Pod Save the World - Why Is Putin Going To North Korea?

Episode Date: June 19, 2024

Tommy and Ben discuss the “Peace Summit” held in Switzerland for the war in Ukraine and the glaring problem of Russia’s absence, Putin’s first visit to North Korea in 24 years and why this growing alliance is a troubling development, and the news that Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich will stand trial next week in Russia on espionage charges. They also talk about Netanyahu disbanding his war cabinet, analysts warning of increasing terror threats to the United States because of the war in Gaza, devastating polling for Emmanuel Macron ahead of a snap election in France, protests in Argentina in response to reforms pushed through by Javier Milei, and the Pope doing influencer outreach by inviting comedians to the Vatican. Then, Ben speaks with Rep. Ilhan Omar about her letter to President Biden asking for a humanitarian parole program for Sudanese refugees.Finally, don’t miss Ben and Tommy discussing how they got into careers in politics – something Tommy, Jon Favreau and Jon Lovett suggest others do in their new book, Democracy or Else. Pre-order Democracy or Else, out June 25th: crooked.com/books 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 Pottae the World. I'm Tommy Vitor. I'm Ben. I'm in your hood. I'm in New York City. It misses you. I'm going to be there soon. I'm to be there next week. Very excited. The annual summer pilgrimage to New York. The road summer pilgrimage, the Hodge. We are doing, and this is the first of about two weeks of travel and press to roll out our new book, Democracy Realtz. It's the first of two trips to New York. By the way, Democracy Reales is available June 25th. But you can pre-order it wherever you get your books, crooked.com slash books. And if you do pre-order it, it will really, really help us. the New York Times bestseller list, which is a big deal. But Ben, being here, thinking about the book, talking about the book, made me think about a question that I get all the time. I know you get all the time, which is basically how did you get a job working for Obama? What's the best way for me to get involved in politics myself? That's the path. And so in the book, we walk readers through like kind of all the escalating steps of political engagement from just kind of being better informed to voting,

to donating, to volunteering, to working on campaigns and in government. But I thought it could be fun for us just to talk about our individual paths into politics because we started at very different places, but wound up, like, literally in the same office. And so it's kind of an interesting story of, like, a couple options available to people. Yeah, no, and I really like that in the book, because people, you know, sometimes people ask me all the time, how do you get involved? What more can I do? And the book provides, like, both a mixture of, like, stories and then advice about how can you get more involved, whether you want to kind of fully make it a career, whether you want to just make a difference in politics in some way. For me, I always had kind of these two interests of

foreign policy and politics. And actually, for me, I was working at local city council campaign in New York, a Brooklyn city council race on 9-11. And, you know, witnessing those attacks because it was election day in New York and I was working a polling site. And witnessing those attacks kind of propelled me down to Washington to look for a job in foreign policy. And I was at a think tank, Tommy, for almost six years. So I was headed down the pathway to being kind of a, you know, really a foreign policy nerd. One of the things I noticed, though, is that it didn't matter what, you know, papers he wrote at the think tank. If George W. Bush was president, things weren't going to change. So I wanted to get involved in politics. And I kind of entered through the doorway of, like,

the, you know, hundreds of foreign policy advisors through a presidential campaign who were often, you know, largely ignored by their presidential campaign, let's face it. But I just kind of kept working. I started offering to do stuff for free, essentially, you know, and I got some small writing assignments. I remember I wrote an op-ed for Obama, for some Irish newspaper. There was like, call me Obama with an apostrophe or something. And I somehow got to Favreau that way because they were like, oh, this guy can actually write. And so I kind of wrote my way into the Obama campaign volunteering though, you know, in my free time and ultimately got hired to be a speechwriter with the kind of foreign policy focus and then patching holes in the foreign policy

comms team on things like debate prep and, you know, responding to whatever crazy thing our opponent said. So I kind of came into a foreign policy think tank door that became increasingly political because I was like, well, if you want to change foreign policy, you got to get involved in politics, you know. Right, right. Yeah, no, I mean, I have the opposite path. I mean, I graduated college in 2002, and I moved to D.C. to intern for Senator Ted Kennedy and started applying for jobs in Washington. But my timing was awful. I plop down into like the beating heart of that Bush era post-9-11 hysteria and the politics of fear and we had, you know, the run-up to the Iraq war and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. And then Democrats just got

crushed in the 2002 midterms. Crush. So there were quite literally fewer jobs. And so I got a short stint doing field on a campaign on a Senate race in North Carolina. we got destroyed. And then, you know, I was sort of literally just like interning, living on my buddy's couch, eating ramen noodles, feeling very sad and sorry for myself when I finally got a job hired to work on John Edwards' 2004 presidential campaign. Basically, I'd gotten it down to two options, Ben. I was going to work for Edwards where I was going to go work at ClubMed and be something

called a Gio, which I think is when you push kids in the pool and get way too tan. So, you know, luckily I got the Edwards job. I was literally like the lowest person on the on the on the team. I fetched a lot of lunches, but I learned by osmosis. I got sent on the campaign trail. I went to Iowa, New Hampshire. And in the book, we wrote about some of the craziest stories from those days. But, you know, even though Edwards got crushed by John Kerry, I met some people who then

worked for Obama on that Senate race, shut up Peachy and Greco and David Axelrod. And I like harassed them once a week until they hired me, spent a couple of years in the Senate, went to Iowa, the Chicago headquarters, where I met. you on the general election in 2008. And then finally, four years in the White House. So it was really like the key for me was like learning by osmosis, gaining the trust of President Obama, the first lady, the senior staff there. And then just, you know, working my ass off to prove that I could do it. And then I could learn enough to actually survive in that job, which, you know, we did okay for four years. We weren't perfect. Well, the funny thing is the shorthand for both of us and you

and I joke about this, right, like the kind of right wing trolls is I got a fiction writing MFA when I was 22 and 23, and you drove a van. Yeah, I drove a press van for a month. Press, press fan. And so it's like van driver fiction writer. I would actually argue, though, particularly actually I'm going to come to the defense of van drivers. The point is do everything, do whatever it takes. And if you're getting into politics, drive the fucking van.

Like, do the press clips. I did press clips on my first campaign I worked on. Like, actually, those are, not only is that good experience, but it also, you got to show you're like, to get into the NBA here, you're like Drew Holiday on the Celtics or Josh Hard on the Knicks. You know, you're going to get the loose balls before you start draining the threes. And even the fiction writing, right? I mean, writing was a good skill. Like actually, the way I got hired is I was a good writer. There were hundreds of other foreign policy advisors who, you know, had comparable foreign policy experience a few years at a think tank. So, you know, I actually, to push back at the troll. Like, like, like that willingness to try everything and to get a skill and to meet people, that's, again, in politics. It's not just, you know, sitting there and waiting to be plucked off your couch. Yeah, it's funny. People attack you for having a diverse set of interest in me for working my way up, I guess. It's kind of a weird thing if you actually take a step back and think about it. But also, like, most fun I've ever had in my life, met some of my best friends to this day.

And so anybody in me who says, how do I get involved in politics? I say go work on a campaign. But anyway, there's lots of great advice, lots of fun stories. There was a time I was in a van that hit a moose in New Hampshire. That ended very poorly for the moose and almost for me. So if you want to learn more, pre-order now at crooked.com slash books and the profits from democracy or else are going to Vote of America and progressive candidates and causes in 2024.

