Pod Save the World - Will Republicans Kill Support For Ukraine?

Episode Date: October 4, 2023

Tommy and Ben talk about the waning support for financing the war in Ukraine, both in the US Congress and in Europe, Elon Musk’s visit to the southern border, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley responds to Trump’s threats, Trump’s former Chief of Staff John Kelly tells CNN about Trump’s disrespect towards veterans, the UN authorizes a mission to Haiti, Canada and India continue their war of words, and the end of “Panda Diplomacy.” Then Tommy speaks with Sue Mi Terry, a former CIA officer and producer of the documentary “Beyond Utopia” that profiles the harrowing reality of life in North Korea and the lengths people will go to escape it. The documentary will be in theaters at the end of October. 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 Pazade of the World. I'm Tommy Vitor. I'm Ben Rhodes. Ben, the house speakership is vacant or something. I don't, I barely listened. But bye-bye, Kevin McCarthy. Yeah, the Kevin McCarthy era will be long remembered in American political history. What an era it was. Did you have a favorite part? Which, which month? Which day was your favorite part? I mean, I, at the beginning, the drama, the heartbreak. The beginning and the end. The comeback, yeah, the beginning and the end is the only thing anybody's going to remember, which is a sad and sorry state of affairs for our country, but not feeling too bad for that guy. I have to say. No, he's a terrible, terrible, terrible person. And I'm sure he'll run again like 15 times. Well, do you remember my favorite thing is like that book, that really cheesy book,

it's worth people Googling just to see that the cover of the book, Young Guns with Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan, and Eric Cantor on the cover. All three of those guys have done. now had, I mean, we may not have heard the last McCarthy, but he's definitely been as humiliated as fully as other guys now. Yeah, it's funny that the Heritage Foundation tax cuts for businesses, generation Republicans didn't make it. So, Ben, we got a lot to cover today. We're going to talk about this mess in the House of the representatives and what it means for Ukraine aid, both in the U.S. and also just the politics in Europe. There's reports about Russia testing a nuclear-powered

missile, so that's really fun. Elon Musk took a little sojourn to the border. Donald Trump is waging war with his own senior military leadership. There is a rare breakthrough for Haiti. The India's War of Words with Canada is getting nastier and nastier. And then we'll talk a little panda diplomacy. And then I just spoke with former CIA officer Sumi Terry about North Korea and a new documentary called Beyond Utopia, which is about life in North Korea and what people will do to escape it. It is really a powerful film, Ben. It's like, I don't like it kind of fucked me up for many, many hours because when you kind of like, you live in the shoes of someone who is, I don't know, in North Korea for decades, brainwashed

for 80 years, you know, you watch this family like desperately go through four different countries to escape. It really affects you. but an amazing film that opens in theaters later this month, that folks should check out. I think I spent the evening of the Donald Trump Kim Jong-un summit and a television studio with Sumi Terry. Oh, really?

Yeah. And what was interesting is she watching somebody who'd worked on that issue for a lot of her life react to the images of Donald Trump, you know, kind of sucking up to Kim Jong-un. And I thought she was going to, you know, pass out. But she's very good. Yeah, I mean, listen, we talk about this in the interview. Like the entire conversation in Washington is about North Korea's nuclear weapons program,

understandably in some level. But when you really look at their human rights violations, the only example that's comparable is Nazi Germany. And that's who you're sending love letters to and sucking up to and, you know, meeting up with in Singapore and, like, talking about how brilliant he is. I mean, that is the context for Trump kissing this guy's ass. for four years. Yeah. I mean, I think people live in like a hellscape that we can't even imagine. I mean, the stories of defectors who, you know, didn't even know, didn't even know,

you know, reached teenage years and didn't even know about holding hands. You know, like, they didn't even know about the basic forms of human connection that people have because they're so beaten into submission to this bizarre cult of personality. It's truly dark stuff that doesn't get enough of a spotlight. So I'm glad you're doing that. Yeah, it's really, it's worth checking it out. Again, it's called Beyond Utopia. So, Ben, let's start with Ukraine because everyone's trying to figure out what this mess in the House of Representatives over the spending bills means for U.S. support for Ukraine. We talked about some of the domestic politics a bit on Ponce of America yesterday. I figured you and I, because look, let's be honest, we're a little more worldly. We're a little more sophisticated. We should broaden it out and talk about Europe, too. So the Wall Street Journal says that the Pentagon has about $5 billion left in its coffers for Ukraine. That is until, you know, some accounting era. finds like an F-35 in a couch cushion or something. But that $5 billion is going to last a couple months and then they got to figure out what's next. President Biden wants Congress to pass another $24 billion. Again, that money will pay for the javelin missiles, tanks, you know, artillery shells,

etc. To date, the U.S. has provided $74 billion in humanitarian budget and military support to Ukraine. If you're seeing bigger numbers in the press being reported, I know it's confusing, but that money probably includes money the U.S. spent to replenish our own stock. piles, and that's why you're seeing like 114, 115. Since the war started, the EU and member states have given Ukraine about 80 billion. The UK has done about $6 billion on top of that. So Europe is doing a lot for Ukraine, but there's no way they could cover the shortfall if the U.S. cuts off funding. So, you know, you and I have talked about how political support for Ukraine funding has eroded in the U.S., especially among Republicans. That's also happening in

Europe. A couple of data points in Slovakia, a pro-R candidate named Robert Fizzo, his SMER party, got more votes in their parliamentary elections than any other party. He still needs to form a coalition, but this guy blamed Ukrainian Nazis and fascists. That's a quote for the invasion and promised to cut off military support. Poland had been very forward-leaning and supporting Ukraine, but the ruling law and justice party is waffling a bit in advance of their election on October 15th. Farmers in Poland are pissed about Ukrainian grain imports undercutting prices and the law and justice party is fending off an even more right-wing party that's running against support for Ukraine. So on top of of all that, Europe just like doesn't have the industrial base they need. Again, the Wall Street

Journal had a great piece on this. They said industry officials say that Europe's defense industry currently can collectively only produce 5% to 10% of the artillery ammunition Ukraine needs. So, Ben, I mean, foreign ministers from most European countries had a surprise meeting in Ukraine this week. They're trying to show solidarity. But the political trajectory across the U.S., across Europe feels very, very bad. And I'm just, I'm wondering what the way through this is that doesn't, you know, leave Ukraine hanging. Yeah, I think you said the key word, which is trajectory, right?

