Pod Save the World - Time to call for a ceasefire in Gaza

Episode Date: May 19, 2021

Tommy and Ben do a deep dive into the latest news on the fighting between Israel and Hamas and what the Biden administration has said about it. They also talk about proposed changes to how the military handles sexual assault case, the bourgeoning film industry in outer space, coercive birth control policies in Xinjiang and a prank pulled on those perpetuating the Big Lie. Then Congresswoman Betty McCollum joins Tommy to discuss her bill to condition military aid to Israel.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, please visit crooked.com/podsavetheworld. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast.

Welcome back to Pod Save the World. I'm Tommy Vitor. I'm Ben Rhodes. Ben, I think I hate the Knicks now because you keep beating us. Is that too petty? It is because like the Knicks have sucked for 20 years, Tommy. Yeah, I don't hate the Knicks. Let us enjoy this. You can, you know, if we win a championship, then you can start hating on us again. But, you know, we're the underdogs for now. Yeah. I'll root for you. Even if Bill de Blasio, I mean, like, I didn't, I didn't think he could be more clueless is a New York mayor, but choosing the nets of the Knicks is not a good look. What was that? Why did he dress like an undercover cop? What was he doing?

Long story. Long story. We need a better mayor. We need a better mayor. More complicated than the Israeli Palestinian conflict, which is our main topic today. So we're going to talk about the latest news out of Israel and Gaza, the Biden administration's response, why Biden is more directly calling for a ceasefire, and then maybe what else he should be doing, what's up with Congress, and, you know, how the world and average citizens in the U.S. are reacting. And then we're going to cover some additional news about the U.S. progress in Congress about efforts to prevent sexual assault in the military. Very important story there. A new space race and some more. And then, Ben, our guest today is someone you know well, Congresswoman Betty McCollum from Minnesota.

We talked about her bill that would condition U.S. aid to Israel if it was used to detain kids. And there's some other restrictions in there. And she also tells us the best ways for normal citizens like us to lobby members of Congress to be annoying and to get our voices heard. So it was good. It was a good conversation. Yeah, I mean, the one thing I'd just say about Betty McCollum, I came to know her pretty well in part because I got interested in cleaning up the 80 million unexploded U.S. ordnance bombies. They're called little cluster munitions in Laos. And she was a champion on the Hill for getting more funding for that. she had like a relatively, you know, relatively, you know, sizable, loud diaspora in her district,

but she's a human rights activist. It's her concerns, you know, she's sometimes, I think, you know, cast as someone who has it in for Israel in particular, I think she's, you know, pretty consistently advocated for human rights globally, and I'm sure that informs her on this. And I'll just note, Tommy, because we're two weeks out from my book, so. Please. I won't plug too hard. I'll just say, please, you know, pre-order.

If you've considered clicking that button, we're getting into the window where you'd actually get the book within a couple weeks. So thanks. Today's the day. What are you waiting for? I know. What's the name of the book? Carpe Diem.

After the fall. There you go. Being American in the world we made. So smash that pre-order button. Please smash that button. Knock Don Jr. off the list. I assume he's on there. I don't really know that.

Also, before we get to the news, I hope everyone check. out this week's America Dissected, where Dr. Abdul-Elsaid is joined by Dr. Sanjay Gupta to talk about all of the changes that have been made over the past year in medical journalism to highlight some stories that he wished more people were paying attention to. New episodes drop every Tuesday. Subscribe to America Dissected. It's a great show. We all need a doctor and some scientists to talk to us in terms that we actually understand

because, you know, Ben, I think over the last year, medical advice is confusing people. You may have noticed that. Yeah, although I benefited greatly from Dr. Fauci on Pots of America. Seriously, cleared up a lot of questions I had. I know. I was like, I told Lovett. That was a great interview. It was like so concise.

It was good information. It was really a lot more fun than a normal Fauci interview. Not surprising. That's what I thought. Yeah. Yeah, it was great. It was really well done. Okay.

So let's turn to Israel and Gaza because that's obviously the big story in the world right now. So as of Tuesday morning, the Israeli Air Force has said that Hamas has fired more than 3,300 rockets. And over the weekend, the Israeli military did a briefing where they said they had struck 766 targets. I imagine that number is closer to 900 by now because it's Tuesday afternoon when we're recording. Also on Tuesday, the Israeli government closed a border crossing into Gaza after a mortar attack injured in Israeli soldier. This is going to at least temporarily prevent aid trucks from getting into Gaza. So that's worrisome. The UN said that more than 52,000 Palestinians have been displaced by the airstrikes,

and I've seen reports of over 200 Palestinians killed by the airstrikes, including several dozen children. Also on Tuesday, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza went on strike. It was a big coordinated strike. And the executive editor of the Associated Press has called for an independent investigation into an Israeli strike that leveled a building that housed the AP and Al Jazeera offices in Gaza. So, Ben, before we get to the Biden response, I just wanted to get a gut check from you,

a general reaction to events we've seen over the last few days. You and I were doing a lot of tweeting, a lot of texting over the weekend. I think we both were in a pretty bad place at times. But how are you feeling now? I mean, look, I just think that you hold a mirror up to this and it just does not look good. I mean, the human tragedy of seeing, you know, over 60 children killed. that's what I just can't I keep coming back to Tommy is it how is that worth it what is that accomplishing you know and so you know I we can unpack all different pieces of some

a policy perspective but some things are not complicated and the idea that children should not be killed on that scale is not complicated it shouldn't be happening and and you know that's You know, that's one of many reasons why I wish that the Biden administration was more vocal, not just in calling for a ceasefire. They should absolutely be doing that. But in speaking to the human cost of this conflict, and not just kind of speaking about it in terms of like it's a specific challenge of this Gaza war to get through, but it's part of a broader dynamic in Israel and the Palestinian territories that just feels incredibly unsustainable. And, you know, the language that the Biden team has been using often, you know, refers to a need to get to calm. Well, you know,

calm suggests kind of like, let's just like not have to pay attention to it anymore, you know. I think what this conflict has done even more than the previous Gaza Wars is, is illuminate how seemingly unsustainable the status quo momentum is in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And so again, there's a lot of other things to say here. But that's my main takeaway is that this war needs to come to an end. Efforts need to be undertaken to get at some of the structural issues in Gaza and the broader Israeli-Palestine conflict. The Palestinians turning to nonviolence through a general strike, I think, is a positive movement. And again, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Hamas is an enormous part of this problem. People who turn to rocket

fire as their outlet are never going to achieve anything other than destroying things. Non-violent political mobilization, as difficult as it is, and as much as it doesn't attract as much attention tragically as violence, does feel like a more constructive way to channel so much of the outrage and despair that people seem to be feeling. So that's a We have a lot to unpack, but those were my opening kind of thoughts. You know, before we get to Biden response, I mean, you, I felt like over the weekend that the human cost of this war was unavoidable. I felt like I was constantly seeing images of children being, who were wounded or wailing

parents who lost a child. And then I heard this interview with a Horat's columnist named Gideon Levy, who told the BBC World Service that he believes most is. Israelis are not actually being exposed to what is being done on their behalf in Gaza. And he said that the media in Israel has prevented average people from seeing the toll of the war, both the devastating images of civilian casualties, but also just sort of like the general fear and despair of average people in Gaza who feel like they have no future. That was a very interesting perspective from, you know, an Israeli journalist. The other thing I saw that I wanted to flag up

top was that Tom Cotton made a floor speech suggesting that the AP was colluding. That was colluding with Hamas, and maybe that was why the IDF struck the building, and that was one of the more fucked up things I've seen in a while. So just throwing those out there. Yeah, I mean, on the Tom Cotton thing, just real quick, I, like, you know, you'll see one of these horrific images and you'll think, well, this is something that will finally get through to people. And when you see comments like that from Tom Cotton, you realize that there's nothing that could change his mind, you know, that, that there's nothing that, that, that there's nothing that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that could be done in Gaza that he would find, like, abhorrent or disproportionate. And,

and that's, you know, that's pretty chilling, right? I think the other thing I wanted to say at the top time I mentioned this to you is that, like, I saw some commentary on like, well, why do we talk so much about this? Not you and me, but there's people in general. And again, I think people have to understand that, yes, this gets disproportionate attention in our political immediate discourse. But there's a reason for that, or there's several reasons for that. I mean, the first is that the U.S. is not just commenting on this as some third party without a stake in it. If you give $3.8 billion in foreign military financing to a government, you know, a healthy chunk of their defense budget and frankly subsidizing the creation of an Israeli defense industry, and then there are these repeated wars like this, you're implicated in that. Like, we are a party to this conflict via our defense relationship with Israel.