So you're doing a lot of good. Ben, we got a great show, though, today. So we're going to talk about last weekend's Peace Summit in Switzerland that focused on ending the war in Ukraine and see what, if any, progress was made. We'll explain why Russian President Vladimir Putin is going to North Korea, is in North Korea right now, actually, and what a deeper partnership between those two countries would mean for the world. We'll cover the latest in the case of an American journalist being held hostage in Russia,

as well as news from Israel and Gaza, why French president of Emmanuel Macron's decision to call snap elections in a few weeks is looking like it might be catastrophic for him, for his political future, and why experts are sounding the alarm about the proliferation of nuclear weapons. We'll also cover protests in Argentina. And finally, we'll find out if the Pope is funny, Ben. Everyone is wondering if the Pope is funny, maybe a tight five on the Reformation or something like that. And then you just talked with Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. What did you guys discuss? Yeah. So I've talked to Ilhan Omar about like a letter that she's sending to the administration. She's got at least a couple dozen other members of Congress on it that she's actually releasing around

her Ponce of the World Appearance, Tommy, that calls for humanitarian parole for Sudanese, been displaced and us see impacted by the horrific civil war there. So this is something that, a program that we have for Ukrainians and Afghans, so people from those war zones to have the capacity to come find asylum and safety and security in the United States. So we talk about that effort. We talk about the war in Sudan more broadly and what other steps the U.S. can take to try to address the underlying causes and provide humanitarian support and hopefully pursue a political resolution there. We frankly then bring in Gaza because a common thread between Sudan and Gaza as that U.S. weapons are being used in both of those wars and some of the politics around APAC getting

involved in Democratic primaries, you know, coming up on the horizon, then Jamal Bowman's primary in New York. So it's a good interview. And at the end, I think she speaks powerfully about in a time of rising kind of xenophobia and anti-immigrant anti-refugee sentiment, how do you kind of push back on that as well? That's excellent. I'm glad you had the conversation. I'm glad she's doing that. Well, all right, Ben, let's turn to our first story today, which is this past weekend, representatives from over 90 countries participated in a peace summit in Switzerland, focused on the war in Ukraine. It was an initiative led by Ukrainian president, Vladimir Zelensky, who is trying to recruit

international support for his own larger peace plan. Zelensky's long-term goal is to recruit other countries as intermediaries to put pressure on Russia and to build support for the Ukrainian side. Here's a clip from Zelensky's remarks at this event. Now there is no Russia here. Why? Because if Russia was interested in peace, there would be no war. We must decide together what a just peace means for the world and how it can be achieved in a truly lasting way.

The UN Charter is a basis for us. And then when the action plan is on the table, agreed by all, and transparent for the peoples, then it will be communicated to the representatives of Russia. So, Ben, the good news for Zelensky is he got 82 countries to sign off on three parts of his 10-point peace plan. Those elements focus on nuclear security, nuclear safety, I should say, food security, and returning POWs or children who were kidnapped and taken to Russia. Vice President Kamala Harris represented for the United States. Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor, was there as well. They announced another 1.5 billion in U.S. assistance. The bad news for Zelensky is that Russia and China didn't attend in several big countries, including India, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and Mexico did not sign off on the summit's final communique. So shortly before the summit, Ben, Vladimir Putin laid out his own ceasefire deal, such as it was. It would require Ukraine to pull its forces out of the four regions Russia had invaded in 2022, drop its bid to join NATO, and would require the West to drop all sanctions.

preemptively. The best response to Putin's proposal was from Italian Prime Minister, Georgia Maloney, who said, quote, it doesn't seem particularly effective to me as a negotiation proposal to tell Ukraine that it must withdraw from Ukraine, well said. So, Ben, I bet there's some listeners who are thinking, like, what the hell is the point of a peace summit if Russia isn't even at the table? How would you sell the value of this event to them? Okay. So I have a piece I mentioned that came out in foreign affairs today. I referenced in the past, in a very very important. very nerdy way. But I have a piece out in foreign affairs today called The Foreign Policy for the World as it is. You know, check it out online. I think it's actually out from behind

the paywall too, so you don't have to do with that. But I mention it because actually the basic premise of the piece is if you step back and look at American foreign policy and it's about kind of what what should hopefully in the second Biden term the U.S. approach be, if you step back and look at it, the quote unquote, rules-based international order doesn't really exist anymore. You know, so the system that you use to resolve disputes like this, now you have a kind of U.S.-led group of countries. You've got the Russians trying to tear everything down. You've got the Chinese building their own kind of parallel order. And then you have countries like the ones you mentioned, like South Africa, they kind of float in between these different blocks.

I mentioned that because in that kind of world, what you have to do is you can't just go to the UN and have a peace conference like you might have done 15 years ago, you know, because the Russians aren't going to play ball. there are too many disagreements on the Security Council. And so you have to start with the kind of like-minded countries. How many countries can we get to kind of sign on with our position on an issue? And that's what the Ukrainians are doing at the Peace Summit so that, you know, you demonstrate the support for your position. I obviously support Zelensky's core point, which is Ukraine's sovereignty, should be respected. And then you kind of test how many countries can you bring on to that position. And I think that's what was happening at this Peace Summit. It was like, you know, can we demonstrate long term support, including financing for Ukraine.

Can we demonstrate support for what will be Ukrainian positions at the negotiating table? But then the second and more difficult challenge is, okay, that's all well and good, but that agreement doesn't end the war and that doesn't get Russia out of parts of Ukraine. And so you have to use that platform of what was agreed at that peace summit and what the Ukrainian plan is as a foundation for then negotiating between these different blocks. And that means you're going to have to negotiate with Russia. And what we saw from Putin is, okay, that's Putin's starting negotiating position, which essentially we get to keep all the parts of Ukraine that we want to annex, which are more than even

what Russia currently occupies in Ukraine. And so the utility of the last week is essentially, we have Russia's opening offer and Ukraine's opening offer. And nobody's going to like it, but what's going to be necessary going forward is a negotiation between those two positions where, let's face it, Ukraine's probably not going to get everything that they want. but if they can maintain a lot of international support, they should be able to get a lot more than what Russia is currently offering. We won't really know how that negotiation goes until after the U.S. election, because the Russians are going to wait to see if they get Trump.

If Biden is reelected, then I think you probably get pretty soon into a real negotiation that seeks to determine, okay, how much territory can Ukraine get back, how much can they be able to choose, you know, do they want to join the European? What's their relationship with NATO? That's where this will all get more difficult. Yeah, and for what it's worth, Zelensky said that, you know, Putin's kind of ridiculous opening bid of just keeping for districts of Ukraine, I think, helped, he's had helped build support among other countries at the conference because it was like just laughable on its face. But, you know, that same strategy was just employed at the G7 where, you know, the UK, the U.S., Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan came together and announced a $50 billion loan to Ukraine to buy more weapons and to repair damaged infrastructure. that money will be fronted by the U.S. and other Western countries but paid off by profits from

$300 billion in frozen Russian assets. Biden and Zelensky also signed a 10-year security agreement between the U.S. and Ukraine, but unfortunately that agreement is meaningless if Donald Trump gets elected, like you said. And here's a clip of what Trump recently had to say about Zelensky. I think Zelensky is maybe the greatest salesman of any politician that's ever lived. Every time he comes to our country, he walks away with $60 billion. And I like him. You know, on the impeachment hoax number one, he was very good. He said, no, the president didn't threaten me at all.

He could have been a grand standard and said, I was threatened, right? Matt, he could have said I was threatened. So I like him. But he's a greatest salesman of all time. He walks in. So now here's the beauty. He just left four days ago. go with 60 billion and he gets home and he announces that he needs another 60 billion else it never ends

it never ends i will have that settled prior to taking the white house as president-elect i will have that sort of a weird uh muddled message there but you know i think the obvious takeaway is that if trump wins he will say to zalinski you're giving up territory stop talking about crime you're not get any more money. You're not in NATO. Ballgame. Yeah. I mean, a lot going on there as usual. I don't know who Matt is. Like, I like how Trump just...

I think Matt Schlapp? Was it like C-pack or something? I don't know. But... Some idiot? It's, you know, on the one hand, look, Zalancey's not a salesman. He's trying to save his country and, you know, he's not like walking away with like, you know, money for his candy store. Yeah.