Which is that there's no place right now in the world where the trend line is in the direction of providing more support for Ukraine. The trend line in European politics is the rise of kind of populists who are kind of merging a message against the cost of living crisis with a message against support for Ukraine. And that's a trend line in the Republican Party in the U.S., which is enough to throw wrenches into the gears of providing continued funding. So there are different pieces of this, right? In the U.S., it's just going to be a real Herculean task to get even this $24 billion out the door. I think they'll get there, Tommy. Like, there's enough end-of-year funding.

They're going to have to kind of have some massive funding bill at some point to avert another government shutdown. And I can't imagine that the White House, and even some Senate Republicans like Mitch McConnell would let that go through without something like this funding getting through. However, I think the message is, given how hard it is, getting more of that funding before our election is going to be really, really difficult. And given the burn rate thus far, it's not clear to me that $24 billion even gets you to that election. So the American funding is in trouble. The European funding is in real trouble, too. And as you have more of these elections, the thing people may say like, well, Slovakia is not that big a supplier to Ukraine.

Well, in addition to being the most forward-leaning, one of the more forward-leaning countries early in the war in terms of providing support, they've also, you know, when other political leaders see results like that in their neighborhood, they might start to get a little cautious too. Oh, yeah. We'll come back to the Kiev meeting because it's interesting that the EU did what they did. I think it's in part an effort to kind of signal ongoing support. But we have to face the reality that it's going to get harder to provide this support, certainly not easier. And look, I think part of what happened here, Tommy, we talked a lot about this while we were waiting for this counteroffensive, that the expectations were raised too high, I think,

by some of the Ukrainian supporters, that this counteroffensive was going to be decisive, that victory was near at hand. That word was used a lot, victory, victory, victory, victory, without much definition of what that meant. And Ukraine has been losing so many people and burning through such ammunition. And if this really is settling into more of an war of attrition, it may be that that kind of, I don't want to say burn rate because there are human lives attached to that, but that level of effort, it may not just, it may not be sustainable. Ukraine may need to shift to a strategy that is more opportunistic, that is not kind of throwing so much at the front lines at the same

time, they may have to account for the fact that there is going to just by definition be a slightly lower flow of weapons and money to them. I don't think it's going to be cut off in any form, nor do I think it should, obviously. But I do think that we're just in a new reality here, assuming this counteroffensive doesn't break through. Thus far, they've only taken back, I think, 0.25% of the land that Russia held before the counteroffensive began here. So that's what we're talking about. It's a very marginal amount of territorial gain. Assuming that's kind of of where things are as we enter the winner, I just think they're going to have to account for less of a spigot of assistance coming in. That's just the reality, unless something can shift

politics. But I don't think anything can truly shift politics in the West on this issue until the U.S. presidential election. And then, look, if Biden's reelected, then maybe there's another push here. That's, you know, we're talking about a year from now. But like, that's just where we are. Yeah. And, you know, Biden did a call today with a bunch of allies trying to reassure them. But, you know, look, we also have to remember that, you know, it's October 3rd, last winter was unseasonably warm. That helped kind of keep some of those political forces from, you know, like a cost of living increasing or people flipping out about their heating bills or, you know, sort of driving sentiment against the war. We just don't know that that's going to be the case. It's like, I mean, so much of this is out of our hands.

And, you know, to your point, the Ukrainian forces have breached a couple of these defensive lines that the Russians have set up. but they haven't busted through them yet or really sort of picked up a lot of territory. And like, I don't know that that's a fair way to judge this counteroffensive or not, but it sort of was the benchmark that got set up and it's what the conversation has been in the sort of expert analyst community. Yeah. And I don't think it's the fair benchmark. But again, the reality is like this is why I think I had, you know, we had these concerns

about how high the expectations are getting raised on the counteroffensive, you know. And look, the arguments that are being made in European politics that you heard in Slovakia, that the AFD party, the kind of Nazi party in Germany, which is, again, as we always say, not a good thing. But the arguments are- Rising and support fast, by the way. Rising and support fast. The popularity is drastically increasing. That's right.

And their message is, we're paying for this three ways in Europe. We're paying for it because we're paying for refugees. We're paying for it in the price of energy, and we're paying for it with this assistance. And look, I think that they're wrong. And look, I think it's worth just noting that what the Republicans are doing with this is cynical and wrong. But there is, you can't ignore the political salience of that message. And so I think, you know, you have to look for ways to shift the Ukrainian military strategy, ways to maybe focus on some of the more consequential systems, rather than trying to give them

everything, focus on what is most important. So for instance, if we're moving to more of an war of nutrition, maybe they need more air defense systems, right, so that their life can be normal in the parts of Ukraine that are not controlled by Russia. I think what the Europeans did with this kind of meeting of foreign ministers in Kyiv was really smart because what they were saying is we're here to talk about Ukraine's trajectory into the European Union. And that's kind of a long-term vision for where this is going. People say like, well, where is this all going? It's pretty clear that Ukraine is probably going to have a hard time regaining all of its territory, certainly so long as Vladimir Putin's around. You have to start to piece together a five-year and a 10-year vision here for how Ukraine can

sustain itself, how life can be protected in the parts of Ukraine that, again, are not under Russian control, how budgetary support can continue to flow in, how reforms can continue to happen in Ukraine so that they can join the European Union over time. So I think you have to kind of broaden the lens here of the types of political and economic and military support you're providing instead of just trying to rack up as much military support and as many weapon systems as possible. It's going to have to be a little more focused, a little more targeted, and coupled with other types of policies that tried to just help the Ukrainians weather a war of attrition rather than thinking, you know what, if we give them a few more tanks and some F-16s, the next counter-offensive

is going to be the one that breaks the line, because it's just not clear that that we can count on that. Everybody's got to stop with this, you know, magic bullet next weapon system bullshit. That's just not the way it works. Adding to the fun, speaking of weapons systems, Ben, the New York Times reported that Russia has tested or is maybe planning to test a nuclear-powered missile. This is based on satellite imagery showing movement at a base previously associated with testing of the SSCX-9 Skyfall missile. I wouldn't be too worried about this one since I think previous tests have all failed. But, you know, not great.

