, on a human level, you know, President Biden's dealing with all this kind of convulsion in our own politics that is happening concurrently to him executing the duties of his office. It's, you know, wasn't that call kind of right around the same time he's making a decision? How did you observe his ability to kind of compartmentalize what was clearly a very difficult series of political decisions he had to make with a bunch of difficult national security decisions he was also making?

President Biden's call to the Prime Minister of Slovenia, the key final call to put the last piece in place was at noon on July 21st. At 3 p.m. on July 21st, the same day, the same Sunday, President Biden announced the world that he was not seeking real. So this was actually his last act before going out to the world and saying, I'm going to run through the tape, serve out my term, but I'm not running for reelection. So just imagine that. Imagine what's going through his head. And of course, I didn't know at noon what the president was going to do at three. So as far as I was concerned, this was, you know, it's another day. I connected the call. I was at home and connected the call through the situation room between. the president and the prime minister. They did a great conversation. The prime minister invited him to Slovenia. The president said, yeah, I'll come to Slovenia. I was thinking, how's he going to get to Slovenia? He knew, of course, at that point that he wasn't going to be running for re-election.

And it just goes to show you that President Biden, you know, is the kind of person who is capable, even at the most acute, political and personal moment for himself to fight him. focus on the mission and say, I have responsibility to try to get this done, and I'm not going to let anything deter or distract me from that. And he was completely dialed in on that call. He made it happen. And then he went out and made a big announcement about his political future. But it was, to me, a real testament to the kind of president that Joe Biden is, that he could pull that off that Sunday. Must have been, I mean, just knowing you for a long time. And roller coaster of a day for you, too. Yeah. It was pretty interesting.

I have to say, because I got off the call pretty elated. Like I said, that was my kind of 95% confidence level, as sure as you can be until it's actually done. I was like, holy how, we've actually done this thing. We've got it. After all these months, all the fall starts, all the moving pieces, multiple countries, multiple negotiating sessions, it's all come together. And we got it.

And then I get asked to join a call with senior staff. and all of a sudden it's like, okay, and the president's not running for re-election. So, of course, that's, you know, a big zig after the zag. But, you know, I was really proud of the president. I was proud that day. I was proud when he addressed the country. I'm proud of him today as he's trying to prevent an escalation of the conflict in the Middle East. You know, this is a guy who has always put the country first, who has always thought to himself,

what can I do to serve, even when it comes, you know, at a personal cost to myself. That's what he was doing that day. That's what he's doing every day now. And in a way, it only kind of puts a bigger spring in my step because I feel like I'm serving a guy who history will look at with incredible generosity, both because of what he's accomplished as president, but also because of the character that he's brought to the office. Well, while we're spreading some praise around, I want to talk about allies. you know, which I'll almost say it. You don't have to say it. They're people in the other party

that seem to not value NATO, not value alliances. Germany, Slovenia, you know, they take some hard steps. I mean, Germany led someone who committed murder in Berlin leave their prison. Slovenia, you know, had the achievement of rolling up these illegals, is vulnerable to Russian influence in Russian espionage. Russian influence in their politics. So it's a big step for them to let people go. And we're the ones who were getting our people back. Why do you think they did this?

What does it say about the value of allies? Did we give them something in return? What do we learn about those allies that helped us get this across the goal line? Well, we definitely gave them one thing in return, and that's respect. We actually treated them with decency, with partnership, with the sense that they mattered. That's what Joe Biden has done since his first day in office. A huge contrast to the previous president. And that kind of respect and willingness to build deep personal relationships with our fellow Democratic allies in NATO, that pays dividends. It's not transactional. It's not like Joe Biden

built a relationship with Olaf Schultz just to get to the day where he could make and ask about releasing this assassin from Germany. It's about a long-term investment because having these allies serves the national security interests of the United States in ways big and small. And that's what played out here. And it's true. Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Germany, they all put something on the table to get this done. And they all did that out of respect for the United States, out of respect for the president of the United States, but also out of a view that it's not transactional for them either. It similarly is about their investment in their relationship with us because they know we'll be there for them when the chips are down for them. And that's the