Yeah. This is like money for their survival. And it's never, obviously, never enough when you're facing an existential threat. I do want to say, and again, I make this point in this article I mentioned, we have to take Trump's populism more seriously, though. I think sometimes people in foreign policy are like, they turn up their nose and say, well, you know, he doesn't understand the complexity or he's just a Putin stooge. And those things are true, by the way. But that point he made is like a valid one, right? How long and how much money does Ukraine need? And, you know, what's the plan for this to end? We can't just presume that people will default want to continue

to give 50, 60, 70 billion dollar packages to Ukraine every year. I do think part of what the administration has been trying to do at the G7 too is it right now it feels like time is working for Putin, right? So Russia's bigger. They have more men that they can script and throw at the front line. They've been able to rebuild the military industrial complex. And it looks like time is working for Putin. And all this additional money, this $50,000 loan, this 10-year agreement, is meant to signal, no, no, no, there are people that are in Ukraine's corner for the long haul. The resources are going to be there. We're getting creative. And this is, by the way, one way to address the populist concern. The 50 billion is not U.S. taxpayer. It's going to ultimately be paid

back by the credit from Russian assets that are frozen. But at the end of the day, the problem with that is that, as you said, it's not really a long-term plan if Trump wins. It's a political messaging thing today that if Biden wins, yes, then it indicates a long-term 10-year commitment that will be continued. But again, I think the common thread between these two things is you're going to have to bring in diplomacy and negotiation more. I mean, frankly, one way to sustain American public support is to show that you're willing to test diplomacy too, and that, you know, you're willing to explore negotiation with Russia with the Ukrainians along the way here, just saying we're going to continue arming them indefinitely in the current

status quo where there's a kind of front line that is creeping in the wrong direction. No, it's not going to watch any focus group of swing voters. They're not excited about shoveling 60 billion a year over to Ukraine. But to your point, Ben, I mean, while Putin didn't make it to Switzerland, he did have time for a two-day trip to North Korea this week. I mean, this is Putin's second meeting with Kim Jong-un in nine months. The last one was in eastern Russia when Putin took Kim Jong-un on a tour of some highly sensitive military and space technology site. Just your kind of classic soft power cultural tourism visit. Putin's last visit to North Korea itself was back in 2000. Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, North Korea has transferred over millions of shells,

missiles, other weapons to Russia. The South Korean defense minister told Bloomberg news that he believes North Korea has exported five million rounds of ammunition. In exchange, Putin has said publicly that Russia can assist North Korea with satellite launches and other associated technology. That technology would be very helpful with North Korea's ballistic. missile program, by the way. The Times, New York Times says Russia has also sent economic aid to North Korea and North Korean hackers are using Russian cryptocurrency exchanges to launder money. So, Ben, you were blown up the Potsie of the World Group chat about 7 a.m. Monday morning about this story because you're concerned. What has you worked up about this Putin, Kim Jong-un,

bromance? I think it's a bigger deal than people, you know, this is not normal for Putin to go, as you said, he hasn't gone since 2000. And I think it speaks to several things that are alarming, right? One is my point before about how there's no international order, like Russia is just flagrantly violating UN sanctions that it itself voted for at the UN Security Council, right? So they're not supposed to be giving any arms to the North Koreans. They're not supposed to be giving like luxury goods. And some of the reporting, Kim Jong-un is riding around in a Russian limousine like that. So it says something about how fractured the system is that Russia is just out in the open

violating its own agreements. It's like these things don't matter anymore. Then underneath that, I worry about, again, what is North Korea getting? They're clearly getting military technology. You know, Kim had visited like a space center in Russia during his visit. Anything that helps them with their ballistic missile program that helps them kind of fortify their own military, their fuel needs, things like that, I worry about North Korea being in a position where it feels emboldened to start to lash out and engage in provocations at South Korea. not necessarily invading South Korea, but imagine if Trump's elected. And the North Koreans are like, well, we got Russian technology. We got, you know, Kim Jong-un's best friend, Donald Trump in the White House.

That may be the time that they start to, I don't know, let's sink a South Korean ship or let's shell a South Korean island. And I worry that the Korean peninsula could suddenly become a hotspot again. And then also, I wouldn't sell short the value to Russia of all these North Korean armaments they're getting, because North Korea had basically prepared for decades to fight kind of an artillery war among other things on a front line between North and South Korea. So they have a lot of stuff that is clearly helping to make the Russians whole. So all in all, this is, you know, there'll be funny pictures and, you know, we can surmise how awkward the small talk is between Putin and Kim Jong-un, some generational differences there, some probably differences in how they like to hang.

But the reality is it's a huge challenge to South Korea, to the United States, to Ukraine, and to the international order that it seems to have unraveled here. Yes, agreed. And one last story coming out of Russia. We wanted to update you guys on the detention of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gerskovich, who has been held hostage in Russia for about 15 months now. A Russian court announced that Evan will stand trial on charges of espionage. The trial begins on June 26th.

It's going to happen behind closed doors at a venue, I think, more than 1,100 miles east of Moscow. And if convicted, Evan could face up to 20 years in prison. So for about 15 months, Russia didn't even pretend to offer evidence of Evan's guilt. Now prosecutors say the FSB is evidence that he was acting on CIA instructions to collect secret information about a Russian tank factory that is self-evidently bullshit. We spoke with Anton Trojanovsky. He's the Moscow bureau chief for the New York Times, who is currently based in Berlin and a good friend of Evans who spent years getting to know him when they were both reporting in Russia. Here's what he had to say about how Evan is doing through all of this. Evan is very much staying strong.

I think the most important thing is for him to, remain a part of life outside the prison walls. So, you know, he's so interested in just like daily life, what are his friends up to? What, you know, what was our mutual friends' 30th birthday party like recently? Cummings and goings. Where are people moving? Who's getting together with whom? So that's the kind of stuff that Evan is interested in and, you know, just daily life stuff. And for him to be aware of that is really important because it also, you know, I think it's just so important to make sure that Evan knows we're all still thinking of him. And he does very much remain a part of our lives. So, Ben, you know, over the last 15 months or so, there's been lots of talk about.

but a potential prisoner swap for Evan because this is obviously just a fake case. Russia has suggested that a swap could only happen after a verdict in the case has happened. So I guess the question is whether, okay, is Russia proceeding with this prosecution bad news because it means they're just going to forge ahead with a sham trial or could it be good news because moving the case forward, getting a verdict is a prerequisite for Russia then releasing Evan in a prisoner swap. Do you have a view on that? I think that, I mean, first of all, the clip reminds you that there's a human being here,

and it's not just like a name and a piece on a chessboard. Look, I think that usually Russia goes through the process. Like with Britney Griner, you know, they had to kind of go through the process to legitimize why they detain this person. So I do think it's not necessarily bad news because they kind of feel the need to prove that their version of events is somehow validated by their judicial system. I do worry about just the, you know, it's a little. election season, Putin's rooting for Trump. Trump's out there saying, like, essentially don't release

heaven or like, I'll deal with this when I get in, you know? So let me read you as truth. This is from a truth social post from May 23rd. He said, Evan will be released almost immediately after the election. He said, Evan, quote, will be home safe and with his family. Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, will do that for me, but not for anyone else. And we will be paying nothing. So to your point, nowhere in there did he offer to, I don't know, help out now get Evan out regardless of wins the election. Yeah, and the wink wink to Putin is that for no one else will he do that, i.e. Joe Biden, right? And so, you know, Trump is literally making it harder, I think, to get an American home for all the, you know, bloviating the Trump does about trying to get hostages out. And so I do worry that this kind of period up to the election. It's unlikely to see something happen because, you know, Putin has every incentive to just wait this out. And Trump is giving him that incentive. He certainly is. One last quick Trump thing, just an aside, Ben. Last week, we made a huge mistake in our show and we forgot to update listeners on Jared Kushner's planned real estate deal in Serbia. We talked about it a few months back, some like half a billion dollar real estate deal he's trying to negotiate with the government. We mentioned this to friends of the pod subscribers, but not everyone. According to a report in Spy Talk magazine, this real estate deal includes a commitment by Jared Kushner to construct a, quote, memorial dedicated to all the victims of NATO aggression. this is referencing the U.S.-led bombing campaign against Slobodan Milosevic,

a man who was charged with genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. So that's what Jared's up to. Yeah. And look, the reality is, you know, if Barack Obama, like, visited Vietnam to do work, they'd be like, he's on an apology tour, right? Jared Kush is literally trying to profit off of the construction of memorials against NATO aggression. Literally, he's creating monuments against, like, the United States and its far. foreign policy in the past. This is kind of the apology tour taken to an extreme of like a real

estate apology tour. If it benefits Jerry Kushner's wallet and bottom line, like there is no line that this guy won't cross. And I think it's a sign that like, you know, smaller country that doesn't get as much attention, but given all the business that's happening with the pro-Russian Serbian government, I wouldn't shock me to see that part of Europe deteriorate a little bit if you get Jared and his buddy Rick Rinell back in charge of things. Yeah, Rick Rineau, who The New York Times reported, is looking to explore ammunition manufacturing opportunities in the Balkans, which is just, I don't know, the most corrupt sound-a-thing I've ever heard.