Kind of an alarmist headline. Also, this week marks the sixth month that Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gerskovich has been detained or held hostage, rather, in Russia. So I just want to add us to the chorus of people who are thinking about him and hoping he gets released soon. Yeah, never good when there's like nuclear cruise missile tests happening even when they fail. It's just a kind of reminder that we're in this kind of very dangerous era because, you know, Putin keeps messaging. He keeps trying to remind people that he has this nuclear escalation card to play. You know, what we've learned is he's not playing it just because the Ukrainians are taking some shots into Crimea and things like that. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned because what people should remember is the entire.

nuclear arms control regime between the U.S. and Russia has kind of fallen apart. Trump pulled out of a bunch of, you know, it wasn't just the Russians, Trump pulled out of some these treaties, the Russians aren't cooperating with the New START treaty that, you know, applies to the deployed missile launchers for nuclear weapons. So this testing is happening without the kind of arms control regime that we've had in place for decades, dating back into the Cold War. And that's just a more dangerous world, right? So that's unfortunately where we are. Yeah. So obviously, Ukraine will be a big issue going forward in the likely race between Biden and Donald Trump. Another big one will be immigration. We've covered the migration crisis a lot on the show. On Monday, President Lopez Obrador of Mexico gave a speech where he said that 6,000 migrants are entering southern Mexico per day. And he said last week, 10,000 migrants reached the U.S. Mexico border per day. So the flows are drastically increasing after a decrease for a while. Lopez Obrador Amlo. And the

Colombian president, Gustavo Petro, both came out and blamed U.S. sanctions on Venezuela and Cuba for driving migration. I think, you know, a more fair assessment would be its policies in those countries plus U.S. sanctions that are driving the crisis, but, you know, you're hearing a chorus of these concerns out of South America. But don't worry, Ben, because help is on the way. Elon Musk grabbed his cowboy hat and his boots and decided to head down to the border to, I guess, learn about it for the first time to test out Twitter's live streaming capabilities. Along the way, he tweeted a bunch of helpful shit, like, quote, we actually do need a wall and we need people to have some shred of evidence to claim asylum to enter. Thank you, Elon. No one else knew that.

He also said, why do so many American politicians from both parties care 100 times more about the Ukraine border than the USA border? Because this billionaire genius can't comprehend that immigration policy is different than getting invaded by the Russian army. But Ben, you have confidence that Elon is going to solve the problem down there, one life stream at a time? Where would Elon Musk born, Tommy? I forgot. South Africa, I believe. Really? So he wasn't born in the United States?

No, I believe he's a migrant. Yeah, he's not from here. He had the opportunity to come here and build with heavy government subsidies, I might add, a very successful career. I mean, look, I'll come back to Elon in a second here. but I will say like clearly two of the five, I mean, you're more plugged in to the presidential politics than I am, but it seems like two of the five kind of insofar as policies matter in presidential election, Ukraine and the border are two that are going to be, you know, front of mind for people

through the election year. And I say this with sympathy for the Biden administration, but I do think that on both of those issues, President Biden needs to do more to kind of spell out where does this end or where is this going? You know, I think right now, they're in that place that we've been in Tommy when we're in government. Sometimes you get stuck in a place where people are looking at your big ticket items and they're like, where is this war going in Ukraine. We're shipping all this money over there, all these Ukrainians are dying and there's a front line that's not moving. And they're looking at the border and they're seeing the numbers rising. And so I think, you know, on Ukraine, there has to be an effort to begin to describe, and they've been reluctant to do this because of not wanting to get ahead of the

Ukrainians, he's going to have to start to talk about how does this end? And just saying we're in this for as long as it takes, I'm not sure that's like a message that the electorate is going to want to hear exactly. They're going to want to. Because I mean, John Kirby got pressed on this today at the podium, Ben. He's like, what, isn't this just another forever war? And like, that's, it's not, right? It's different. It's not the, like, a, like a 20-year-old war on terror. But when you say we'll be there as long as it takes, it sure sounds like one, you know, to your point. If your message for how this ends is we're there as long as it takes and the front line's not moving, that's just not going to work politically.

And so there has to be some discussion of an end state in Ukraine, where this is going, or what is a sustainable level of support. And on the border, like, he's going to have to go out. And yeah, I think he has to put forward like a comprehensive set of policies that describes, like, what are we doing with border security? What are you doing with migrants who are here? How do we bring more order to the asylum process? But also importantly, I'm going to agree with Petro. Like, sure, you can't blame the U.S. only. But I think President Biden going on and saying,

we are going to, you know, suspend these sanctions. Cuba doesn't need to be on the state sponsor of terrorism list. They're not a state sponsor of terrorism. Some of the more comprehensive sanctions on the entire Venezuelan economy. These things are pushing migrants to our borders. They're making life worse in these countries. We should be laying out that we're doing everything. we can to slow the flow of migrants to our borders. So I think putting out a kind of comprehensive vision for how you're going to deal with the border, starting with the factors that are driving people here, including U.S. sanctions, and dealing with things in this country as a part of it. Now, Elon Musk, I'll also discuss in the context of this election because he sounds more,

that line about why are we defending the Ukrainian border and not our border? We used that line. Marjorie Taylor Green used that line like a year ago. And I think we played the clip on this podcast. That's where Elon's at. And we're now entering a period where we know the Russians have every incentive for Joe Biden to lose and Donald Trump to win. We know from recent reporting that has been put out that China now seems to be playing in our politics against Joe Biden, and that means for Donald Trump. And then we know the guy that controls one of the biggest platforms that those countries might use, that he also seems to be kind of where they're at on these things, too. The deck is stacked pretty heavily.