So that merits attention. Similarly, diplomatically, you know, our obstruction of even a statement out of the UN Security Council on this is we're a party to that as well. I mean, so we can't act like the people are selecting this as something to care about as if, you know, it's just one of many issues around the world and not one in which the U.S. is very much involved. And I think the other thing we have to acknowledge is that this is a unique conflict. And that, you know, at it, you're talking about, you know, deep connections between the United States and Israel. In many ways, the success of the independence and creation of the Israeli state has been a multi-decade project in the United States, but also has to do with like the deep

interconnection between the Jewish community in this country and just Americans in general who've cared about Israel. And then you also have a country that is the home to, some of the holiest sites of three of the major world religion. So this is going to get attention and just lamenting that people pay more attention to this and other things is a way of obscuring the fact that we as American taxpayers are a part of this. And we, as people who worked in American foreign policy, were a part of this. And we should all be examining it as honestly and openly as we can. And I'm glad we create the space to do that on this podcast. Okay, let's talk about what President Biden is doing to manage this conflict. So, you know, Ben, here's the things we know so far. The White House dispatched an envoy to conduct shuttle diplomacy between the two sides. Tony Blinken, the Secretary of State, he's been talking to the Israelis, the Palestinian leaders, basically anyone else that can be helpful.

President Biden himself talked with Prime Minister Netanyahu on Monday, and the White House readout of that call said, quote, the president expressed his support for a ceasefire, which was the first time we heard him use that word, I believe. But, you know, I think it's fair to point out that expressing support for a ceasefire is not the same as calling for or demanding one. And so I think a lot of folks, myself included, are trying to figure out why. Like, it seems like a cost-free thing to say both sides need a ceasefire. So, Ben, I was just going to quickly try to summarize some of the reasons I've heard for why Biden isn't more overtly making this call. You just want to get your take and sort of reaction to those arguments or like anything you're hearing from probably a lot of the same people. So the first thing I keep hearing over again is just a sincere belief that private diplomacy is the best way to get BB Netanyahu to do what you want. You know, you'll hear this from Jen Saki and her on the record statements.

And then others point to the fact that private diplomacy got a ceasefire after eight days in 2012. But a more public diplomatic effort, they say, in 2014, took nearly two months. So they're saying, like, this is just the more effective way to get it done. an official told the Washington Post that they believed Netanyahu was going to continue targeting Hamas until he thinks the job is done no matter what. So I don't know if that is suggesting that, you know, I don't know, maybe a ceasefire is just, the calls for a ceasefire just missed the point. I wasn't totally sure how to interpret that. And then one report said the administration wants to avoid using words like ceasefire abuse. It could be interpreted as treating Israel and Hamas as equivalent actors in this struggle.

And then, you know, one aide told the post that public pressure on Netanyahu might, might just backfire and it might lengthen the conflict. So those are some of the arguments I've heard. Obviously, some of them are contradictory. Right? It's probably different people talking to different news outlets and whatnot. What do you make against these arguments against calling for a ceasefire? And like, I don't know. What's the argument for just calling for one? Yeah. I watched this play out. And look, I was in similar debates in government. It won't surprise people to know that I was usually calling for or urging that we call for things like a ceasefire in this type of situation.

I think that knowing all these folks in the White House and in the administration, and they're good people who I'm sure sincerely want the violence to stop, I could detect in their language, you know, they were kind of defensive yesterday that the quiet, intensive diplomacy is a better way of doing this. It felt like a rationalization. to me. And look, I've been there, right? So I'll be self-critical. When you're in government, you were there, Tommy, sometimes you're doing something that's not really the right thing, but you convince yourself that it's right. Here's the challenge. If you have a public fight with Nanyahu,

if you publicly call for ceasefire, if you're seen as publicly pressuring Israel, that opens a bunch of cans of worms. You know, one political blowback in the U.S. and the Republicans are attacking you, and APAC is attacking you and things like that. Secondly, though, if you're publicly calling for a ceasefire Netanyahu refuses, then what do you do? Well, then you have much, then what? And then what I would say is that then it becomes untenable, for instance, to block UN statements on calling for a ceasefire. And then you're increasing, you know, the political blowback at home because suddenly you're working through the UN. And then suddenly there are questions about, well, if you're using certain language,

about the need for ceasefire, could that be used to justify investigations of Israel and the international community and all these other things? And so because that's a hard thing to do, to take this public, you kind of convince yourself that there's all kinds of rationales to be doing this privately, right? I think that's wrong for a few reasons. One, I think that sometimes the United States, part of our credibility is just being honest about what's happening in the world, you know, and not sounding like your speaking in some foreign language of foreign policy speak or, or, you know, winking in people that, you know, we're doing this privately, but not publicly. So one is just kind of being honest

about what your position is. I think the second thing is, I heard this analysis time and again with then Yahoo. Like if you hug him, if you embrace him, if you give him public cover, you know, you're more likely to be able to get him to do things. That improves. That is bullshit. That is wrong. That is wrong analysis. We have eight. years in the Obama administration of proof of that, you know, like that never happened. Like we, you know, this idea that somehow, you know, we were going to moderate Netanyahu's actions. Netanyahu makes decisions about his actions based on his domestic political standing, not based on like doing favors in return for something that Democratic presence did for him,

you know. And so I just, part of what's so frustrating to me about this is we have over a decade of Netanyahu relentlessly undermining a Democratic president, you know, coming to speak to the U.S. Congress at the invitation of the Republican Speaker of the House without telling the Obama administration to hyperbolicly argue against the foreign policy of the United States of America to the U.S. Congress and then fully embracing Donald Trump. I mean, could not have been a closer partner to Donald Trump around the world. And yet that context seems to be missing entirely from how the Biden team is approaching this. It's as if we're back in 2009 or something, and we don't have 12 years of that record,

never mind the degradation of the Palestinian circumstance over the course of that time as well. So, again, I just think the analysis that we're going to be able to bank some credit with BB, you know, by getting his back, both flies in the face of history and also kind of lets him totally off the hook for, what he's done for the last decade plus here. And the last thing I'd say about this, and this is tied to, again, why do we talk about this issue? This is really undercutting our global standing. I mean, there is a necessity of reestablishing or trying to build up U.S. credibility on human rights and on defense of, you know, the rules-based international order. and we've heard that messaging repeatedly, I think for good reason, and I'm glad from people like

Tony Blinken and Jake Sullivan and even President Biden. But it's so hard when you are one day or speaking about human rights in the rules-based order. And the next day, you're literally the only country that is refusing to call for a ceasefire and seemingly okay, at least publicly, with what's happening in Gaza. And, you know, the circumstances have got hard. or not easier for the United States on these issues after Trump. And, you know, like, it's not like we were perfect on this in the Obama years either. But, like, I just think that I just don't know why when you weigh the risks and benefits of being public in your positions, what is truly gained by being private here. Now, I'm rooting for them. And if there's a ceasefire, I'm sure they'll

say, oh, see, we help broker the ceasefire because it was private. But you still paid a price, You know, even if there's a ceasefire in the coming days, the impression that was given of U.S. support for what's happened in Gaza is not going to go away. And that's just the reality. Yeah, look, I'm running for these guys, too. I hope this private diplomacy approach works. But here's what we know. On Tuesday, the Israeli defense forces chief spokesman said the IDF is not talking about a ceasefire. We are focused on the firing. So it doesn't sound like there's a ceasefire. And over the weekend, Netanyahu said, the military operation will continue as long as it takes to achieve our goals. And then he pointed to statements from the U.S. and other countries where they talked about Israel's right to defend itself and said, they know and we know that our actions are just and necessary.