But anyway, that's why we can't let those guys win. But we digress, Ben, so let's turn to Gaza, because, look, I don't know what to say. Week after week is just getting steadily worse. Last week, we talked about how Benny Gantz, a relatively moderate political figure, former general decided to withdraw from Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu's war cabinet, along with another former top military leader. On Sunday, Netanyahu disbanded the war cabinet altogether. It seems pretty clear he did so to avoid having to include a far-right extremist members of his coalition government in this war cabinet, guys like the National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Givir,

who had demanded he be included in these negotiations. But regardless of Netanyahu's motivation, the net result looks like it's just going to concentrate more power in his hand. and Beebe's hands. That has not stopped Netanyahu, though, from blaming others for how things are going. On Sunday, the Israeli military announced it would pause fighting during the daytime in some parts of southern Gaza in an effort to facilitate the entry and distribution of more aid into the Gaza Strip. This was like a pretty limited step, basically a pride to like seven miles worth of road that is critical for getting aid in and out. But relief organizations were hopeful that it would help them not only get aid in, but also distribute it without getting hit with airstrikes.

Unfortunately, that hope was pretty quickly dashed when the Israeli government leaked the Netanyahu. I'd learned about this daytime pause plan in the press that he wasn't happy about it. And so it seems like it's partially walked back. A lot of people think Netanyahu is lying and just kind of talking out of both sides of his mouth here. But who knows? Meanwhile, Ben, Israel and Hamas don't seem to be any closer on the ceasefire agreement that has been proposed. Tensions keep ratcheting up between Israel and Hezbollah. According to the AP, Israel says it is targeted 4,500.

Hesbola sites in the past five months. The IDF has taken out several senior Hesbola leaders in recent weeks. And more than 60,000 Israelis have had to evacuate from northern Israel because of this cross-border fighting. So the status quo is just awful. Ben, do you get the sense that Netanyahu's political position has improved after Gantz's departure from the war cabinet? Or is it just status quo? Is it worse? What's your take? Well, I think you have to keep in mind that Nenia's play is always to try to divide his opposition and cling to power with his kind of relatively small base of support in Israel. Even, you know, long before October 7th,

we consistently saw him bring centrist into some kind of cabinet, right? This happened with Yarra-Lapid. This happened with Zipi-Libney. This happened with Ehud Barak. And those people always leave the cabinet less popular than they came in. And here, I think, you know,

the alarming thing, right, is that Gantz is leaving, the war cabinets dissolving. And so Netanyahu is just, when he's in small rooms making decisions, he's more likely to be in even smaller rooms, just him and kind of a couple of people like Ron Dürmer, his kind of close aide,

or he's going to have to listen to these far-right people who always had, let's face it, the sway in his government. I mean, people listening should know. Benny Gantz was not a part of the coalition that is the governing coalition in Israel. He was, so his withdrawal doesn't kind of collapse the government in any way. Netanyo's always been beholdened to stay in power to those far-right guys.

So in some ways, I don't think things really change. substantively that much. The Israeli government is what it is, but you're right, like he's now going to be even more beholden or kind of more likely to only listen to those voices to his far right. He's kind of weathered the backlash to his leadership after October 7th, and he's clearly trying to drag this thing out. You know, this is the open-ended war that we were all afraid of. And just a couple of other things on the points you mentioned, you know, we saw with the ceasefire, for instance. We talked about this last week. Sure, Hamas absolutely is not playing ball. They're not agreeing to the terms U.S. is presenting because they want an Israeli agreement to end the war up front.

But it's also been the case that Nanyahu has never been able to endorse what the administration said was in Israeli proposal. The aid thing reminds me of that because Netanyahu is unable to stand up and say that aid should get into Gaza. He has to act like, you know, either he was surprised or he's acting like he's surprised. This is not leadership. You know, if you can't stand up, and it can't be the U.S. standing up and saying Israel's doing this, Israel's letting aid in. Like, why can't the Israeli prime minister be able to stand up in front of his own people and say, we support the ceasefire deal or we think Aitcha get in. It's indicative of a political leadership that is not really committed to doing the right thing or the thing that the U.S. wants it to do in all these spaces. And that brings in Hisblo, because look, we can talk about the back and forth on the border.

it's a political problem for Nanyahu that tens and tens of thousands of Israelis have been displaced for this whole time. But the reality is until you have a ceasefire in Gaza, you're going to have this kind of low-boreal conflict that could escalate in Lebanon. We haven't even talked about the fact that there's basically been an ongoing naval battle between the United States and the Houthis and the Red Sea. So long as the war in Gaza continues, the Red Sea, Lebanon are going to continue to be sources of violence and potential escalation. Yeah, I mean, on the Houthi point, there was a story in maybe the Wall Street Journal the other day about a commercial ship in the Red Sea that had been attacked by basically a Houthi sea drone, essentially what the Ukrainians are using against the Russian fleet. And then they got hit with the Houthi missiles. These guys had to just sort of sit there and think they were going to die for 10 hours before being rescued by the U.S. Navy. But I think one person is still missing and presumed dead. But, Ben, more broadly, I mean, I think listeners probably, like anyone's listening to the show knows that we both think this war is a humanitarian disaster. We've been critical of Biden's refurb. refusal to put any sort of real pressure on Netanyahu. We think the only path forward is both sides agreeing to a hostage release deal and a ceasefire deal that ends the war that gets to a permanent cessation of hostilities. And this like Israeli stated goal of quote unquote eradicating

Hamas is just not achievable. It's not realistic. But I do want to give folks just another reason why I think the war needs to end, which is we are hearing more and more like top intelligence officials say that the war in Gaza is drastically increasing the risk of a terrorist. attack on the United States. There was a peace in foreign affairs by an academic named Graham Allison and then the former deputy CIA director Michael Morrell. The headline was, the terrorism warning lights are blinking red again. And this is not based on like classified sources. These people aren't governed anywhere. They're talking about testimony from senior national figures like the FBI director Christopher Ray or the head of Sentcom who said, Christopher Ray said after October

7th, quote, we've seen the threat from foreign terrorists rise to a whole other level. Ray is particularly concerned about terrorists or ISIS-linked people getting into the U.S. through the southern border. The U.S. recently arrested eight Tajik nationals believed to have connections with ISIS. We don't know if that is true, but these guys entered through the southern border. They requested asylum. And then according to good analysis of ISIS-K by CNN, this is an organization that is primarily run by Tajik's. They basically try to radicalize and inspire attackers sort of out-reaching. in the world. They're not trying to train and recruit people, like teaching them that a fly

plane like 9-11. They're trying to say, get to the U.S., radicalize you there, buy a gun off the shelf, you know, anywhere in this country. You'll go to a Walmart and get an AR-15 and do something horrific. So I just think the full takeaway is the war in Gaza is putting American lives at risk in the United States, full stop. And no one's working to end it. In fact, Congress is greenlit an $18 billion sale of that 15 is Israel. Now, I don't think those will be there in time to be a part of this war, but there's just zero momentum seemingly to pressure Israel to just get to a ceasefire. Yeah. I mean, there's this alarming ISIS wing that seems to be in part in Afghanistan, seems to be recruited heavily from Tajikistan. We saw the Tajik's, Tajik members of ISIS carry out

an attack looked like in Russia, if people remember that attack that took place in Moscow. And look, stepping back, you make the core point here, which is one of the questions that people don't even bother to ask is, is the war in Gaza in America's interest? Clearly, no. It's making us less safe at this point. It's badly damaged our international credibility. It makes us look like hypocrites when we're arguing for a rules-based approach to the war in Ukraine. It's causing all this instability across the Middle East, which, by the way, is cost the United States tens of billions, certainly of dollars in kind of forward deployments in the Red Sea with the Houthis or moving assets to the region. This is not in our interest.

you know, and so why do we continue to provide the weapons that sustain the war? And I, you know, I made three points trying to step back in that far and a far as far as article of mine about kind of the mindset that needs to shift. And what they are quickly, Tommy, is one, the kind of political analysis that I can't break from Israel. Like that's an outdated view of American politics. I would argue it's more costly. Yeah, it's more costly to give Israel this Israeli government, in particular, a blank check. then it would be to actually, you know, have a policy in line with American interests. The second problem is signing on to maximal objectives.