In terms of, you know, foreign influence or tech bro influence in this election, it's pretty decisively against Joe Biden. This is like, this is a big problem, you know? This is a big piece of this election cycle. And I don't know that we have an answer for what you do with an unaccountable guy with over $100 billion. People spend a lot of time going through Biden's speeches talking about like his surrogates, what his message should be.

We spent a lot less time talking about that kind of last mile issue of how you get a message to people that aren't, like, focused on politics and Twitter is a piece of that. A lot of these technology companies are a piece of that. And you're right that things are stacked firmly against Joe Biden here. But by the way, Ben, one piece of progress. So last week we talked about the corruption allegations against Senator Bob Menendez, the former now chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Our hope was that getting rid of Menendez might actually help President Biden have the political space to get rid of some hardline sanctions against Venezuela or Cuba, right? Some things that we've long talked about that were

stupid. So Menendez, remember, was accused of helping the Egyptian government get military aid in exchange for bribes. So Ben Cardin, the new chairman, came in and he put a hold on military aid to Egypt. So Ben Cardin, shaking some stuff up here. We've got a little progress already. Yeah. No, I guess no gold bars for Ben Cardin and his family, you know? Look, this is overdue, a real look at U.S. assistance to Egypt, given the abysmal human rights circumstances there. I'm glad he's doing it. Ben Cardin is also in the past favored engagement with Cuba. So I really do think there's an opportunity that the Biden administration absolutely should take here to change course on Venezuela and Cuba. I'd like to see them do some of the same on Egypt as well.

We'll see if they take it. Yeah. So Ben, the other big political fight that's happening is Trump against his former staff, especially former senior members of the military. I literally can't remember if you and I talked about the Mark Millie stuff, which just like tells you a lot about the Trump news cycle. But for a reminder, Trump suggested that the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mark Millie, should be executed for treason. Here's a clip of General Millie responding to Trump's comment on 60 minutes. He is suggesting that you be punished by death, the former commander in chief, to his former top military advisor. Look, I'm a soldier. I've been faithful and loyal to the Constitution of the United States for 44 and a half years. And my family and I have sacrificed greatly for this country,

my mother and father before them. And, you know, as much as these comments are directed at me, it's also directed at the institution of the military. And there's 2.1 million of us in uniform. And the American people can take it to the bank that all of us, every single one of us, from private to general, will loyal to that constitution and will never turn up back on it no matter what.

God damn, that guy's got a great voice. He should do like a smooth jazz kind of late night show. on the radio. Also later in a speech, Millie said, quote, we are unique among the world's militaries. We don't take an oath to a country. We don't take an oath to a tribe. We don't take an oath to a religion.

We don't take an oath to a king or a queen or a tyrant or a dictator. Now, the civility police came out in response to that and in question whether it was appropriate for someone in uniform to make these kind of comments. I would say defense of the civility police, a lot of us criticized General Millie when he walked out into Lafayette Square with Trump when they were, you know, clearing Black Lives Matter protesters. But what did you make of Millie's comments here and whether or not it's appropriate for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to make those while still in the job? Yeah, I'd like a red hand alert here on this one, Tom. Yeah, it's coming. I'm totally, like, I have no patience

with visibility police on this, right? Because I saw some of this stuff. I saw some like, you know, you know, people really wringing their hands about this and this is, oh, my God, this is so terrible. And, you know, the Wall Street Journal writing editorials about, you know, General Millie's falling into the trap of violating norms just like Trump and everything. Well, let's just look at what he said. He said that we don't take an oath to want to be dictators. Is there anything factually inaccurate about that? You know what I mean? like it's a sign of how much Trump has infected everybody's brain that that that statement is

somehow controversial you know what I mean like like if he had said something like you know Donald Trump can go fuck himself or I guess that would be in a pretty extreme version but like you know if he had said something that couldn't be pulled out and totally defended that'd be one thing but what you know the reason I really like to have no problem with it is where I might disagree with Millie, right, is, and this is not to impugn anybody in the military, but I think he's right that Donald Trump is talking about the whole military here, because Donald Trump is also kind of dog whistling all the time to the MAGA heads in the military, I think, you know?

And when Millie says all 2.1 million of us, you know, agree about this, well, I don't know. And I think what Millie's doing in those remarks is his audience is the military. military. And he's saying to people, including some people, that might be Trump supporters, hey, remember, you take a note to the Constitution. And I think that's not just a political message in our politics. I think that's an important message for the military to reaffirm to its own people, you know? It's a statement of principle. It's not a political attack. He's not saying like Donald Trump's a corrupt hack and fuck that guy. Right. He's saying like, I swore no the Constitution. If that, if you view that as a political attack, the recipient of that message is the

problem in my book. That is exactly my point. That's exactly right Tommy. Like if it's political to say that we take note to the Constitution, not a dictator, then we've got bigger problems here. Okay. And I think it is important for senior military officers to message to the U.S. military to remind them that we take an oath to the Constitution. And that's what Millie, I think, regrets about the walk he made across Lafayette Park is that

that was about Trump and not the Constitution. So on this one, I don't know. Like I don't see why that's a problem. particularly give the guy the bent of the doubt after Trump threatened to execute him. You know, like, I mean, the guy's allowed to, you know, to speak his mind a little bit. So the other sort of strand of this, Ben, is during the Trump years, there were lots of reports about, you know, really shockingly disrespectful things Trump said about the military. Usually they were in the Atlantic. Thanks to Jeff Goldberg.