So to your point, we can try to do this dance where we're privately calling for a ceasefire publicly pledging support for Israel's right to defend itself. But Netanyahu is hugging the U.S. and making us complicit in what's happening in Gaza to to the world. And I think that's creating a very, very challenging messaging framework for the United States that's going to do some damage. Ben, one thing I want to ask you about, which was on, so on Monday's positive America, I talked about that mantra that you and I used to hear all the time that like the U.S. and Israel shouldn't disagree publicly. And I think, you know, to dig deeper into this, what I don't get about that mantra is that it's just totally a historical, right? So two examples.

In 2010, the Israeli Interior Ministry approved the construction of 1600 new apartments in East Jerusalem while Biden was visiting Israel. You and I were there for this. Biden was furious. He said publicly that the move, quote, undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I've had here in Israel. So that was a very public disagreement from Joe Biden. Here's the lead of a New York Times story from August 1982. President Reagan expresses outrage to Prime Minister Monacham Began today over Israel's latest bombing raids in West Beirut, saying the attacks had resulted in needless destruction and bloodshed. So that's two very public examples of the president and the VP disagreeing.

And, you know, like Biden once said, this inscription he wrote to something to BB, said, BB, I don't agree with the damn thing you say, but I love you, which again is confusing because nobody loves BB Netanyahu, right? Like Jim Baker once banned him from the State Department when he was Secretary of State. Joe Lockhart, who was Bill Clinton's press secretary, once said that, quote, Netanyahu is, quote, one of the most obnoxious individuals you're going to come into just a liar and a cheat. he could open his mouth and you could have no confidence that anything that came out of it was the truth. So I guess I'm just trying to understand how like this no daylight approach became the mantra with Bibi Netanyahu,

who was perceived by past administrations as someone who was dishonest. And when there is very recent evidence of presidents and Joe Biden himself disagreeing with bad policy decisions. Yeah. And look, we certainly disagreed. I mean, the whole, you know, the last two years in government of mine were defined in some part by the disagreements over the Iran nuclear deal, right? I mean, it's possible to do this. I mean, it's a truism that bears repeating that if you have friends and you think your friends are doing something wrong, you should tell them. You know, like I don't, like, I don't

why we define a friendship with Israel as a circumstance where we, you know, provide them enormous support and then can't point out if they do, you know, Netanyahu had no problem pointing out when he thought, you know, what Obama was doing was wrong. I think that part of what's changed, Tommy, from certainly the Reagan point, is this really deep-rooted evangelical Christian support for Israel that has become more and more ingrained in the Republican Party, which assures that there is one major political party in this country that is always going to be in lockstep with Israel no matter what. And, you know, the Trump administration was proof of that.

I mean, Mike Pompeo, right, number one enemy of the pod, you know, delivered a speech to the Republican convention with the old city of Jerusalem behind him. I mean, did that happen? Like from the embassy building. I mean, it was not subtle. It was both a message about, yeah, sure, national security, but it's also a wink, wink message to evangelical Christians. And so I think what's happened politically is as the Republican Party has become more and more fervent in its support for kind of the right wing of Israeli politics, that means that the only place for debate about these issues is within the Democratic Party.

And some Democrats are pretty lockstep in their support of Israel, too. And groups like APAC do spend a lot of time and effort making sure that they are, which means that there is always going to be a political cost or political fight of some sort in expressing any critical. criticism of Israel. And I remember feeling this very cutely in the Obama administration, you know, if we had some dust up with Netanyahu, usually at Netanyahu's instigation, you could count on, you know, a week or two of stories that distracted you from your infrastructure message, you know. And that's exhausting, right? It's like, let's just not, let's just not have those fights because, you know, and there's good political judgment to say, you know, why have a feudal fight with Netanyahu when, you know, I can't really change what he's doing anyway, and I want to focus on these other things. And so that's kind of created a situation where there's a perceived cost to any daylight.

But the flip side of that coin, Tommy, is that the situation has gotten so much worse on the ground in terms of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and in terms of the fact of the Israeli government moving further and further to the right, to the point that, like, Democratic constituencies cannot look at this relationship and see themselves in it in terms of blanket support for everything Israel does because they're progressive. They care about human rights. And you see this generational change. An AOC or Greg Meeks now is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee because Jamal Bowman defeated Elid Engel, who was in line to be chair and would have been, you know, I think in lockstep with Israel in this circumstance. Like Joe Biden cannot ignore the reality

that his own base is just going to be more and more uncomfortable. with this. And the fact that you have political difficulties because Republicans will scream at you and some Democrats will be squeamish about this, I'm sympathetic to how hard that is, having been there myself, but it's unavoidable. I want to talk more about the congressional reaction in a minute. But before that, like, I turned to round up some suggestions from like sort of smart people that I was reading or people, you know, that I know about things Biden could or should be doing to help, you know, hasten the end of this conflict. I just want to run a few of those by you and see if, like, any jump out at you as good ideas or bad ideas or things you'd add in there.

So some people suggested just doing more to publicly empower the Egyptians to negotiate a ceasefire. Egypt is talking to both Israel and Hamas. They have actual real leverage over Hamas because they control one of the border entries into the Gaza Strip. Experts think they're the most likely to succeed. Others have suggested asking the various Abraham Accord countries to do more to support the Egyptian negotiations, get them to condemn Hamas, and also figure out ways they can help the Palestinian people, and then use the new leverage they have from these agreements to push the Israeli government to do a better job on restricting settlement construction and all the other underlying issues. There's great NGOs out there that are promoting peace and people-to-people

exchanges that need more help. Some have talked about letting Israel know that after the war ends, the U.S. is just going to be more engaged in reducing the underlying tensions like we saw in East Jerusalem. Others of saying, like, Biden should embrace the John Kerry plan that was laid out at the end of the Obama administration for a two-state solution and potentially stop blocking criticism of the bombing in Gaza or calls for a ceasefire at the U.N. That was sort of like a long laundry list of potential options there. But I wonder if any of those ideas kind of jump out at you as the most worthy of consideration, or if there's better ideas that I didn't list. I'd love to hear those.

Well, I don't, yeah, because I don't subscribe to the view that U.S. public pressure isn't helpful, I, again, I think the quickest way to stop the actual bombing of Gaza, and, you know, and the Hamas rocket fire, by the way, is to publicly call for a ceasefire and to kind of create an inevitability of momentum. Because I'd say even in 2012, by the way, Tommy, I was involved in that. And what we did very publicly is Barack Obama, I remember sitting in Cambodia in a room with Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Tom Donnellin, and Jake Sullivan. And having it. Yeah, I was there.

Yeah. In that hotel with the, we went from Aung San Suu Cheese House, this like incredible, this incredible, amazing emotional event to a smoke-filled fucking casino in Cambodia where we're trying. We were across, we were across the street from the Camer Rouge food mart. I remember that very well. And everyone's just sitting around being like, oh, my God, how do they broker the ceasefire? No, no, that's exactly right. And because basically what happened was we had to decide, Obama had to decide, whether to publicly send Hillary Clinton on a plane to Israel to negotiate a ceasefire, right? And we knew that that was basically, that was public pressure, right?