And if you support the war continuing with the stated goal of destroying Hamas, well, the war is never going to end because you're not going to ever destroy Hamas. It's an idea. It's a movement. It's not just in Gaza itself. And then the third thing is we need to be able to look at our own policy from the outside in. What does this look like if the kind of swing state audience, to take a political analogy in the world, is the global south.

Just imagine what the war in Gaza looks like in terms of double standards. So for all these reasons and the terrorist threat, I think, makes it acute, you know, it's time to kind of look at this war through the prism of American interest here. And there's no interest in a kind of open-ended war in Gaza that the U.S. is fully supporting. Totally great. It's complete and total madness. All right. We're going to take a quick break.

But, Ben, my understanding is that you just recorded an episode of our subscription show, Inside 2024. cricket.com slash friends if you want to become a subscriber. But it was you in Favreau talking all about debate prep, am I right? Yeah, this was a really fun episode to do, Tommy, and I think it'd be fun to listen to because we talk about, obviously, with the debate coming up between Biden and Trump, what does it like to be in debate prep? And John and I were both in debate prep in 2012, you know, during a re-election campaign that obviously went really great before the first debate when Obama almost blew the whole campaign. But he found his footing. So we tell a lot of funny stories, fun stories to relive

and then also what is the strategy that goes into the Bay Prep what should the Biden people have you thinking about with the Trump debate coming up so people should check this out this is a really fun episode it was fun to talk to John

for I don't think I'd potted with John in years either so it's like you guys came out of the out of the studio giddy it sounds like you had so much fun so we forgot all these funny stories you know you start to talk to somebody else

and you remember you know so we definitely we went in the well on this one so yeah there's always like some hilarious stupid but she'd usually be like David Axe Arad, like having room service deliver a salad in the middle of like some, you know, heated prep session or something like that. I know, that was in the middle of Obama getting emotional and tearing up before his convention speech when he was talking about Martin Luther King.

And like he's the most powerful moment. And then Axis salad arrived in room service. Somehow he ordered it to Obama's suite, which is perfect. Stories like this and much more for all you subscribers. Listen to Inside 2024, crooked.com slash friends. Let's turn to France. How about that transition? Last week, we talked about French President Emmanuel Macron's surprising and very risky decision to call SNAP elections in France after his party got crushed in the elections for the European Parliament. Now it increasing looks like the results

of these SNAP elections could be disastrous for Macron. So there's two key data points. First is that the four far left parties in France, the communists, the socialists, the Greens, and a party called the LFI have decided to come together and run under one. platform called the New Popular Front. What that means in practice that these parties won't be competing with each other in these French basically congressional districts. They're going to run one candidate in each district to avoid splitting the vote. And then the second data point is some recent polling, which shows that Macron's party is in deep trouble. The far left coalition is getting about 25% of the vote. National rally, the far right party is getting like 30 to 35% of the vote.

But Macron's party is getting less than 20% of the vote. And so again, French parliamentary elections have two rounds. The first round, I think is June 30th. The second round is July 7th. If no candidate gets 50% in the first round, which very rarely happens, then candidates who get over 12.5% of the vote get to compete in the second round in the runoff. Macron gambled that his coalition would end up pitted against the far right in these runoffs and then he could win those races. But if this polling is accurate, it looks like his coalition might not even make the runoff in most districts, let alone win seats. The campaign may end up being primarily far left coalitions versus far right coalitions. And so, look, we're talking about 577 different elections in different districts with

different elect, you know, people involve, local issues, et cetera. So it's hard to predict. And there's some questions about how strong this left-wing alliance really is. Will people listen to their leaders or will they just do their own thing? But when the runoff is over on July 7th, some French political analysts are predicting that Macron could go from having 250 seats in the Assembly to less than 100. Le Figuero, a newspaper, which I read all the time, did some modeling based on the European Parliament elections that found Macron's coalition might only make it to the runoff in 41 National Assembly districts out of 577. So this would just be like a wipeout for this guy. And so bad, I think that raises the question. If this happens, do we need to revisit our conversation last week about whether Rishi Sunex is,

decision escaped D-Day was the biggest cell phone in recent political history? I think, well, we very well may, although, again, for Rishi Sunak, it's a little more existential because that guy will be out of the job after July 4th, whereas Macron, even if he gets pasted, he can still be president, still live in the Lise, still preside over the Olympics opening ceremony as president for a couple of years. But yes, if I was arguing the kind of McCrone five-dimensional chess point of view last week and you were arguing the catastrophe, the early returns are certainly good for the catastrophe argument. It does just feel like Macron, his party, the movement that he started, the kind of neoliberal

centrist politics. That's just not where the French are right now. I will say the left-come coalescing, I think, is a good thing in the sense that you've had this kind of fracturing of left-wing parties, the traditional socialist party kind of collapsed, and then you have all these different parties. I generally think it's actually good that people are saying, let's ban together. give more of a coherent choice. And that could be a positive aspect of this.

And I'll also say, like, there is this kind of weird benefit that could happen, which is that even if the far right wins, and I mentioned this last week, then they kind of are responsible for governance to some degree for a couple of years. I would rather they win this parliamentary election and lose the next presidential election, given the French system putting so much power in the hands of the presidency. So that's still like the media. medium term thing to watch. But yeah, man, Macron does not seem to have his finger on the pulse of the electorate. Let's just hope that enough French people coalesce around candidates so that the far

right doesn't get kind of a clear majority in the assembly. That would be a win at this point. Yeah, I mean, look, this would be like President Obama calling a snap election just days after the 2010 midterms when we got our asses handed to us. And, you know, but I mean, even in the near term, Ben, the French stock market dropped like 6% last week because everyone is worried about the potential the far right to rise. And look, I'm with you. I think, listen, if given a choice between, you know, Marine Le Pen's party and like literally anyone, I'll vote for anyone else, but there are some pretty odious members of this far left coalition too, who said, you know, kind of welcomed October 7th and said some awful things. Oh, yeah. But you're right. I mean, interestingly, like, Macron came out of nowhere

to, like, kind of create this centrist party. He just made it up on his own, El Marsh, and he kind of exploded French politics. In the process, you know, he sort of forced, some of the, you know, he kind of killed off the traditional French Republicans. And after this election was announced the traditional Republican Party, Le Republicans, one, the party leader announced they would do a deal with Le Pen. The rest of the party was like lost their mind. They said, no, you won't. These guys have the party members stormed the Le Republican office. And they tried to like physically enter his office and push him out. They were tweeting that he'd been kicked out of the party. There was another Twitter account where he was saying, no, I have not. I'm still here. It's just like complete disaster at a mess. So I don't know. I guess we'll know for sure, but it's ugly. And I guess the good news, give you guys some good news. There is a lot of energy against the far right.

So last weekend I think there's about a quarter of a million people on the streets protesting against Marine Le Pen in the far right. And they also got a boost from the captain of the national soccer team, killing Mbapé. Let's listen to a clip of that. I'd like to address all the French people, especially the younger generation. We are a generation that can make a difference. Today, it's clear that the extremes are on the doorstep of power. We have the opportunity to choose the future of our country.

And that's why I'm calling on all young people to go out and vote, to really realize the importance of the situation. We need to identify with values of diversity, tolerance and respect. Good for Mbapé, man. I'm sure he will take some real heat for being an athlete, especially a black athlete, talking about political issues. but well-sad, thoughtful, courageous thing to say, I think. Yeah, and I think that takes real guts.

And we haven't seen a lot of athletes in Europe and soccer players, particularly who have big falling to take that step. And look, I mean, I always think, you know, the French getting pretty xenophobic here in their immigration politics and their racial politics. And yet they seem to have no, you know, Leblos, the French national soccer team. Let's just say that looks like the benefits of diversity manifests in a community that the French people care about. So good for him on calling that out. And it does speak to, like, again, the challenge is McCrone kind of tried to push everybody the far left and far right by owning the center, right?