kind of approach to our alliances and to a positive sum vision of American foreign policy that I think makes our country safer, makes our country stronger. And it's a vindication of the argument President Biden has been making over the course of the past three years. And it shows what you can get if you actually just step up and operate with the sense that allies are a benefit and not a burden. And I'd make one other point, Ben, Donald Trump made a real show of saying, I can get the allies to finally step up and do things for the United States. It'll be me. I'll get them to pay. When President Biden took office from President Trump, we had a total of nine allies who were hitting their 2% of GDP contribution to NATO in terms of

defense spending. At the NATO summit that President Biden hosted this year, the 75th anniversary, we were at 23 allies hitting that. And that is to me a testament to the fact that President Biden didn't just go around treating this thing like a protection racket and berate and belitties. other countries. He worked with them. And that's generated greater contributions from those countries to our common defense. And it's also generated big moves like the ones those countries made on our behalf last week to get our people home. So the other thing that, you know, you obviously took the approach to an exchange of just enlarging it until it could get done. It's like a math equation that's to get bigger to get done. The thing that was most interesting

to me and surprising in a way was the inclusion of kind of Russian opposition. figures. Now, this cuts both ways. We've all, we've kind of exhausted the conversation about, like, you know, are you giving something away by, you know, giving someone an incentive to grab people? This is a different one in that, on the one end, I was relieved to see those people out of prisons where they could have, you know, died like Alexei Navalny did. On the other end, you heard, you know, Ilya Yashin say, I don't want to leave Russia. I want to be here. I don't want to be in exile. How do we think about those, or those people Putin wanted out because he wanted them just out of the country? And he wanted to do.

to show that they were less than Russian and that they're gone and that they're kind of somehow corrupted because of their, the U.S. would want to see them out of prison. Was that something we were seeking their release or was that Putin wanting to empty his prisons of prominent oppositions? Well, we were seeking their release. And one of the people, they were on our list of requests for them to be able to get out because we didn't want to see them die in Russian prison like Navalny did. We wanted to see them be able to speak out and fight on. on behalf of their cause and their country, and Ilya Yashin, in fact, in that same press conference,

made the point that he's intending to continue the fight, working with his fellow dissidents and political advocates and democracy advocates. And we felt that creating a circumstance where their lives over the long term would be saved and where they would have a space and a platform to do very important work was a contribution. And I will tell you, I stood in the Oval Office,

with President Biden when he got on the phone with Vladimir Karl Merza. And Vladimir Karl Merz is well known to many of us. He was actually a fellow poll bearer with Joe Biden at John McCain's funeral, a real champion for human rights and universal values and democracy. So he gets on the phone with the president and his wife and two of his three children were in the Oval Office as well. And he said to the president, I thought I was going to die in a Russian prison. I had basically resigned myself to that fate, and I cannot believe that I'm actually free.

And I cannot thank you enough for both the human outcome of being reunited with my family, but the larger values-based outcome of being able to get back to the work that I love so much. And Vladimir also made the point that when he got on the plane, he looked around and he saw his friends, also on the same plane. And he couldn't believe that. He actually said to the president, I thought I was dreaming. I couldn't, it made no sense to me

that I'd come out of prison in the, basically the prison's shower shoes get on this plane and there are my fellow freedom fighters on this plane with me. So it's certainly the case that particularly fairly, and I haven't had the chance to speak with him

and hear more directly his take, that our view in Germany, view who was a key part of this as well, was that we were going to give these folks a real opportunity to get out and be free of the yoke of Russian tyranny and repression within Russian prison. And then they'll be free to make their own choices about what they do on a going forward basis. And Ilya will be able to decide what he wants to do.