I mean, you don't send your very prominent secretary state out there. She can't come back without a ceasefire. Everybody knows that. Nanyahu knows. at, right? So the decision, which then I had to announce, I remember, in that smoke-filled casino, I remember the absurdity of walking through a bunch of, like, Cambodian guys playing slots and chain smoking cigarettes to go announce, like a, that Hillary Clinton was flying to Israel. That was publicly calling for a ceasefire because it was putting Hillary Clinton on a

plane to go there, knowing that she wasn't going to leave until we got one, right? So people... So you disagree with this idea that 2012 was a more private process and 14, yes. private that it was Hillary Clinton there, but what the hell do you think she was there to do? We publicly announced that she was going there to pursue a ceasefire, you know? So that's why I do end the conflict. I think beyond that, the couple things I point out, the situation in Gaza itself, I mean, because everybody always acts like there's kind of either you're solving the two-state solution or there's nothing to be done.

The situation in Gaza is completely unsustainable, right? And what is that situation? Like, Hamas wins an election in 2006 and basically takes control of the guy. Gaza strip in 2007. Israel imposes a land-errancy blockade and imposes really strict limitations on anything they can get in and out of Gaza. And this is why people say it's like living in an open-air prison. The people there do not have freedom of movement. They have electricity for a few hours a day. They have water for a few hours a day. There's like 40% youth unemployment. like there's no future if you're a young person in Gaza.

Never mind the trauma of these periodic wars, right? It is a humanitarian catastrophe that's been ongoing for more than a decade. And we would painstakingly negotiate with Israel to let more goods in because they would say anything could have a dual use, a military purpose and a civilian purpose couldn't get in. And that was like, you know, concrete for buildings, right? I mean, and so never mind that people from Gaza couldn't sell their goods into Israel and the West Bank and things like that,

that a resident of Gaza, whose Palestinian, could not go to the West Bank. If they had family there, they just were cut off from those people. That is humanitarian situation is untenable. Hamas, yes, has rockets and has continued to rearm with these rockets. But I would argue for the sake of Israel's security. And yes, I associate myself with everybody who says it is untenable for a nation-state to have rockets fired indiscriminated citizens. I'd say, first of all, that's why we built an Iron Dome system that protects against these rockets, which I'm very proud is saved incalculable number of Israeli lives. But also, clearly the blockade is not stopping the component parts from getting into Gaza, the tunnel networks in other ways in which they're getting

the pieces of these rockets. So what you're doing is you're punishing the residents of Gaza without stopping the flow of whatever is needed to build these rockets from Iran or whoever else into into Gaza, I think you have to try a different approach here. And frankly, I think you'd be more likely to dislodge Hamas if you open up space for the people of Gaza. They don't have a choice right now. They're just stuck there with Hamas, you know? So I would, as much as I'm a skeptic of the Abraham Accords and the kind of motivations of those involved, this is one to turn to the Emirates and the Gulf countries and say, what is a big initiative to try to, try to, dramatically improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

And in doing so, hopefully, empower different political actors in Hamas so that you're both trying to improve the humanitarian situation for Palestinians in Gaza. And you're trying to deal in a different way with this, the challenge of Hamas. Just on your Gaza point, just two other things. I mean, yes, Hamas did win elections in Gaza, but not everybody voted for them. I think that's an important point, right? There's not like universal support for Hamas among God as citizens. I'm sure a lot of them hate them in large part because of the realities of the total lack of freedom of movement that you talked about, right?

Like if you're a parent with a bunch of small kids and you are just trying to avoid shelling, you have nowhere to go, nowhere to go. The Navy is by the sea. I mean, I've heard parents, I was listening to an interview today where a father had taken his kids into just the densest part of the city because it was his hope that that's where they'd be safest because he just hoped that the airstrikes would. wouldn't hit the most dense urban parts of the Gaza Strip. I mean, that's a hell of a risk to take. That's a scary reality. There's no escaping the shelling for just the innocent families. Yeah, and those elections were over 15 years ago. Some of these kids getting killed, weren't born when they took place. The Palestinian Authority had been discredited in a lot of ways. Yeah, I don't think that you can assert that today we know that if the Palestinian people in Gaza had

actual choice, you know, that they, that they would, you know, I think there's plenty of reason that they wouldn't choose Hamas. And the reality is what you see in Palestinian politics with this general strike today is kind of a leaderless movement, which is great, you know, because the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have both failed the Palestinian people in a lot of ways. Obviously, the Palestinian Authority has been a much more responsible actor relative to Hamas. But, yeah, I'm glad you pointed that out, because I don't want to lead people with the impression that there's some kind of like, you know, massive popular support for Hamas among Palestinians. There's not.

I mean, the last thing I was going to say, Tommy, this has been really frustrating to me, is John Kerry did put out these final status positions for the United States, right, like a new step for the United States to publicly declare, here are positions on the future borders of an Israeli and Palestinian state, the future security arrangements of a two-state solution, the idea that the U.S. supports Jerusalem being the capital of both countries, right, and the position on the right of return. I don't know why Joe Biden hasn't just, I mean, John Kerry is in the Joe Biden administration. Tony Blinken was the deputy secretary of state at that time. Obviously, Joe Biden was vice president. I do think that gives you at least a foothold

when there is such kind of despair about a Palestinian state, just reassert, hey, here's what we believe the outcome of these negotiations should be, or at least the starting point for these negotiations should be, so that there's something public in the world about what the position of the U.S. government is with respect to a two-state solution that won't solve the problem. But I do think it gives you some diplomatic and moral authority to say, like, here are positions, and we think you guys should negotiate on the basis of these positions. And this is informed by, and that Kerry made clear in that speech, that wasn't just John Kerry. That was. That was informed by the Camp David process under Bill Clinton. That was informed by, you know, the

Annapolis process under George W. Bush. That was informed by the carry process under Barack Obama. We've been at this for a long time. If you really want a two-state solution, people know what it looks like. And I don't know why, you know, we took a lot of political heat for abstaining from a UN Security Council resolution that condemned Israeli settlement expansion and putting out those positions. We took that heat in part in the hope that the next. ex-democratic administration that we were doing them a favor, that we're essentially handing off a baton to them. Here, look, guys, we're giving you these publicly stated positions, so you don't have to go through a laborious process of taking the political hit for coming out with this. So I do think

that's something that they should embrace. Yeah, two more quicker things on this before we get to other topic. So there's a lot of movement in Congress, and you'll hear about this even more in my conversation with Congresswoman McCollum, but you're starting to see calls for Biden to do more to broker's ceasefire and more calls to just generally exert pressure on the Israeli government. So AOC over the weekend tweeted some pretty harsh criticism of Israel itself saying, quote, apartheid states aren't democracies, end quote. And she criticized the Biden administration for vetoing a U.N. call for a ceasefire saying, quote, if the Biden admin can't stand up to an ally, who can it stand up to? Separate from that, 28 senators issued a statement calling for a ceasefire. That's led by John

Ossoff from Georgia. Senator Schumer of New York endorsed the call for a ceasefire. Senator Bob Menendez said he was deeply troubled by civilian casualties and the destruction of the building that has the Gaza Bureau for the AP and Al Jazeera. Those are two like very pro-Israel U.S. senators. The House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Representative Gregory Meeks, said he's sending a letter to President Biden requesting a delay in the sale of $735 million worth of missiles to Israel. So, Ben, I mean, to me, this seems like a very different reaction out of Congress than past conflicts. Did you agree? Yeah, that never happened when Barack Obama was present. And look, it's a party changing, but this is above all the creation of BB Netanyahu, right?