And I think part of what you want to see is not just the mobilization that Mbapap is calling for, but, you know, the left needs to kind of reestablish itself and deal with kind of the some of the strangeness in its flank. I'd frankly like to see you a healthier center right than Marine Le Pen there. And so hopefully if more people get involved in politics, then you're not just kind of leaving it to the far left and the far right and then this guy, McCrone. That's kind of what has to happen in the long, well, at least the medium term in France. But good to see people like that speaking out. I'd like to see more that in this country and more that around the world. Yeah, Mbapé was born in Paris, I believe, but his father is from

part of Cameroon. His mother is Algerian. So yes, he's sort of exactly, you know, the the picture of the diversity that you're talking about. And the Euros, the Euro soccer tournament is happening right now. So as French citizens decide whether to vote for Marine Le Pen, they're watching Mbapé play and cheering him on. Ben, speaking of protests, let's turn to Argentina, because they were huge protests there last week after President Javier Mulei narrowly pushed through two massive reform bills that he claims are necessary to pull Argentina out of its decades-long economic spiral. So these due laws would grant the president the power to declare a state of economic emergency, cut pensions, privatize some state-owned firms,

and weakened labor protections. Mulei has faced stiff opposition from political opponents within Congress to this plan and some violent protests outside of it. Dozens of protesters were hospitalized after clashes with police, including five opposition MPs who were part of the crowd. Muley was elected president last November with about 55% of the vote. He described himself at the time as an anarcho-capitalist who was willing to take a chainsaw to public spending. and basically the political system itself. In fact, he used to love to bring an actual chainsaw to events and hold it up looking like a psycho Wolverine-style X-Men character.

But since getting elected, he's taken a bunch of steps. He's devalued Argentina's currency. He's slashed the size of government. He's cut fuel subsidies. We spoke to Buenos Aires-based freelance journalist Daniel Politi about what these austerity measures are looking like for ordinary Argentinians. Here's a clip. The social stuff that's happening in Argentina, I think, is interesting.

It's not getting that much attention. in the way that what austerity has meant to the people of Argentina. Austerity is strong austerity that Millet has ushered, has meant, you know, soup kitchens are empty pretty much, the government has pretty much stopped sending money. The soup kitchens at the time when poverty has increased, figures have shown that poverty has increased. Millet has managed to decelerate inflation. You know, I mean, last month's inflation numbers just came out.

they were the lowest since 2002. Argentina still has, you know, almost 300% annual inflation rate. He came into office promising a lower inflation rate. And he's delivering in that sense, but at what cost and the cost of austerity, what's happening to unemployment, unemployment has already started to increase. So I think for now, Malay still has this screening room. He's still, if we can call it in this honeymoon period. The big question is, how long will it last?

and how long will Argentina people be willing to put up with this pain in order for some promised better future? So, as you mentioned, you know, the spending cuts have moved Argentina from a fiscal deficit to a surplus. The month-over-month inflation rate fell to about 9%. But again, the annual inflation is 300%, which is unthinkable for us. And Argentina owes the IMF about $44 billion. They've got a steep hill to climb.

Mule has kind of become a celebrity in right-wing. circles in the U.S. He spoke at CPAC earlier this year. There's a clip of him giving Trump this big, weird, enthusiastic hug. He was also in the U.S. meeting with big tech leaders, including Elon Musk, who he's been like buddy buddy with on Twitter as well. Elon basically just wants access to Argentina's supply of lithium, which is a key component for electric vehicle batteries. Musk is called lithium, the new oil. So, Ben, you know, Miele's a departure from some of the right-wing populace we talk about often who are successful because they combine, you know, conservative positions on social issues like abortion or immigration, along with an expansion

of social programs in the welfare state. Miele is very much not doing that. He's basically pairing super conservative social views with austerity measures that you might expect from the Tory party in the UK or Macron in France. Do you think that's going to work? It seems like it got the potential to make nobody happy to me. Yeah, I don't think that's going to work. I mean, he's got the tear it all down right-wing populism of other leaders. But then he has this kind of like extreme libertarian, you know, Milton Freeman kind of, I mean, you mentioned Elon Musk. Miele could fit right in on the all-in pod, Tommy. You know, you could slide right in there next to David Sacks and, you know, but put that aside. I think the concerning thing here is that when Miele got elected,

it was kind of like, how far is you going to go in two areas? One is, in terms of his kind of libertarian fantasies, his anarcho-capitalist fantasies of austerity and kind of gutting the state. And then two was how undemocratic was he going to be and how much was he going to challenge institutions of Argentina's democracy? And unfortunately, after a relatively restrained beginning, it seems like he's accelerating in both spaces, right? Because he's really beginning to take that chainsaw to the Argentina state. And that's going to have a long tail in terms of declining social service. poverty, you know, people really suffering because of those policies. But also he's, you know, it's a national economic emergency. You know, he's kind of ramming this stuff through. It does

feel like we're now seeing the person that people were concerned about. And honestly, I feel like that's going to end badly for everybody, including Miele, you know, like if you've got huge economic disruptions, you're going to get more street protests and more instability in that way. And if he's kind of going after the functioning of the state. Well, he doesn't have like a big political party backing him. So I think he could end up being quite isolated, but the problem is it's probably not going to be very good for people in Argentina in the immediate future. Yeah. He definitely needs to get inflation under control, but man, it's going to be unbelievably painful to get there if this is how he's going to do it. And then finally, Ben, listeners might have opened Instagram or Twitter in the last week

and wondered, why is every single late-night TV host or, like, comedian from the 90s hanging out with the Pope? It turns out that is because Pope Francis invited more than 100 comedians from around the world to visit to, quote, establish a link between the Catholic Church and comic artists. Yes, the famously lighthearted, funny Catholic church. Some of the American attendees include Jimmy Fallon, Stephen Colbert, Chris Rock, Julia Louis Dreyfis, and Whoopi Goldberg. Here's a clip of Whoopi Goldberg talking about the meeting.

I thought, okay, I'm going to walk into this building and I'm going to burst into flames. But as it turns out, I did not. And I brought him some stuff from Sister Act. He requested, right? He asked for it. Everybody loves Sister Act. The Pope, it's a great movie, but both of them. The Pope later with the G7, he's delivered a speech and reportedly asked for stronger guardrails

for artificial intelligence. I'm sure that was a highly technical conversation. Ben, the Pope met with Biden one-on-one. Biden's obviously the second-ever Catholic president and deeply religious person. I'm guessing they didn't discuss reports that the Pope has been repeatedly using anti-gay slurs during meetings of the Vatican.

Ben, why is the Pope doing influencer outreach? Is that what's happening here? It appears to be what's happening here. I mean, I guess they were thinking like does me a big spotlight on Italy on Rome and on the Vatican. And so we might as well do whatever we can to make use of it. I mean, look, I will say that on balance, and you mentioned these slurs that he used behind closed doors. So this is not to kind of look at the Pope wholly with rose-colored glasses. I do think you

have to look at it relative to the history of the Catholic Church and frankly relative to other leaders around the world. The good thing about Pope Francis is he seems to continue to be trying to provide some degree of like moral leadership in the world. He's been outspoken on climate change. He's now raising issues around artificial intelligence and guardrails that, you know, frankly, I think political leaders need to take on as the kind of challenge almost up there with climate change in terms of protecting humanity going forward. Not, well, maybe not that close, but, you know, it's definitely in the next tier down.

And actually, he's taken some steps to open up a little bit the Catholic Church on issues around LGBT. Hopefully the reports of these slurs, you know, can push him in the right direction on those issues. And so I think he was trying to kind of use his platform to get attention on how he's trying to change and evolve the Catholic Church. You know, reaching out to a bunch of comedians, probably almost all of whom have told Catholic jokes or, you know, or done something that the church wouldn't like in the past. I think that that's a kind of, that's in line with Pope Francis kind of signaling, hey, we're in a new era. We're trying to be, you know, we're trying to have a sense of

humor about ourselves. We're trying to open up to kind of audiences that have reach with, you know, younger populations, but also that they might have once been at odds with us. But I was kind of Tommy, I know you're, you know, you've done Colbert and we love Stephen Colbert. And frankly, I like all these light night hosts. It was like a very late night forward. It was like Conan O'Brien, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Fallon. So again, no offense to the late night hosts whatsoever, but that's a slightly older demographic, you know. It was kind of our generation of comedians, too. Chris Rock, you know, so they got to find, like, who the kids these days think are funny.

The next one is going to have to have some, like, YouTubers and TikTok comedians. Yeah, I think Colbert is a deeply religious guy and a Catholic. Yeah, you're, like, you're right. I mean, like, I'm not excusing anything that Pope said. I do think when you compare him to his predecessor, Pope Benedict, he does seem like a much better influence in the world. I think it's kind of interesting, frankly, that the Catholic Church is doing influencer marketing. I mean, that's the thing that political campaigns have just started doing as well.