So stepping, pulling the lens back even further, you know, one of the things in the past, we've seen negotiations about things like prisoner swaps kind of foreshadow or almost being a confidence building measure for more geopolitical type negotiations. Obviously, the war in Ukraine is ongoing. I was struck by just the clear breadth of context that you all must continue to have with the Russians to pull something off this complicated. You've negotiated multiple now prisoner exchanges, Black Sea grain initiative, you know, all manner of kind of quiet. I'm sure lines of communication. What should we take from this about the possibility of seeing some transition into a negotiation that obviously would have to include the Ukrainians to around the war in Ukraine itself? Does this build the confidence at least each side can keep

agreements? Are there personalities that you've learned about in these talks that might be useful if you enter into negotiation about the war in Ukraine itself? I mean, how do you see the interplay between the two? It's a great question. I will say that we do have confidence in our channels in our ability to talk to counterparts on the other side who can actually speak with authority and deliver on what they say. And that's something real. It's real in the narrow sense that as we have to manage crises or potential escalation or instability or pass messages to one another, particularly authoritative messages that we know we can do that. And that is a,

positive thing for us. When it comes to Ukraine and negotiations over the war in Ukraine, that's a more complicated question, largely because we were in the driver's seat with respect to this prisoner exchange. Ukraine has to be in the driver's seat when it comes to diplomacy with Russia over its own sovereignty and territorial integrity. And so I don't think there's a direct link between what we've just done and Ukraine diplomacy, because there's the key actor here. Ukraine that's ultimately going to have to make its own decisions. But President Zelensky himself has said this war will end through diplomacy. So what we're trying to do is put Ukraine in the best possible position at the negotiating table when it chooses to go there. And when it chooses to go there,

I do believe that we've learned some lessons based on our contacts with the Russians about how we can help facilitate a better sort of set of outcomes in that diplomacy. But I will also say this. it's one thing to negotiate a prisoner's law and it's very transaction it's another thing to negotiate a settlement to a war and my level of confidence that russia's going to come to that conversation in good faith is not not particularly high at this point yeah yeah uh so you know we have to also restrain the extent to which we overdraw the lessons from this particular type of diplomacy to a different, much more complex form of diplomacy that would be involved in negotiations over the war. And now you've got, I just want to end with a couple of questions on, you know, you've got, what, six months left that Joe Biden, or my math might not be perfect, but a few months left of the Biden.

Five a half. So, you know, you've got the countdown clock. And in a weird way, I have to imagine that as difficult as, you know, his decision was, in a way, it sets a sense of like running through that tape, hopefully handing off the baton to Kamala Harris, which will have a certain amount of obvious continuity. But, you know, this is an account. You closed a big account.

Now, I want to end by asking about the two biggest accounts, right? So the war in Ukraine, where would you like to see that on January 20th? How do you want to be handing that off? Like, what's on your kind of punch list for what would be a positive outcome? You know, the war's not going to be over in January, barring a miracle. But where are you trying to get that in your handoff? Well, when we entered this year, 2024, my first order of business was to make sure that there was not a general collapse because of the failure of the United States and other

countries to provide the necessary weapons and assistance to Ukraine. And we got the supplemental done. We are surging the capabilities to the front lines. We are helping Ukraine work to stabilize along that front line and, avoid that collapse. So that's sort of step one. Step two is to build up Ukraine's capacity to continue to impose costs on Russia so that they see that continuing to try to fight this war of aggression in Ukraine is not going to achieve the results they hope to achieve. And then the next step is to help Ukraine be in the best possible position on the battlefield, so it's in the best

possible position at the negotiating table. Now, the Ukrainians will dictate the pace of those negotiations. And I can't predict what will happen before the election or before the end of President Biden's term and what will happen after. All I know is that we need to keep every single day driving to create the best possible situation for them so that they are in a maximum position of strength to negotiate. And that's the baton I'd like to be able to pass off. Now, obviously, there is a significant difference in opinion over U.S. support for Ukraine between one candidate in this election and the other. And we are kind of looking at those contingencies, and I will leave it at that so I don't get myself in trouble. Yeah, no, I get it. And well, President Zelensky himself has said,

you know, November will bear a lot on the war in Ukraine. And then I want, so I want to ask you about Gaza, we've obviously, you know, they've been a bit critical over the months. But you and I, you know, we've had conversations. I'm not, I don't want to litigate that, though. I want to, I want to kind of look forward in terms of clearly we're at a point where, you know, I'm sure they're ongoing ceasefire negotiations. You're obviously, I'm sure you guys are working around the clock to try to avert an escalation in the region. But in the same kind of prism, what would be the place you would like to leave this? You know, I'm not going to bring peace to the Middle East in a few months.