I mean, I don't know how many times we've been warning for the last decade that he was putting support for the Israeli government at risk in the United States through his policies and his actions. We cannot ignore that this is an extreme right-wing guy who's said publicly that there'll be no Palestinian state on his watch and that his expanding settlements, including into incredibly provocative places like Sheikh Jara, and is basically telling Democrats to go fuck themselves so the better. part of a decade. And then you're surprised that Democrats are like, wait a second, pause, you know, why are we shoveling ever more military assistance to a government that is ignoring us, in many cases insulting us, as certainly was the experience in the Obama years, while clearly having no interest whatsoever in the two-state solution that was supposed to be the basis of how we thought about the Palestinian issue for the last 20, 30 years, right? So this, Let's be very clear. This is a creation of Bibi Nanyahu's, right? Democrats are reacting to the changes

of the Israeli government more than anything else. And I think it's healthy. And I think Meeks deserves a ton of credit, right? He's been traditionally pretty pro-Israel guy, but I think he's right to say, wait a second, like, if I've got my constituents and the Democratic caucus concerned about the civilian casualties in Gaza, I want to know what this arm sale is and what to what end are these weapons can be put. Those are legitimate questions for Congress to ask. Yeah, it also, I think, shows why elections are so important. I think that, you know, Elliot Engel probably would have taken a different approach if he was still the chairman of that committee, but he lost to Jamal Bowman in a primary recently, and nothings are quite

different. So primaries matter. Last piece on this. So over the weekend, there were protests in over 20 cities across the U.S. about what's happening in Gaza and then just a U.S. policy towards Israel generally. People also took to the streets internationally and in London, Paris, Sydney. elsewhere in solidarity. There were some really unfortunate videos of someone in London, I believe, shouting anti-Semitic comments that are obviously disgusting. But I think most of these marches and conversations were about solidarity with the Palestinian cause. In Los Angeles, where crooked media is based, thousands of people showed up to a rally outside of the federal building. Our producer Jordan Waller attended this rally. She interviewed some folks. So here is a clip

of what it sounded like. Some of the people she talked to, the first person you'll hear, is a young Palestinian-American woman who came out with her boyfriend and her eight cousins. What brought me out was that I am Palestinian. I'm a full Palestinian citizen, and I'm a Palestinian on both sides, so I have to support, of course, because I can't really do much over here, and this is the most I can do as a citizen of the United States. I hope that with all this awareness that's coming up right now, that the U.S. government will be able to actually acknowledge what's happening in Palestine for once and work on sending less money and budgeting, and sending less money to Israel and supporting their military. School never taught me anything. The only reason

I know anything is because I am full of Palestinian and my parents have taught me and I've seen it my whole life. I just hope that, you know, the government will actually make change for once and And hopefully this oppression is over sometime soon and not just in Palestine, but all over the world where the U.S. government is aiding other countries to kill their people. So I just hope there's some change made in the future. My name is Julia. I'm from Riverside and I'm Mexican, but we stand with Palestine because what they're doing is not fair. This is their land. And they're not being like having our human rights.

They're not giving Palestinians their human rights. If you turn on the news, they're not really giving much of the side of Palestine. It's all about Israel. And there's two sides to every story. And they're not seeing showing how much the Palestinian people are suffering from this. They're just putting what Israel is going through. My name is Rick. When I go to public meetings, I introduce myself as a recovering Zionist.

It is an untenable way of government to raise someone one people's rights over another people's rights is absolutely unacceptable to me anywhere, anytime, including there, and especially there because it misrepresents us as Jews. The Jewish people is not and has never been, in a majority opinion, that that Israeli racist way of governing other people is just. It's not just, and we will see it down. Israel is at the high point. It is still at the high point of ethnic cleansing and has been doing it continuously since 1948, and we've got to stop it because it's not really benefiting anyone except a few creeps like Netanyahu and the arms manufacturers. They win every day. And my friends on both sides of this

lose every day. The Jews and the Palestinians lose. So Ben, you know, like last thought on this. I mean, it's interesting how quickly this became an international cause, sort of like, you know, the Black Lives Matter protest did. And I guess this seems to suggest that Jared Kushner was wrong when he said that the conflict is, quote, nothing more than a real estate dispute. It seems a touch bigger than that at the moment. Yeah, it matters to people for the reasons I talked about earlier. And I just, you know, the any-semitism is awful, right? And it has no business in this world. And any-semitism has been at the root of so many of the most horrific things that have happened for centuries.

And so the first thing is, you know, I've made clear too that the right-wing anti-Semitism, you know, it needs to be condemned is quite insidious too in the white nationalist movement. But if you are any Semitic, like, you are doing no favors for the Palestinians or anybody else, and you have no business being a part of any effort to support human rights.

So go fuck yourself, okay, to the anti-Semites out there. I think the second thing is the, you know, the emotion that people feel, I just want to validate, like, so much of this comes from people caring about Israel, right, and wanting it to succeed and being worried about where it's going. Because what is the future five, 10, 20 years from now, right? If they don't deal and adjust an equitable way with the Palestinian issue, with this massive asymmetry of power, I think that's what's so worse than the people. You know, I think we should have huge empathy for Israelis as well, not just because rockets are fired at them. You know, I don't like the shorthand of all Palestinians are terrorists, right, that the Palestinians are firing rockets. I also don't like to shorthand, by the way, that all Israelis are just people who have rockets fired at them or people that you blanketly support Nanyahu's policies. I've been in touch with a bunch of my friends in Israel. You know, I had one telling me about having to go into bomb shelters with her. her three kids and who are young, and having to explain to them the whole Israeli-Palestin conflicts.

And I had this image, you know, because I've got a six-and-four-year-old. I was trying to imagine being in a bomb shelter, trying to explain to them why they were there. And by the way, she said, trying to explain why Palestinian kids were in even more danger, right? I didn't like living as an American under Trump. I didn't like the feeling of having someone who was so contrary to my values in charge of the country. And the fact that he was democratically elected made that even worse. I'd like us to express solidarity with the millions of Israelis. And again, it may not be a majority, unfortunately.

But the millions of Israelis who feel victimized in many ways, yes, they're worried about rockets flying at them, but they also look at a government that doesn't reflect their values either. And it's so important that we don't lose sight of that. They're solidarity with Palestinian people who are suffering greatly, but there's solidarity with Israelis who don't want this either. And ultimately, as with all these other mass movements that we talk about all the time on the show, that never quite fully succeed but feel like they're making progress, like a nonviolent effort over time to pursue a just outcome is worth it.

It's worth it. No matter how hard it feels. because if you give up on that, then you know you're succumbing to hopelessness. And that's going to be bad for everybody. Israel, Palestinians, America, human rights around the world. Yeah. Look, I mean, as frustrated as we all were with Donald Trump as president when he didn't win the popular vote. I mean, Net Yahoo has been prime minister for years and he has not come close to winning popular vote.