And if you think about it, then Jesus was the original influencer. So, you know, there's a long history there. But, yeah, I guess good for them. I'm sure it was an incredible experience. I initially thought Biden invited all these guys. Like, what's happening? Well, it's a sign, by the way, that the, of the allure of the Pope, right, of both that office, right, but also Pope Francis,

that all these people went, you know? I mean, I was impressed. I was like, there are not many places in the world or people in the world that could say, hey, we want to have a bunch of comedians and that kind of star power shows up. So it does remind you that I think particularly Pope Francis, but also the institution itself, it matters. And insofar as it's incrementally opening up, that's, you know, that's to the good. Yeah.

Okay, that's it for the new section. We're going to take a quick break. But when we come back, you will hear Ben's conversation with Congresswoman Ilhan Omar about all things to Sudan and Gaza. So stick around for that. Okay, we are very pleased to welcome back to Pod Save the World, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, who is always got a lot of interesting things to say, but also today is going to talk about and frankly announce a letter that she's sending to the administration when this podcast drops. But Congresswoman, thanks so much for joining us.

Thank you for having me, Ben. Okay, so we've been talking about the situation, the horrific humanitarian situation in Sudan. And one of the things that people have really been struggling with is what can we do? You know, what more could be done to help people, such a tremendous amount of people are in such horrific needs. You've now called for there to be a humanitarian parole program for people impacted by the war in Sudan, similar to what we've had for people from Afghanistan and Ukraine. Just to begin, explain a bit about what that means, who that affects and why you took this step. Yeah, well, thank you again for for having me and for spotlighting our work in regards to

Sudan. You know, what is taking place the civil war in Sudan is probably one of the most horrific civil wars that we've seen in a really long time. It's experiencing one of the worst famines in 40 years that has been recorded. There's millions and millions of people that are being displaced. There's again the accusation of genocide that's taking place in Darfur. And I think there are a couple of things that the United States obviously can do. One of them is to provide parole, which is a relief for so many people. It allows for them to be able to come to the United States. I think when we're thinking about just the horrors of what people are experiencing and our ability to have already done it for the people that were fleeing Afghanistan after the withdrawal,

the people of Ukraine after the invasion of the Russian troops, I think it is time for us to allow for that same relief to be provided to the Sudanese people. I am grateful to Sarah Jacobs, who is the co-lead on this letter that we are sending to the administration. We have about two dozen of our colleagues that are on this letter, and the letter goes out today. And what do you think the possibilities are that the administration will be open to this kind of approach? I mean, this is actually kind of exactly what the humanitarian parole program was designed for this kind of circumstance where there's no question about the vulnerability of the people who are impacted, you know, are facing everything from, you know, genocidal violence in Darfur to famine conditions and parts of the country. At the same time, we've obviously seen, you know,

kind of a building anti-immigrant, anti-refugee sentiment and even, you know, border policies getting much firmer out of the Biden administration. Are you hopeful that you can make some headway here and opening some doors to some people who desperately need literally asylum? Yeah, I mean, we've we've had some preliminary conversations with the administration. We've had this conversation with the envoy that was assigned to deal with the civil war. in Sudan, we feel that the administration might be receptive. I don't know how quickly they might be able to get it done. Our hope is that, you know, this sort of compassion has been present with the Biden administration,

and we hope that that compassion is going to be extended to the Sudanese people. As you said, we're experiencing just, you know, severe atrocities. and the world seems to not be paying attention. I think the humanitarian crisis in itself to see so many millions of people cross the border to South Sudan, into Chad, into Ethiopia, that is also experiencing atrocities, to have millions internally displaced. I think it is imperative for us to show. care and compassion to the Sudanese people who have suffered for a really long time.

Just stepping, taking a bigger view of things, this would obviously help people who can get here. Hopefully there's people with family. They're people with connections in the U.S. who may try to find safety and security. But there are obviously, in any case, you know, still so many vulnerable people. You know, there's 10 million people displaced, as you've said, that's beginning to create challenges in neighboring countries. A horrific death toll already that the U.S. envoy, Tom Periello, suggested it could become as high as 150,000. And yet, there seems to be no end in sight to the war. What policy tools would you like to see the U.S. using? What can be done

from the perspective of the international community to try to address kind of both the humanitarian needs but also the political dispute and some of the regional powers have been pouring in weapons. What tools are available to the U.S. that you'd like to CSB using? Well, obviously there are always tools available to the United States. You know, one is to look at there. There are two entities that have really some real leverage that we have a relationship with. One is the Saudis. The Saudis really want to be at the table and the leads in negotiating a ceasefire. And they've been an obstacle to the support that some of the other ones that are leading or have attempted to lead a ceasefire,

whether it's the Egyptians or the Kenyans or other players within the region that have had a few conferences so far in trying to get the RSF and the Sudanese army to stop taking up arms and the civil war and eventually transition into a civilian-led government. So we could pressure the Saudis to either fully carry out the negotiations that they want to carry or step aside and allow for the other regional entities that are designating themselves to be able to lead those negotiations. The other one is the United Arabians. Emirates. They are accused of being the primary suppliers of the RSF in regards to weapons. We know that those weapons that have been spotted have been weapons that the UAE has purchased from the United States. I've let an effort for us not to sell them weapons until they stop arming the RSF. I know that my colleague, Congresswoman Sarah Jacobs, is leading a renewed effort into doing

that. I think those are quick steps that we can take. And I think in regards to supporting the Sudanese people as they struggle is to, you know, increase the humanitarian aid that we are providing to give more support to our envoy, to do the parole that we just talked about. We are not without tools in our toolbox in trying to help address the civil war that is happening in Sudan. A common thread between Gaza and Sudan, right, is that the U.S. is providing these arms to the Emirates and Saudis that find their way to the RSF, to Israel that have been used in Gaza. Do you think that is there a growing appetite to take a look at, you know, because U.S.

foreign policy people are often wondering, why doesn't the Global South support our foreign policy agenda? Why is it so hard to get countries to care about Ukraine? And yet, you know, this is kind of staring us in the face that part of the issue is that it's U.S. weapons that are being used in, you know, right now the two most horrific, well, alongside Ukraine conflicts in the world. Is there something that can be done to take a more holistic look at who we're arming? and what the actual tools are. Because in Israel, you know, there are tools like the Leahy law and things that would suggest that we should be restricting those arms flows.

Is there a way to surface those more in Congress or people willing to take a harder look at this? Yeah, I mean, that's why I introduced the Stop-Arming Human Rights Violators Act, the Sara Act. And I think it's important for us to have a holistic look and be able to. able to make the determinations on the front end instead of continuing with the approach that we've had in place. I think, you know, speaking of the Leahy law, that we know that that's now being violated by the Israeli army and we haven't taken any action. And I think if we are serious, we should bring back that leverage and the legislative. tools and oversight to members of Congress and the fact that we have relegated our power

to be able to have oversight, to make those decisions to the executive branch really shows that there are not too many members of Congress that are too concerned in overseeing the pieces of legislation that they pass and making sure that those pieces of legislation are carried out in the way that they were designed to be carried out. So on Gaza specifically, you've called for a halt to providing weapons to Israel for some time now. You know, that's a position I've advocated. At the same time, I want to kind of bring together the politics and policy of this, because at the same time that we see this kind of building concern, obviously, from the Biden administration rhetorically, they've yet to kind of really take

that step. You know, they've, they've withheld, you know, I think one. shipment of offensive weapons. And now we see at the same time that the war cabinet is unraveled in Israel, the one place where B.B. Netanyahu can seem to get a big welcome is in the United States Congress with the bipartisan leadership inviting him to speak to Congress. And so we have this kind of interesting intersection of a policy that is not working. Because if one of the goals of the policies to limit the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, get more aid in, and get to a ceasefire, you know, that that has not worked. Pretty clearly, a big piece of that is Prime Minister Ninyao himself. And at the same time, though, we see this kind of political embrace of Nanyahu.