So a lot of these comments were sourced to, like Trump officials on background. Now Trump's former chief of staff, John Kelly, has decided to come forward. confirm all these stories on the record. So Kelly, you remember, was the commander of U.S. Southern Command during the Obama administration. He was a four-star general combatant commander. Then he took a job as Trump's Secretary of Homeland Security. Then he took the job of chief of staff. So John Kelly confirmed on the record to CNN's Jake Tapper the following previously reported stories and anecdotes. One, that Trump, while touring Section 60 at Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day in 2017, said, quote, I don't get it. What's in it for them? Remember, Section 60 is where service members killed in Iraq and Afghanistan are buried, presumably, including John Kelly's son, who stepped on a mine in Afghanistan and was killed. Second, the behind closed doors, Trump called John McCain and President George H.W. Bush losers. No surprise there. He said that in public all the time. And then there was that trip to France. Trump took where he refused to visit a cemetery where service members killed in World War I were buried, saying, quote,

why should I go to that cemetery? It's filled with losers. And then there was the anecdote that Trump said he didn't want wounded veterans in this military parade that he wanted because, quote, it doesn't look good for me. So, Ben, you know, it was obvious all along that John Kelly was the source for these stories because they were like one-on-one conversations. It had to be. I'm glad he put it on the record.

I don't totally get why I waited until now. I'm guessing he was really mad about what Trump said about Millie. But like, look, I don't know. like, I'm of two minds of this, right? I'm glad he said this. But also, hey, John Kelly, Trump's disrespect for the military was clear before you decided to leave your job in the military to take two political roles in the administration, right? But I guess the question is, do you think that Millie and now John Kelly come out?

Like, can this move the needle at all among service members support for Trump? I don't think so on its own right. but I do think that it could, if there's real effort, put behind this message over the course of the next year. So first of all, I just, I'm with you, after totally defending what Millie said, I find this whole John Kelly thing kind of bizarre because as, you know, you and I, you know, probably follow us closer than most people because we had to deal a lot with the press and with Jeff Goldberg. And as you said, when there's conversations where there's only one other person there in a background quote, it was clear as John Kelly. all along. And what was also weird is that in the interview with Jake Tapper, he literally said like verbatim the things that were in the Jeff Goldberg article in 2020. So it's weird. It was like he was reading his own background quotes under the record. And it's like, dude, especially after you took

political jobs. Because Millie, I think we had to remember did not take a political job. He was still in uniform. He was still just kind of moving up as chairman. As chairman. John Kelly took off the uniform to go into the White House. So he kind of had an extra obligation, I think, to come out and tell people what he new. So, you know, I just find it all very strange. I don't quite understand the calculus of these people like Kelly and Mattis, you know, who make these kind of strange, veiled comments, sometimes in public. And then they show up clearly on background in like Jeff Goldberg stories, where Jeff Goldberg, who is a friend of this pod, but he pops up now every few months with stories that are just about U.S. generals who don't like Trump. He's kind of on this beat.

I know. Listen, like, I respect these guys. I respect that there's honor and not. getting involved in politics and sort of how they view the world. But on some level, it's like, guys, if you're going to, like, get drunk with Jeff Goldberg at the Aspen Security Forum and cop up a bunch of stories on background, like, just say it on the record. Also, Ben, did you catch this part of Kelly's quote? He said to Tapper, like, it just seems like Kelly got ripped shit and like Tapper's a really good reporter who probably reached out to him. Who's also friends with Jeff Goldberg, by the way, too, like they hang out. Like, there's some weird circle there. But this was part of Kelly's quote, quote, a person who is not

truthful regarding his position on the protection of unborn life, on women, on minorities, on evangelical Christians, on Jews, on working men and women. There's a lot to unpack there, John Kelly. What does any of that mean? What did you mean is not truthful about his position on Jews? What does that mean? I don't know, man. Like, I just, this is why John Kelly probably should not have gone into politics in the first place. I think, by the way, you know, this is a very conservative, small C conservative guy in John Kelly. The unborn life. things kind of telling that. I just, on your point about, like, moving the needle. Boston Catholic guy, yeah. I think that the Democrats or the, you know, the anti-Trump coalition,

whatever we want to call this, has to kind of make, you know, tie a whole bunch of these things together, right? Trump's insults to the military. By the way, including, like, bizarrely World War I, that's my favorite one. Like, what did those guys ever do, you know? But Tommy Tuberville holding up all these appointments, right? You know, like Paul Gosar threatening to kill people in the military, like just there should be a this concerted effort to kind of package this together and not just go on MSNBC and talk about it as people like me do, you know, admittedly, but to go into these communities, to go to military, you know, military communities, base communities, military families, VFWs, veterans messaging.

Like there should be a massive effort to go into these places for the next year and be like, these people have no respect for the military, they have no respect for service, they have no for veterans. I've heard in talking to like Democratic politicians over the years, including, you know, people like, you know, Connor Lamb, like a really great, you know, member of the House from Pennsylvania who got elected in a special election after the Trump election, you know, that there are these voters that are Trump-friendly voters, but they're veterans or they're in military families, and they just, they really don't like this, you know. And they have a sense of honor. Yeah, they may hate the Democratic Party. And they may think we're all woke lunatics,

but they really don't like this attack on kind of patriotism in the military. So I just, I hope that people, these are some of the only persuadable voters out there. And you have to pack it just together and not just assume that the Atlantic article or the MSNBC commentary is going to reach these people. You have to go to them and remind them of all these things. Absolutely right. Okay, let's take a quick break. When we come back, we are going to talk about some rare progress in Haiti, India, and Panda Diplomacy. Stick around for that.