No, he gets like 30%. Yeah, like who's getting like 30%. I mean, look, the sad truth is that their parties to the right of Likud that are picking up more and more seats. But anyway, BB sucks. He's corrupt. He's a racist. Get rid of him. Okay. Let's turn to some important news about legislation and Congress that would change how the United States military prosecutes sexual assault. The context here is tragic that there's an epidemic of sexual assault within the U.S. military. The number of cases reported each year has risen since 2006 when the conviction rate is extremely low when cases are actually charged. percent in 2019. Senator Kirsten-Jillabrand of New York and a lot of other great activists have been arguing for years that the way the military handles these allegations is actually part of the problem. So right now, commanders, like the person above you, the person you report to, get to decide

whether sexual assault allegations against their subordinates go to trial. So that can discourage victims from coming forward because they don't want to like tell the boss and face retaliation, or it could lead perpetrators to getting more lenient treatment because their commanders argue that they have otherwise strong performance records. So what Senator Gillibrand's bill does is it takes that power out of the chain of command and instead puts a decision to charge these cases in the hands of independent military prosecutors. So Gillibrand has been just doggedly working on this issue for years and her efforts gained some additional steam recently when Republican Senator Joni Earst agreed to co-author a new version of the bill. now we have 61 senators, including 18 Republicans, signed on as co-sponsors, which means the Gillibrand bill is bipartisan and it's filibuster proof. President Biden has pledged, quote, an all-hands-on-deck effort to combat sexual assault in the military. Secretary of Defense,

Lloyd Austin, is convened to review the expected to recommend decisions on these trials and how to fix the process. So more work to do, but hopefully this bill is going to move quickly. And again, just huge credit to Senator Gillibrand for all her work on this over the years. Yeah, I mean, the one thing I'd say, Tommy, is that way back when, this shows you, you know, how long this has been going on, when my wife and Norris was a Senate staffer, not that long ago, but it was, you know, she was working for Barbara Boxer. Boxer was working with Jill Brown on this very issue. And, and, and, and I, I remember hearing her frustration at this, because really there's, they've tried the other ways.

They've tried, you know, the military's tried to keep this in the chain of command, keep this in the kind of more traditional military. Yeah, reform. It doesn't work. It does not work. You know, and by the way, we did not do enough on this in the Obama years. You know, we, we, because we wouldn't take this. What, what people have learned is you have to take this step of removing it from the chain of command.

And so, you know, commend Jill O'Brien and everybody else in this effort. And hopefully this gets, gets done. And it's common sense. Like, you know, you should have an independent mechanism to review this rather than, you know, keeping it all inside, you. the kind of somewhat opaque military justice system, which can be wonderful on some issues, but on this has not met the mark. Yeah, the data has shown that it's failed, so very overdue change. Ben, we have some fun space news this week.

So first, Chinese state media reported that China has successfully landed a rover on Mars, so that would make China the second country to do so after the U.S. Their rover is going to do a bunch of scientific missions, and then it will conduct a three-month mission to look for signs of ancient life. So look, we wish our Chinese astronaut friends the best of luck. I will say that it would be a lot cooler if they also had a little space helicopter hanging on that thing. But, you know, get them next time. Second, there's a new space race between the U.S. and Russia.

Okay, and this time they're competing to see which country can be the first to film a movie in space. So last year, Tom Cruise and NASA announced that they were collaborating to film a movie on the International Space Station or ISS. Ross Cosmos, I hope I said that right. Mike McFaul, correct me if I'm wrong, the Russian Space Agency announced that they, too, will film a movie on the ISS about a surgeon who goes to space

to operate on an astronaut too ill to return home. Ben, are you disappointed that Stephen Seagall is not included in any of this? He seems like an obvious choice, but he was left off the roster. Well, I mean, I'm actually like, well, first of all, congratulations to the Chinese, you know, the more rovers to marry her.

It's a great human achievement. I know, Tommy, I was thinking like, we talked about Putin playing hockey. Why isn't Putin like the star of the movie in the space station, you know? Get your house up there. Yeah, yeah. I mean, you could go up there. I mean, or maybe, like, you should have, we could have a crossing of the streams. And like, you know, if we're really in the Cold War with Russia, like Tom Cruise is in some battle of wills with the Russians in the space station at the same time, you know.

That'd be cool. Friendly. You know, no actual, you know, we want to be careful up there. But maybe you. We could do, they could play chess at up there. Yeah, yeah, like exactly, like a Cold War era, like chess drama on the space station or something. Bobby Fisher. But then at the end of the movie, after, you know, 90 minutes of competition, they discover that they have to work together to fix something on the outside of the space station and then they make peace between nations.

Like, that's the kind of movie I get behind. They have to work together to get Elon Musk to stop. weeding so that he'll fix the rocket that can bring them home. Yeah. Look, there's no bad ideas in a brainstorm. We're just pitching, like, movie studios, call us. Yeah, yeah, we're here. We're available.

They're trying to get the Tesla off the rocket that Elon raunched because they want to resell it for, as an NFT. It's called, you know, POTS of the World Productions. We're ready to go. Okay. Well, the UFOs are out there. I mean, the UFO news, like, is just passed like a fart in the wind, you know? I mean, man, like, I still haven't read the New Yorker story because, like, sometimes they

get a little intimidated by like the 10,000 words. I'm excited. Yeah, it's, it's, well, what's crazy about it is like it's about not just the UFOs themselves, but like the kind of subculture of these people who've been been at this for like a really long time, who are now being like validated. And, you know, it's got to be pretty satisfying to spend decades like insisting that there are these UFOs. And then suddenly like, everybody's like, oh yeah, they're right. There are these UFOs, you know. Yeah, totally. Absolutely. Yeah, my cousin Wendy sends me, uh, all the space news that pops up. I just got to read the really long New Yorker story. Ben, one slightly darker story before we get to fun stuff to wrap up. So we have talked a lot on the show

about the ongoing genocide in Xinjiang province in Western China, where the Chinese government is systematically trying to eliminate the Uyghurs and other Muslim minority groups. A lot of that coverage has focused on China putting like a million or more Uyghurs into these re-education camps and reports of the horrible treatment of detainees. But a new report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute is highlighting the impact of another tactic that the Chinese government is trying to use to just wipe out the Uyghurs and others, which is coercive birth control. That includes forced abortion, sterilization, and detentions. And as a result, according to this institute, the birth rate across the region fell by nearly

half, 48.7% in the two years between 2017 and 2019. It fell even more in areas with the largest concentrations of Uyghurs and other minorities. according to the Associated Press, that is the sharpest known decline in birth rates of any territory in recent history. You might remember back in January, the Chinese embassy in the U.S. tweeted a link to a report, big air quotes in report there. I think it was in Chinese state media that argued this drop in the birth rate in Xinjiang resulted from the eradication of religious extremism, which makes no sense. The tweet literally said, study shows that the process of eradicating extremism, the minds, of Uyghur women in Xinjiang were emancipated and gender equality in reproductive health were promoted and making them no longer baby-making machines that are more confident and independent.

That was one of the more disgusting things ever tweeted by, you know, a state-run account. It was widely condemned. I guess, I don't know, there's just this accumulation of evidence that this genocide is happening. We talk about it often. We always try to figure out, like, what the world could be doing about it. and I just, I'm at a loss. When you read something this horrific, I'm just at a loss as to how there isn't just more of an urgent focus.

But here we are. I think that, like, if everybody, we mentioned the New Yorker story that was recently out, but like inhabiting the experience of one woman who did nothing wrong and was thrown into these camps and forced into small cells with other women, denied food, medical care, basically psychological torture, forced to consume all this propaganda. But then, you know, even more harrowingly, once released, nobody wanted to associate with her because, you know, you could get thrown in camps for talking to someone who was in camps, like the psychological torture of this on top of the fact that you have things like, you know,

forced sterilizations and people disappearing. This is no joke. I mean, this is a genocide of a people, at a minimum, a cultural genocide and a mass atrocity in terms of human rights violation. And, you know, I think we have to care as much about this as any other issue with China. I mean, if you look at the actions of the U.S. government, you know, we've taken more forceful action, you know, on trade disputes, right, than on this. That sends a message that we care more about, you know, the trade than this. To give the credit, you know, where credit is absolutely due, I think Tony Blinken and Jake Sullivan have much more forcefully raised this issue, multilateralized it, imposed sanctions.