We also seen the Democratic Party, APAC, spending a lot of money in primaries, and that may come your way. They're focused right now on Jamal Bowman, Bowman seat in New York, but that's not the only one where APAC is trying to kind of punish people that don't take a wholly supportive line of the Israeli government. Where do you see the political and policy debate in the Democratic party on support for the Israeli government right now? Because on the one hand, you're seeing more criticism than we've seen before, given what's happened in Gaza. And on the other hand, not much has changed substantively or in terms of even the optics of inviting Netanyahu, and we still of APEC kind of getting involved in Democratic primaries. So where do you see, you know, on the spectrum,

the current state of the Democratic Party's view of this relationship with the Israeli government? I mean, we, as you said, we haven't seen a shift and we might not see a shift in a really long time. You know, I've come to the realization that this is a very entrenched policy position, that Democrats, Republicans, regardless of whatever administration we have, regardless of, you know, where members of Congress represent, that this is sort of, you know, our ally, we do whatever it is that they ask. And we're not going to see a shift in that until we change the people who are in these seats, right? And we have to make sure that they are not people who get there with the support and the financials. financial backing of APAC so that they can be, they can have the independence to make decisions

that are both good for our country and sort of allow for them to lead with their conscience, with their humanity and their morals intact. It is quite unfortunate to see so many of our Democratic colleagues put out these statements calling for a ceasefire saying, you know, Natiniajo is not a partner for peace. saying we should condition aid, saying Netanyahu should not be invited. And then when push comes to shove, they'll vote for the aid. They will sign on to the letter of invitation, just like Chuck Schumer did. We were all really excited about the moral clarity that he showed when he made that speech

on the Senate floor. And then months later, to actually invite the man that he said was not a partner of peace to come address the, to give him the honor of having a joint session in front of Congress really shows you how much of a disconnect there is between what people are willing to say and what they're willing to actually do. And the fact that their actions do not, are not in lockstep with their words, shows you how much pressure is out there. We know that that pressure mostly comes from APAC. And I think in order for us to be able to withstand that pressure,

we have to take the financial incentive that is attached to that pressure away. And that's why big money and dark money in politics really has shifted the way in which this country is governed. And it is, I think, a detrimental and a threat. to democracy, to a representative democracy, and something, something has to give. Well, you know, I'm going to ask you one more question that kind of ties back to where we began, but obviously Gaza is a part of it. You know, we've seen, for instance, on the National Defense authorization, which is the massive spending bill that Republicans love to attach very problematic

amendments to. You know, there's something barring, I think, you know, any Palestinians from coming into the country, you know, kind of vindictive policies like that. But we've generally seen xenophobia kind of creeping in. Obviously, it's kind of a feature, not a bug of Republican politics, but also kind of public opinion, you know, turning against, you know, asylum procedures. It's World Refugee Day coming up on June 20th. You obviously, you know, your personal story, you were a former refugee from Somalia. You've seen in your district, I know, the benefits culturally and economically to having a vibrant immigrant community.

How do we kind of reintroduce the benefits, both moral and humanitarian benefits of compassion, but also the necessity to, you know, both global stability, but also the domestic economic and cultural benefits of an orderly migration system that includes compassion for refugees in an environment where there are lots of concerns that people have about the border and there's kind of the pendulum has swung against compassion. Yeah, I mean, Republicans have now developed a brand of punching down and it's really unfortunate. I think, you know, for me, I've been in this country now 29 years, in 19 years.

1995, our family was fortunate enough to be resettled in the United States and benefit from the refugee resettlement program, which since the Obama era has not really fulfilled its promise and the number of slots that have been allocated have never really been fully taken advantage of. You know, people are not showing up at our border. people are not showing up at borders throughout the world and be made into refugees because it is fun. It is something that they want to do, right? People are being displaced because of war. People are being displaced because of the climate crisis. People are being displaced because of violence, lack of opportunity. And so these are people who have to leave everything that is known to them in order to seek,

And so there's no one more grateful, no one more hopeful, no one more joyful than a refugee who has lost their home and everything that they knew that is now given an opportunity to start over and to find shelter, to find access to food and to resources. And that gratefulness shows up in their service. that gratefulness shows up in the educational opportunities that they provide to the societies that they are placed in, that shows up in the economic opportunities that they create because most of them have entrepreneurial spirit, that shows up in the way that they really uplift that American story of America being a piquan of hope. And I think, you know, when I talk to, you know, my, my state, staff, my constituents, my relatives, who all have an immigrant story from, you know, decades, generations, they all remember, you know, my great-grandmother migrated here, you know,

my husband's relatives left Ireland because of the potato fat man. Like, everybody remembers. There's this pride. There's this story about, you know, they came. here with $20 in their pocket. They came here through, you know, Alice Island. So all of those stories are stories that make the American story. And people need to be reminded that this is, unless you are indigenous or you're someone

who is a descendant of the enslaved and you came here in shackles, everyone else make their way to this country from another part of the world and made it their home. and made the United States what it is today. And I think that is a story that is forgotten because the Republicans have been so good at really undermining the narrative that we are a country of immigrants, undermining the fact that immigrants

contribute less to crime and more to opportunities that immigrants. take less resources than what they pay in into the system. And so we have a fight on our hands when it comes to reshaping and reclaiming that narrative. And I think it is important to have, you know, voices like mine sharing that story. And this week we submitted an op-ed, hopefully that will run in a major outlet. that will remind us that there is beauty in us allowing people to come to our country because it just enriches us.

Well, that's well said. I mean, all of us who are not indigenous or somewhere immigrants, and so that made America great. So maybe this is, you know, we have to make America great again by actually honoring our tradition as a nation. I'm informing our immigration system. Exactly. Yes.

a system that works for everyone. Well, look, it's so great to see you. We'll be following the issue in Sudan and if people should be supportive to their members of Congress with that kind of approach. But always good to catch up with you and best of luck and your own election coming up. Thank you so much. Thanks again to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar for joining the show. Ben, I didn't mention the Celtics winning the NBA finals. Yeah.

Because I was trying to be respectful because I'm in New York, but we did. I want to congratulate you. I actually am really... I played hard. I will say this as an NBA fan who obviously wants the Knicks to win every year, but that never happens. This team deserved a title,

like the Brown team. They're awesome. I was kind of almost glad that that kind of got out of the way. So that now, you know, hopefully the next year the Knicks can make a run at it. But I like those guys. And by the way, I'll say, like Jalen Brown, I've been following, like,

he seems like a good dude, right? He's so smart. He's so interesting. smart guy, thoughtful. So I was glad to see him win the MVP too. So you know what? I actually feel good about your win. Congratulations to you. I mean, I remember when we drafted Jalen Brown. I was like reading all about him. He played just like super great hard defense was athletic as hell and he's just developed his game to become a super max contract deserving star. But yeah, I mean, the team was just like unbelievably deep. We like Drew Holiday and Derek White coming off the bench,

Christop Porzingis. I mean, it was just a unstoppable squad. So, you know, finally Boston. sports fans get a win. It's about time. It's been quite a drought for us. Big win for Latvia, tough loss for Slovenia. We got it for Worldo content. The Latvians have a lot to celebrate here with Buzzingis. So I'm talking about.

All right, that's it for us. We will talk to you guys next week. See ya. If you want to get ad-frey episodes, exclusive content, and more. Consider joining our Friends of the Pod subscription community at crooked.com slash friends. Don't forget to follow 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. And if you're as opinionated as us, consider dropping a review. Pod Save the World is a crooked media production. Our executive producers are me, Tommy Vitor, Ben Rhodes, and Reed Cherlin. Our producer is Alona Minkowski, and associate producer is Ashley Mizuo. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick, audio support by Kyle Segglin and Charlotte Landis.

Our studio technician is David Tolls, thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn and Phoebe Bradford, who upload our episodes and videos to YouTube.com slash Pod Save the World. For nearly 100 years, The New Yorkers provided political commentary, journalism, criticism, and of course wit to millions of readers. And you can expect even more from their podcast, The New Yorker Radio Hour. Each week, listeners will hear from guests like Supermodel Brooks Shields on the sexualization of young girls in Hollywood, New Yorker staff writer Gia Tolentino on the dangerous trend

of OZempic and even CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman, on if and how artificial intelligence should be regulated. grab your coffee and join editor of the New Yorker David Remnick as he presents a mix of profiles and storytelling that the publication is known for every Tuesday and Friday. Listen and follow the New Yorker Radio Hour wherever you get your podcasts.