With Trex, you get the most of everything, the most wood inspired, the most eco-friendly, the most decking and railing designs, the most trusted. Trex, performance engineered for your life outdoors. Visit trex.com today. All right, Ben, so we get some pretty major development for Haiti. So on Monday, the United Nations Security Council voted to approve a multinational year-long security mission for Haiti. This UN mission would be led by Kenya, and their mission would be to guard critical infrastructure, ports, schools, conduct operations alongside the Haitian police against gangs. Remember, we've talked about this a bunch over the past few years. Gangs control much, if not all, of Haiti, especially

Port of Prince. Kidnapping for ransom is kind of a daily thing at this point. And things have gotten steadily worse since the president of Haiti was assassinated in 2021. And it's been too dangerous to hold elections. So there's no political leadership to speak of. Haiti's foreign minister called this UN vote, quote, a glimmer of hope. The U.S. has pledged about $200 million in support of the mission. About a dozen countries said they're willing to join. So 13 members of the Security Council voted yes. Russia and China abstained, but they did not block it. So Ben, a few things here. I mean, first, I kind of assumed that the Russian and China approach to the UN was like burn it down, destroy it, render it inoperable in all its ways. So it was interesting to me to see,

them decide not to block this mission. It probably speaks to the fact that, you know, when voices in the Caribbean and Latin America and Africa are all saying, hey, we have prioritized something that you can actually get them to move. Second, you know, obviously there's a, there's a terrible history of foreign intervention in Haiti that everyone just needs to be mindful of before getting too hopeful. There was direct U.S. military intervention. Everyone remembers the UN response to the earthquake, which led to this horrible cholera outbreak. And then, you know, Kenyan security forces, I think about a thousand. of them will lead the mission. They have been accused of human rights violations. So that's something

that I think the UN will have to watch. We also don't know if or when these forces will get to Haiti. They voted to do this and they actually have to do it. So it could take months. But I don't know, Ben, what did you make of this abstention from Russia and China? And like, what is your level of optimism here that this Kenyan-led mission could really help change things? Look, I think this has to be welcomed as real progress here. It's a real meaningful step where there's been a total absence of international support for Kenya. And, you know, there was an effort the U.S. was trying to get Canada to send some forces down there. But this ultimately may, you know, be better and more appropriate, given the terrible history of Western intervention and or neglect of Haiti over the years.

To have a Kenyan-led force like this makes a lot of sense. to your point, you know, we talked a lot of the last cup episodes about how dysfunctional the UN's gotten, how diminished UN-Unga seemed to be the UN General Assembly meetings. This does demonstrate that maybe the only formula that can work, particularly the Security Council, to build on Sun you said, Tommy, is that like if Russia and China are really banking on hugging the global South, right? Russia, you know, trying to get support for its policies or at least try to keep the, you know, the global south neutral on issues related to Ukraine, China, trying to position itself as this leader, that if countries, important countries in Africa, like Kenya,

and countries in the Caribbean are saying, we need, we need this, we want to do this, we need support, that they won't be, they, Russian China, won't be blocking U.S. foreign policy if they veto this. they'd be blocking something that the Global South wanted and needed done, you know? Yeah, right. And so that's, you know, an interesting lesson. Another reason I think the U.S. should be putting a lot more focus on what the interests are of sub-Saharan African countries, for instance, or Caribbean countries. One reason we should be focused more on that is because it's the only way to potentially

break some of these great power log jams at places like security counsel. So that's an interesting lesson to take from this. Now, as you said, this is not a panacea here. And I worry, one of my worries is we are dumping a lot on Kenyan security forces that are not accustomed to these kinds of deployments. And I think that means that like we have to sustain support. This is a very good down payment from the United States of $200 million. But I think, you know, it can't just be like now this is done and we kind of, you know, pull away from it. I'm not suggesting that's what we're planning to do.

But, you know, six months from now, one year from now, the U.S. has to continue to be probably not only providing funding, but going around the world and trying to get other countries to continue to support. this mission. The Kenyans are probably going to need a lot of advice and support that the U.S. can help provide and other countries can help provide. And yeah, like, you're going to have to monitor this stuff. By the way, this is not to single out the Kenyans. I mean, any, you know, previous UN forces from other countries have had problems of corruption down there. Yeah, sexual assault. Sexual assault. Exactly. It's such a mess down there that it's hard for anybody to go and not be kind of captured by the corruption and chaos there. And so there does need to be a lot of oversight. But this is one where the UN, if I'm at the UN, you know, I'm really

trying to lean in and do everything I can to make this as much of a success as possible. So whatever resources the UN can provide down there in terms of personnel and expertise, this is something to be surging those resources too, because you want to demonstrate that there's still a space for the UN to do missions like this and to be relevant. And if you can make things just a bit better down there, that would go a long way to addressing like a really catastrophic humanitarian situation. Yeah, a lot of work ahead. But man, like these are real serious gangs. They're well-armed. They're dug in. This is zero-sum for them. This is where they live. So they're not going to want to relinquish control. But boy, really, really hope that you can some sort of breakthrough here and, you know, protect some people. One other thing I'd say it's interesting is that William Ruto is the president of Kenya. And he's a guy with the interesting past, right? He had a he once had an ICC indictment on him that ultimately got lifted. Very charismatic politician who was vice president of Kenya for a while. You know, a lot of whiffs of around him over the years. One of the things he's done as president is he's clearly trying to play a bigger role in the world stage. He just hosted like a major climate summit, an African

climate summit. Yeah. And now he's doing this. And I think that's good. I mean, I'm not suggesting, you know, like I think there's still questions around corruption. But it's good that a leader like that, you know, he was outspoken on the coup in Niger against that. It's good that we have countries like Kenya stepping up to play a bigger role. You want these kind of regional powers like an East African power like Kenya to say, you know what, we want to have a voice on climate. We want to have a voice on international security. And I think that is a real positive development. Ben Rhodes, once again, leading from behind. Just kidding.