So the trend line is good, I think, in terms of the U.S. elevating this. But, I mean, when you look at the scale of this and when you look about what does it say, a government that will do this, we'll do other things. You know? Yeah. They will do other things within their own territory and abroad. And, and I'm not trying to, you know, be some hyperbolic kind of, you know, I want to have a Cold War with China guy. I'm just like, this is what we're looking at, you know.

And having spent a lot of time on my book looking at this, it just, all I can say is like, we need to, this needs to be top priority, right? And because, you know what, certain things are just well beyond the pale. Yeah, it is a profound evil. And I totally agree with you that President Biden and Jake and Tony, they really have, you know, up their game and focus more on this as opposed to President Trump who basically told Xi Jinping that he was doing the reopening. Yeah, you should keep it up. He cared more about soybean sales than this, you know. Yeah. Literally.

last thing. A group of more than 100 retired generals signed an open letter that regurgitated some of the most absurd lies and conspiracies about the 2020 election. And, you know, this is really, it's a worrisome reminder that the U.S. military is just not immune to this stuff. They're not immune to lies. They're not immune to conspiracy theories. They are not immune to disinformation. But what I found really upsetting, Ben, is that one of the most celebrated and revered members, of the U.S. Navy actually signed on to this letter. This was Rear Admiral Jack Mehoff, added his name into the list of distinguished members of the military who weighed in. And, you know, like, Jack Mehoff is on board. So, obviously. We're not just kind of growing out here. Like, this actually happened. It is on, the name is on the list. It is there. Rear Admiral was a

nice touch, by the way. Yeah, so some prankster somehow got in touch with the organizers of this crazy letter with these crazy conspiracy theories. And they were so thirsty to just add another name to their bullshit that Rear Admiral Jack Niehoff was fully represented on this, on this letter. So fantastic work. Like you've got to find it can be a dark world out there, right? This is like a tough pod. But like I'm glad that they're heroes out there in the world that that are able to look at a situation like that. letter circulating and get this done. Like, congratulations to you. Thank you. Thank you for your service,

you know. Thank you for your service to all the weirdos. I probably should have stacked together the space story in Jack Mehoff and not put the Uighur story in between. That's my mistake as a producer of the show. But when we come back, we will have my conversation with Congresswoman Benny McCollum about her bill to condition USA to Israel. So stick around for that. We are so excited to be joined by the Congresswoman from Minnesota's fourth district, Congresswoman, Betty McCollum, thank you so much for doing the show. That's great to be here with you. So I'm so excited to talk with you because, you know, listeners hear so much about what the White

House is doing or not doing when it comes to foreign policy. But I feel like we have far less visibility in conversation about the role Congress plays or can play. So I really appreciate your time. The first question for you is you introduced this bill called the Defending the Human Rights of Palestinian children and families living under Israeli Military Occupation Act. Can you just give us a sense of what that bill does and why you wanted to introduce it? Well, UNICEF and some human rights groups came into our office back several years ago,

and they had a report on the military detention of these young children. And these young Palestinian children were being rusted out of their home. Some of them were having hoods put over their head. they were put in stress positions and then transported to military detention centers, Israeli military detention centers. They did this without a parent knowing necessarily where they were going. They did that without an attorney at the other end. Some of these children were tortured.

Many of them just broke down and would sign a confession in a language that, you know, in Hebrew. And these are Palestinian children. Hebrew is not their language. And so when I found out about that, I was like, you know, outraged. I mean, I've been speaking up on child labor rights all around the world, working on maternal child health all around the world, and to see this was just disturbing to me. And how are we going to stop the cycle of violence to continue

when children are not only witness in their parents at lines, you know, being searched? and humiliated. But then when the children are taken, on top of it, we were just creating another generation of violence. And having had the privilege of working a little bit on the Northern Ireland peace process and hearing the moms and the kids talk, I just knew I couldn't be quiet about what was going on in the Palestinian occupied area. Yeah. So let me just ask you about some of the criticisms of, you know, this bill and this policy, because I think it's important to try to surface those. President Biden said during the campaign that cuts or conditioning U.S. aid to Israel would be irresponsible.

I think he used the words outrageous. He said it was a gigantic mistake. Similarly, you know, APEC, I think, called your bill, unnecessary and redundant, and they believe it would undermine U.S. interests and make peace less likely. Like, what's your response to those who say that U.S. aid to Israel shouldn't be conditioned or cut in any circumstance or that, you know, legislation like yours is unnecessary. We condition money all the time. We condition money with our fellow citizens if it's unemployment. We condition money for loans to businesses. We put conditions on some of the money for COVID.

We condition money and aid to our fellow citizens. We also condition money and aid to foreign governments that we work with, whether it was health care aid during petfar or military aid, you know, whether it's going to the Philippines or whether it's going to Israel, we do have the Leahy law in place. But there's different things going on with the money that we give Israel. First and foremost, my bill, my defense bill, will continue to have money in there for Iron Dome. I don't want to see any Israeli child living in fear. I don't want to see any Israeli mom and her little. ones escaping for their life. Because Hamas is, you know, part to blame in this. Hamas is not seeking peace. They're creating violence. So we've got the extreme right in Israel. We've got the extreme, you know, with Hamas. And so they're the only ones benefiting on this.

So what we can do for security, you know, for Israeli children, I want them to live in peace and harmony, too. But going back to your question about conditioning, we, you know, we sell equipment to Israel. We put conditions on equipment that we sell to other countries saying that they can't be used for human rights abuse. But then we have cash payment to Israel, no strings attached. And so I want to make sure that not one penny of that is helping to subsidize or be used in any way to take land away from Palestinians. to destroy Palestinian homes and to detain of Palestinian children and military detention centers. And people will say, oh, well, you know, the Leahy's laws there.

We make everybody else that we put conditions on money to show us where the money's gone and how it's been spent. And I see those reports now on a regular basis. Israel shouldn't be treated any different. Can you explain what the Leahy law is? So the Leahy law is a human rights law saying that, that if we are part of being support to another country when it comes to military, that human rights abuses aren't going to be occurring. And so people say to me, well, prove to me where the human

rights abuses occurred. And I say, well, prove to me that the money hasn't been used for human rights abuse, transparency, and an audit. So I noticed last evening, Monday evening, there was a report that Representative Gregory Meeks, who's now the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said that he is going to send President Biden a letter requesting a delay in the sale of more than $700 million of precision-guided missiles to Israel. Did that surprise you? I mean, that felt like I don't recall seeing an effort quite like that to restrict military sales to Israel as quickly during one of these conflicts?

I'm not on that committee. I talked to a couple of members who are on the committee and other members. Members were quite taken back and very disappointed, and I think you've seen that in the numbers, both in the Senate and the House, that President Biden wasn't calling for an immediate ceasefire. And so I think that that in part is a way

to get the president's attention. And I also think members of Congress are very alarmed at what is happening. happening in in in in Gaza. We have seen you know, um, American AP Al Jera. Um, some of the, the buildings where a lot of the media was reporting out, right? Reporters have always been on both sides, uh, of, of a conflict when they can be or a war when they can be. And the fact that that building was destroyed and, uh, you know, AP's voice was taken down, uh, was another thing that really alarm members of Congress. And so they want to see a stop to this. But the only way it's

really going to stop, this is just a cycle of ongoing violence, right? Another settlement's built, there's more violence. Children are detained. There's more violence. A land of water rights are taken away from Palestinians, more violence. And the heart of that is the occupation. So if we want to see the violence come to an end, the United States has to assert itself as an honest broker working with some other nations, whether they be Scandinavian, Nordic, or EU, whoever wants to come to the table and say the occupation needs to end. So, you know, I appreciate you saying that because, look, we're all hoping for a quick end to this fighting, but to your point, I mean, once that happens, the Israelis and Palestinians will

be living with the aftermath of all this violence and all the tensions that have flared within Israel, within the West Bank, within Gaza, and the Palestinian Authority will still be run by President Abbas, who is not proven to be particularly competent. And then Bibi Net Yahoo will probably run for a prime minister for a fifth time in two years. And it just, it feels like this recipe for the status quo. And I'm wondering what else you think the U.S. can or should do to more forcefully promote peace to try to snap us out of that cycle that you were just talking about. I think we have to realize the government that we're dealing with in Israel. And we were having a conversation here in the office.