And I will say that in that speech in Etienne Yal gave to Congress, one of the things that I found I was alarmed by is he previewed, you know, you saw like kind of the senior Israeli officials saying he's going to give his plan for Gaza the day after in the speech. So I was like listening for that. And I didn't hear anything that I hadn't heard before, which is we will have open-ended administration. if we don't have security control over Gaza, you know, it's not acceptable to us, which doesn't seem like the kind of, you know, potential plan for Palestinian administration and consideration of even potential air boots on the ground there.

So it seems like Nanyahu is still in a position of a kind of an open-ended control of Gaza. What do you want to see in terms of where Gaza could get to in terms of the next few months that you're still in the job? Well, I'm humble enough to say that predicting, you know, the next few months is exceedingly difficult. So rather than try to put a particular time frame on it, let me lay out where we would like this to end up and what we are driving towards. Step one, get a ceasefire and hostage deal and see through all the phases of that deal so that there is an end to the war in Gaza. I believe that that is close and there are some details left to be negotiated, but there is no reason from a practical perspective that we cannot bring that across the line in the near term. As you said, we have to deal with some immediate issues related to escalation in the region, threats to Israel from Iran, from Hizbollah, from other proxies. We will deal with those.

But then we've got to drive this ceasefire and hostage deal to closure. Once that's done, we do need the reconstruction of Gaza, and we do need to deal with what is an acute humanitarian situation and the profound, almost historic level of rebuilding that is going to be required to give people there a good life. And we have said from the start that we do not want to see Israeli occupation of Gaza, that we want to see a reformed Palestinian authority responsible for Gaza and the West Bank. And ultimately, from there, what we would like to see is a credible pathway to a Palestinian state, living side by side, a democratic Jewish state of Israel. Now, getting from here all the way to there is not easy, but step by step, there are things that we can do. And the other initiative that we've had on the table for some time, where you and I may not see entirely eye to eye either, is that we believe that Israel's normalization with some of its Arab neighbors can actually,

actually aid in the cause of helping deliver tangible benefits and a political horizon to the Palestinian people. And so we see these issues as connected. And we want to make sure that we have a comprehensive strategy for the region in which a future of Palestinian self-determination, freedom, dignity, justice is a critical piece of the puzzle. That all starts with getting the deal, though. We have got to do that because without that, we're not only nowhere with respect to the continuing suffering and war in Gaza, but we're nowhere with respect to being able to bring stability to the region writ large. So step one is that. Step two is a genuine reconstruction effort in Gaza that does not involve open-ended occupation. And step three then is a credible

pathway to the two-state solution that President Biden is frequently talked about. And I believe that that should be integrated into a strategy that involves Israel's relationships with its of neighbors. And the final point I make, Ben, is when I'm out of this job, I hope you'll bring me back on the program and we can have a full account. Yeah, yeah, I'd love to do that. The one thing I do want to ask is, and I'm sure there's probably not that much you can share, but when you have, you know, Hanea is clearly in the negotiation. He's taken off the field. Who, I mean, because it seems to me like there's always been a problem in that Nanyahu once Hamas essentially declare its own defeat as part of the outcome he's, you know, insisting on,

whereas, you know, someone needs to agree to a deal to release the hostages from the Hamas side, but it's probably not going to agree to their own defeat. And now one of the people in the negotiation has been killed. Can this negotiation take place without, like who on the Hamas side can be in the negotiation, given the posture of essentially taking out Hamas's leaders or having them have to kind of declare their own defeat. First of all, I think the way you just captured that, I actually haven't heard that many people who have, and I've answered a ton of questions on Gaza, crystallize that challenge in this negotiation, and I think it's a very insightful point, and it makes this incredibly complex piece of diplomacy.