I was not the background quote. That was John Kelly. Nerdy deep cut. I know. Neither was because John Kelly. Ben, in the last couple of shows, we talked about Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, alleging that agents of the Indian government carried out an assassination on a sick leader in Canadian citizen on Canadian citizens. soil. This is a guy named Hardeepe Singh Najjar, who's murdered in British Columbia in June. India's reaction to these allegations have been the furthest thing from chastened or conciliatory. I mean, today, for example, the Financial Times reported that India has ordered Canada to withdraw

about 40 diplomats from the country. Previously, India announced a visa ban for Canadians. the national secretary for the youth party with the BJP, Prime Minister Modi's party tweeted, quote, Nijar was gay and Justin Trudeau used to like him, but Nijar ditched Trudeau for someone else. Is this reason for murder along with a photo of Nijar next to a man with his face blurred out? So, I mean, this just, this, obviously that's ludicrous,

but this just sort of folds into a rotter point, which is these Canadian allegations, have not embarrassed the Indian government at all. In fact, Modi's doing what he's always doing, which is fanning the flames of nationalism and using it to incite his supporters and not giving an inch. I think that Trudeau had absolutely no choice

but to go public with this kind of information. It's a Canadian citizen killed in Canadian soil. He lives in a democracy. You can't cover up a crime like this. I'm pretty sure the press would have found out no matter what. But it just does speak to how challenging the politics are. Because, again, like Canada's thrown weight around, but not as much weight as the Indian government does at this point.

And they're just, they're in a tough spot. Yeah, but this is really outrageous. And it's bullshit and it needs to be called out far more than it has been. I mean, and this is common, right? And what Modi does is he doesn't come out and say this stuff. But like, you know, Obama made a kind of bailed reference to the fact that, like, targeting minorities in India could cause, you know, he's wrong. And some minister came out and threatened to kill Obama.

Like, it was, you know, it was, like, normal. It's always some guy who's, like, one degree removed from, Modi saying really crazy stuff. And now this kind of crude thing about homosexuality, that that that that that that plays into this kind of weird mixture. The Indian BJP playbook is the most absurd like manifestation of thin skinned people acting really tough, you know? Right.

You know, Trudeau, as you said, had no choice here. Like he can't just say like, oh, okay, the Indian intelligence services. killed in a contract killing somebody in Canada, a Canadian citizen in Canada, but I'm not going to talk about it because we want geopolitical relations with India. The United States needs to get involved here. The U.S. government, the British government, you know, the Australian government, New Zealand are all implicated in this because this is five-eyes intelligence, intelligence-sharing countries. But I'd also think Europe should get involved here. And it can be quietly, but the message has to be clear. You guys cannot do this. Like, you cannot step this far out of the boundary.

of international norms and expect lots of investment to be flowing in from the West. You know, part of what India wants is to attract a lot of investment so that they can try to catch up in their economic growth with China. Well, what kind of message are they sending? You know, they're sending a message that like, we're going to kill people in other countries, and then if that gets out, we're going to throw out all the diplomats of that country. I can't imagine there's going to be much Canadian investment in India. And how can anybody else in Europe or the United States or anywhere else in the world be assured that that might not happen in their country too. And there's a similar dust up. So there

has to be a message that there are going to be some consequences if this continues, because if you don't send that message, they're just going to keep doing it. And they're going to take the message that this works. Like if there's not a consequence for this, if the U.S. is not kind of tightening the screws at least behind the scenes, the message that Modi and the BJP will take is, actually, look at this. This is great. We can kill people in other countries. And then we can freak out when we get called out on this and intimidate everybody. And it works. And so just like Khashoggi, by the way, five-year anniversary of that killing, it will happen again and again if the message is sent that the world's major advanced democracies think it's too hard to have some uncomfortable conversations with geopolitically important countries. Yeah, and just such nonsense and bravado.

I also saw right before we started recording, Indian authorities raided the homes and seized a bunch of phones and laptops from reporters at a site called NewsClick, which is like a left-leaning news outlet in India that's been really critical of the Modi government. The Indian government has long accused NewsClick of financial misconduct, but they, I think, did this raid under the new national security law. Last August, the New York Times reported that News Click was getting money from this rich American tech investor with ties to the Chinese Communist Party. So, you know, there's just a lot of really scary authoritarian things happening in Modi's India that's, you know, not getting a lot of attention. Yeah, no, not enough.

And I think it's, you know, the very influential and very important, very successful Indian diaspora communities around the world who've generally been very supportive of Modi, they too have a lot of influence here too to say, look, and I'm not telling people that they all have to agree with us politically on even pluralism. And we're just talking about basic stuff, like not killing people in other countries. You know, like there's has to be some line to this. You know, you can be a BJP supporter all you want. Like, but like this is way outside the boundaries. This is not good for. for India. I really truly believe it's not good for India in the long run. And again, it's like a manufactured threat. There's no risk of a sick separatist movement creating a, you know, a sick state like seceding from India. It's just, it's nonsense. It's just like they manufactured this entire problem by going after this guy for absolutely no reason. Yeah, they're probably fueling like that kind of separatism around the world by doing this. Yeah, absolutely. Our final story, Ben, so sad news for zoo lovers. Starting next year, no American zoos will have a panda exhibit because, for the first time, we'll be panda free in 50 years, because the pandas, they had been on loan from the Chinese government.

And in the sign of the times, the Chinese government is refusing to extend the contracts on those loans. So the pandas will be going home. The first diplomatic pandas arrived in the U.S. during the Nixon administration. It's called Panda Diplomacy. They sent a couple pandas to Washington, D.C., to the zoo there. but I don't know. I don't know. I'm half sad and I also half think that zoos are an abomination and every time I go to one, I leave feeling really depressed for all the animals involved. So I don't know how to feel about this, but I don't know if you have a take about the geopolitics because that's why people

are listening to this thing anyway. I mean, I used to go to the Washington Zoo a lot with my kids. I'll give this take Tommy and you, I'll just give you a tip as a father of a young daughter now. if you are going to miss the pandas there's a show on Apple TV Plus called Stillwater about a giant panda that lives next door to these kids and this this panda drops some fucking wisdom okay like basically what happens is these kids

like they have problems and something makes them sad and you know and they go over to this panda and this panda is like let me tell you a story and this panda just like he breaks it down with this kind of Zen, like Buddhist kind of wisdom. You know, he's often meditating. I think we can get what we were getting from the panda diplomacy and from the pandas in these zoos from this cartoon

that is on Apple TV Plus. I think we've got it covered. I think we're fine. I think people, if you liked Bluey, and I was dropping Bluey Rex like early on in that process, I think Stillwater's, it's literally in that weight class. Not as funny. Okay.