And it was like, you know, the eight years of Obama and four years of Trump, we were a different country with Trump at the helm. And I think some of my colleagues are living in a romantic view of when Israel was working very, very hard at a peace process. Benjamin Netanyahu is not working for a peace process. Settlements keep going forward, the military detention of children, even though it's been brought out in human rights and that, you know, it's just, you know, waved off.

You know, the nation state law that was passed in Israel, where Arab-Israeli citizens are treated as sex. class citizens is something that even members of Congress are just waking up to now. This is not the same Israeli government that, you know, that Jimmy Carter and the Clintons and even President Obama, you know, he came up against, you know, a brick wall dealing with Benjamin Netanyahu on settlements in that. And he exerted as more, you know, I want to say common sense about talking about how, you know, if we're going to get to a two-state solution, expanding settlements, Israel is not the way to get there. It's the way to keep it from

happening. So it's, it is a government that is, you know, very much determined in Israel right now to gain and grab as much power and authority as it can over the Palestinians. And that's not going to end well for Israel. It's not going to end well for the Palestinians, the Middle East, or the United States. Yeah. So, I mean, like, this is obviously such an emotionally charged conversation, right? I mean, you have the history of the Holocaust, you know, leading to the creation of Israel and, you know, the understandable emotional desire among Zionists to have a state where they're safe

and secure. And, like, of course I understand that. And then you also have, you know, good faith people on the other side who are deeply concerned about Palestinian rights, their human rights, their human rights, their. their right to self-determination, their basic humanity and freedom. And sometimes it's very hard to meet in the middle and have a good faith conversation about U.S.-Israel policy and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without it quickly devolving into maybe an emotional reaction or at times a bad faith criticism where criticism of policies or leaders is painted as inherently

anti-Semitic. How have you navigated these waters, right? Because it's, It is rare to have a member of Congress like yourself put forward a very bold policy on this issue. A lot of people would rather avoid the issue to get ahead in Washington than author a bill and put themselves in the middle of it. Why did you make that choice? People of the Jewish faith have been discriminated and mistreated and murdered. And then we have Holocaust deniers. And then just what happened in Charlottesville after President Trump was elected and people were chanting in the street carrying torches, white supremac. We still have a lot of people in this country who, you know, have hate for people who are different than themselves, whether it be religion, skin color, sexual orientation.

It is something that we have to face head on and we have to stand in solidarity. with our Jewish brothers and sisters and our Muslim brothers and sisters to coexist, to treat each other with dignity and respect. And so it comes down to me with a fundamental human, human right. What did I want for my children when they were born? What did my parents want for me? They wanted me to have peace, security, good health, and opportunity. And when I travel all around the world. And I've had the opportunity to do that working on maternal child health. That's what every parent wants for their child. And we have to come together with it. That's a basic human value that we all share, whether you're a parent, you're an aunt, an uncle. We want children to have hope and

opportunity. And if we can focus on that as a common ground, I think we can move forward together. So that's why my bill focuses on children's rights, right? If we can't agree that a child, you know, a young child should not be taken out of their home in the middle of the night, put in stress positions, tortured in some cases, without sounding alarm bells, then we're not living our American values. And whether it's friend or full, whether it's my country or Israel, when I see a human rights violation committed, I feel I have an obligation if I want more just, more peaceful world for the future to speak out on it. Spoke out on what was going on in Guantanamo.

I've spoken out what happened with, you know, how we were retortching people in Iraq. I speak out against my own government when I see human rights violations. When the Rohingya, when I was, you know, in Myanmar shortly after the Rohingya were fleeing to Bangladesh, I spoke out to the military officials there and told them what was doing wrong. And one of Ansushis' protégis told them that what was happening to the Rohingya or the Uyghurs in China. It shouldn't be any different to tell another Democratic nation, Israel, who is a who is an ally when it comes to democracy, but when they step out of the line of not living up to what I believe democracy values should be, I believe I have a right to say something.

Final question for you. We constantly talk about on this show and on Ponce de America, the best ways to lobby Congress, if you're out of state, you know, should you be calling Mitch McConnell's office? Should you be emailing? Should you be faxing? You, are an expert. You are a member of Congress. You know what constituents do that is the most annoying, that is the most likely to get your attention. So if you're a listener right now and you're hearing, you know, like about these reports of civilian casualties, you want to know what you can do to help, how to press for a ceasefire, what advice do you have for them? Like, who should they lobby? What kinds of things should they ask for? Like, what do we do? Well, all politics is local.

So I think you start there. You talk to your local, uh, your local, uh, member of Congress, find out what their position is on things. Tell them why you feel what's happening is wrong, what you would like to see them to do. Then you go to your senator. And then certainly you can talk to leadership and express your views. But the most impactful thing is the person that's directly representing you because why, you're directly voting for them. I think also letting the White House know what you feel. And they get involved. If you want to take it the next step, there's plenty of faith groups and nonprofit organizations

and international organizations that work on human rights issues all around the world. And I would encourage somebody who wants to engage on this, also to make themselves a person who's going to engage on human rights wherever they see a violation. This is a wonderful place to start because we really need your help in getting the word out that this does not reflect America's values. It does not reflect values of treating people with dignity and respect. And the ceasefire needs to happen soon. The occupation needs to end. And children need to stop being traumatized by witnessing violence and discrimination day in and day.

out. And that's the children both in Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The children in Israel, when they witness at checkpoints how Palestinian children are treated, that's not good for Israeli children to watch too. And that's why I'm so proud of the support we have from any of the groups in Israel who work on human rights supporting our bill too. And J Street as well here in the United States. Excellent. Great, great, great groups. Thank you, Congresswoman so much for your time. Thank you for your excellent advice about how to be annoying to you in the future. We will take you up on it. And we really appreciate you doing the show.

All the best. And thank you for doing this. And journalism is important. And I'm glad your voice is being heard. Thanks to Congresswoman and Collin. Ben, I don't know. Do I need to apologize for my attack on the Knicks? I'm talking to Jason Concepcion later for a segment on take-line.

and, you know, I need some material, if you have anything for me to prepare that I can sort of use to clap back at him if you talk shit about Boston. I mean, if you want to, I just basically heap scorn and talk shit about James Dolan, the worst sports owner. You and Jason could find solidarity and trashing James Dolan, who's punished Nick fans for 20 years with his kind of sadistic ownership. And the reason the Knicks are good is they finally kind of set up an organizational structure that kind of got Dolan out of things.

hired a really good coach in Tom Tibido and built a team around a star player and Julius Randall who did the work, you know. But Jason, I think you'll find, you know, more than happy to probably pile on Dolan. So you're recommending the high road, I guess. I'm kind of recommending the high road, right? I mean, you can do that. All right, I'll demand a CISF. What you could do is you could also dunk on him about all the past years that the Celtics, you know, crush the Knicks, which is many. There we go. Yeah. Now we're talking. All right. I'll work on some materials. I got a couple hours here. Okay, thanks everybody for tuning in today,

and we will talk to you next week. See you. Ponsave the World is a crooked media production. The executive producer is Michael Martinez. Our producer is Jordan Waller. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Segglin is our sound engineer. Thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn,

Yelfried, Nar Malkonian, and Milo Kim who film and share our episodes as videos each week.