In terms of your direct question, though, I've been saying for some months now that there are two key decision makers, Bibi Netanyahu and Yahya Sinwa. And Sinwar, ultimately, no matter who's in the chair across from the Qatari's and the Egyptians negotiating, the decision making a decision maker is Sinwar. And actually just today, just in the last few hours, Hamas has come out with an announcement that Hania's replacement as the head of the political office of Hamas will be Sinwar, who kind of will now unify the military and political wing. We'll see if that's ultimately confirmed. That's sort of a hot off the press's report.

But fundamentally, the dynamic that these two men are the ultimate decision makers in this negotiation has not changed despite the dramatic events of the past few days. And we contend with that reality. We work through that reality. And the goal is for both leaders at the end of the day to ultimately agree to the first framework, start implementing it and get us to an end to this conflict. Yeah. All right.

Well, look, I know you're a busy man. You have to run. I will say if you do come out here after, and we can have that long discussion, you have, you know, IP is the name of the game out here. There's at least a movie, if not like a multi-season Netflix show in the hostage negotiation that you just concluded. Any notes for a screenplay that you're taking there? My wife, Maggie, is a huge fan of Ryan Gosling.

So if we could get him to play me, I would really appreciate it. I would make my life better. No, I think he's going to play. He'll play Evan, man. He'll play Evan, man. He'll play Evan. You know, they always have the bureaucrats played by some kind of, you know. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, yeah.

Faceless. Yeah, no. Exactly. Yeah, exactly. No, one thing I will say, Ben, before we close, I'm not even sure I'm allowed to say this, but I'm going to do it anyway. Since you mentioned Hollywood and go-biz and entertainment. also Kermasheva, the Radio Free Europe reporter who was released as part of the deal.

Her 13-year-old daughter, Miriam, had her birthday on August 2nd, the day after Al-Su got released. And she was supposed to go to a Taylor Swift concert in Poland with her whole family that night. In fact, they bought the tickets before Al-Su got taken. She couldn't go because, of course, she had to be at the White House and then in San Antonio with her mother. but I'm hoping that someone listening to your pod knows Taylor Swift and can get four tickets for Miriam and the family so that they can go to Taylor Swift concert. So that's not screenplay, but I'd like to see that happen. I think there's someone listening to get that done.

So we got some swiftly connections here, so we'll see what can happen. Well, look, that's a good reminder at the end of this. At the end of the day, like these are incredibly human circumstances. You know, we've dealt with Alan Gross coming up from Cuba, with Jason Resign and others coming out of Iran. It must have been very satisfying to meet those families. So congratulations to everybody who worked on this, including probably some people whose names will never show up in the newspaper in the U.S. government who were working tirelessly on this. It's a testament to how much Americans don't forget people just because they're in prison in a difficult place. So congratulations, everybody worked on it.

And thanks for joining us today. Thanks, Ben. Ben, that was a great interview. I really hope that some Swifties out there are listening. I know. I know. Anybody out there in the concert business in the Taylor Swift operation? Anyone out there? Yeah.

Just who has a direct line to Taylor Swift. Let her know. We have a little girl who, you know, deserves a Taylor Swift concert more than anybody I can think of. Yeah, absolutely. And also, you know, just one point, like we were playing that soundbite from Trump earlier. congratulating Putin, of course, but you know that he is just so bitter that this didn't happen. Oh, yeah. You know, that this happened under the Biden administration.

Remember, he said he would get Evan out on day one. Of course. Yeah. One more thing you won't get to do. And one more. Including being president. This is, I'm sorry that I had to circle back on this. No, you got the mic. Hold on.

No, I know. I realized why you and I had a miscommunication about the pole vaulting thing earlier. Oh, you were thinking that guy fell? Because you were talking about the people who won the men. I'm just talking about the guy who's pulled out in the way. Oh, I wondered that at the time. I was like, because I'm thinking about victory. You're thinking about humiliation.

I'm not humiliation, but I'm just, you know, I'm here for every viral moment of the Olympics as much as I am. This seems like a particularly viral Olympics, but maybe it's just because now we have that now. But like the grit, the perseverance, the incredible inspiring stories are, you know, are absolutely. No, no, we know what you're in it for now. The triving form of the Olympics, but I'm obviously in it for the hotties. for the bodies. There are a lot of hoties in Olympics, too, in all directions. I'm just going to say that.

I was watching the even just, you know, like some of the men's swimmers, obviously. I feel like those pictures are being viral. Those men look like their bodies were sculpted out of ice or something. Like it's amazing the shape that those guys are in. But did you watch the women's high jump competition? Because I think like you, apparently to be a professional, you know, elite high jumper, I think like you have to have the physique of a model because all of them were like six feet tall, incredibly, you know, muscular and tone.

But like just they're all babes. I was like, oh my God. Like they just kept announcing one after another and I was just dumbfounded. I will say to not just dwell on the haughty piece of it. But no, no, but like the. This is why you don't let me near your microphone. But these people are in that kind of shape. And some of them are like doing sports where they have to like work a job.

You know, it's like how are these people doing this? You know? Because not all these people are like, you know, round the clock. training. Anyway, that's my observation. That's a very good point. Well, like the one, the Gabby, the our 200 runner. Yes. Do you watch her? Yes. She, by the way, stunningly beautiful woman, stunningly effective athlete, and got like a neurobiology degree at Harvard and a master's degree in public health. And like, I'm like, how is this person doing all these things at the same time? Like, how is this person like? That's Gabby Thomas. Gabby Thomas. How is she a world class

athlete and like a world-class public health intellectual, you know, like it's pretty, I mean, made me feel pretty inadequate. You had another thing that makes me feel like I have accomplished nothing in my life. You know, my mother is a three-time Olympic gold medalist. I know. She's three-headed. Yeah. So I really have accomplished nothing in my life.

She's not co-hosted parts of the world, though. Very true. Very true. I just want to say for people who are super into the Olympics, Ben and I are going to do a YouTube video about this. It'll be an original on the Pots Save the World YouTube channel where we will go a little bit more in depth than just hot buds.

Where we're going to get into the IOC, some of the ways of the bureaucracy works. So for the nerds out there, this one's for you. Check us out. All right, guys. Well, thanks for the great show. Ben, thanks for letting me sit here in the studio. Oh, anytime.

This is fun. It's always fun. And Tommy will be back next week. Don't worry, WorldOves. If you want to get ad-free episodes, exclusive content, and more. Consider joining our Friends of the Podcast. pod subscription community at crooked.com slash friends. Don't forget to follow us at crooked media on

Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter for more original content, host takeovers and other community events. Plus find Pod Save the World on YouTube for access to full episodes, bonus content, and more. If you're as opinioned as we are, consider dropping a review. Pod Save the World is a crooked media production. Our producer is Alona Minkowski. Our associate producer is Michael Goldsmith. Our executive producers are me, Tommy Vitor, and Ben Rhodes. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick and engineered by Vesceles Photopoulos. Audio support by Kyle Seaglin and Charlotte Landis. Madeline Herringer is our head of news and programming. Matt DeGroate is our head

of production. Andy Taft is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team, Phoebe William Jones, Kiro Pahlav and Molly Lobel, who upload our episodes at videos to YouTube.com slash Pod Save the World. It was not long ago that two old unpopular men were running for the world's most important job. Since 1992, every American president bar one has been a white man born in the 1940s. It Trump wins. That run could span 36 years. This cohort was born with aces in their pockets, and yet their last act in politics

nearly saw the two main parties accusing each other of wrecking American democracy. As the boomers near the end of their political journey, John Preeto sets out to make sense of their inheritance and their legacy. Search boom from The Economist wherever you listen to your podcasts and unlock all episodes by subscribing to Economist Podcast Plus.