But like, and for the parents involved out there, an edible too like there's a like you really can get on the wavelength with this panda okay so that's what I'd say as a solution here I will say like the world feels it's one of those weeks Tommy where the world feels like not great to me it's like you know we got you know speaker of the house being ousted in this country political chaos we like that part well we like that part but the point is like we got we got you know Ukraine stalemate we got Russians testing nuclear-tip cruise missiles you know that We've got the Chinese pulling the pandas out. We've got the Indians whacking people in other countries.

It's one of these weeks where I'm kind of looking around. I'm like, are we kind of halfway through the collapse here? And like, where's the bottom of this thing? And, you know, so I don't know. I don't know if the pandas are part of that, but it seems like, can we just have nice things in this world? It does seem like there's not a lot of cost to just extending the panda contract. Dude, there's one of these things the Chinese government does. It's so punitive.

I'm like, what's the point? I guess, you know, in terms of, TV with Lizette. I mean, she's 10 months in a couple days. I was hanging out with her on the couch. The Patriots game was on TV. She was not paying any attention. Now, that's understandable because Mac Jones

was thrown picks left and right, and we were just not looking good. But then, I don't know if you ever watched Miss Rachel. Speak of a sort of North Korean style cult of personality. You put a little kid in front of Miss Rachel, and they will march. They will do anything she says. So that's where we're at in terms of the very, very, very,

very, very limited screen time that Lizette gets, which like once a month, if that. I remember being struck, like, you know, I think after, I forgot how old our kids were, they're over one probably, but like once you, like Sesame Street comes on, it's really interesting. Like, yeah, you could have, like, you know, the Jets game on and they're not paying attention, which, you know, is smart of them. But if Sesame Street comes on, like, even a baby will, like, turn their head. Like, there's something about, like, those voices and those colors. The way they do it. Yeah. I miss Sesame Street, too. It's kind of sad.

You'll get to that point where the kids start to outgrow things. And so, like, I remember they get to be like, I think it's around four or five. They kind of lose interest in Sesame Street. And I'm kind of like, can we watch Sesame Street? And they're like, Dad, that's lame. I'm like, no, it's kind of nice. It makes me feel good, you know? Yeah.

So, I don't know. I watch Sesame Street by myself sometimes. We will all miss Ling Ling and Sing Sing. They might be dead by now. I think those are the Nixen ones. But with that, we're going to take a quick break. And when we come back, you will hear my interview with Sumi Terry. She's a former CIA officer, East Asia expert. And we talk about the film she helped produce, which is called Beyond Utopia,

which is all about North Korea. So stick around for that. Last week, Travis King, the U.S. private, who crossed into North Korean territory in July was returned to U.S. custody. That story captivated the world detention because he intentionally crossed the border. usually the flow of people is going the other direction with defectors desperately trying to escape North Korea. A new documentary called Beyond Utopia highlights the heartbreaking reality of life in North Korea and the incredible risks people take trying to get out. It is an inspiring and also, frankly, devastating look at life in North Korea. Joining me today to discuss it is one of the film's producers. Assumi Terry, Sue is a former CIA officer and a researcher

specializing in East Asia. Sue, thank you so much for doing the show. Thank you for having me on. So, you know, you and I were just chatting before we came on. I mean, you worked in the CIA for several years. I was on the National Security Council. Almost every debate that I was in about North Korea or every situation room meeting, focused on their nuclear weapons program.

This documentary does something different. It's focused on the North Korean people, the unbelievable hardships they face, the risks they take trying to escape the country. I've read that conditions in North Korea got much, much worse after the COVID-19 pandemic because the border was closed and a lot of the sort of cross-border commerce that happened under the table was cut off essentially. But can you give us a sense of kind of what life is like for the average person in North Korea

today? Well, misery, right? If you're talking about average North Korea and not elites, elites are okay, right? Elites still live pretty fine. Kim Jong-un is one of the wealthiest person in the planet. It was always bad. There were some famine years in mid-1990s, if you remember, where millions of people perished and people have constant food shortages,

malnourishment, obviously no information, security services, the field tactics. It's a totalitarian state. But as you mentioned, North Korea was the first country to close the border when COVID happened in January 2020. So what happened was actually that border closure did more to North Korea's economy than sanctions ever could. So there's no trade going back and forth. So right now internally, there are food shortages, there's malnutrition, the economic state is quite bad. Now, we know the nuclear missile programs are advancing just fine. But you ask about average North Korean.

And for life of average North Korean, situation is very dire. Yeah, it really looks horrific. I mean, so the documentary Beyond Utopia, it follows this South Korean pastor named Pastor Kim. He estimates that he has helped rescue over 1,000 people who have escaped North Korea. What listeners might not understand about that process is that it's basically impossible. You can't really, you can't go from North Korea into South Korea because you have to literally walk through a minefield. So you end up going across North Korea's border with China. You have to cross a river.

that in of itself is incredibly harrowing. But the journey doesn't stop there. You have to traverse China. You have to get through Vietnam and then Laos before finally reaching Thailand, where defectors can turn themselves into the authorities, get some help, not risk being sent back to their certain death, essentially. Can you tell us about that journey and the obstacles that people face? It's very harrowing. It's you're risking, risking your life. First, you have to leave North Korea. And the only way to leave is that porous border between North Korea and China, because again, the two Koreas are divided by the DMZ, there are soldiers, there's mines, there's impossible to flee their way, although some people have tried on fishing boat and whatnot. But vast majority

of North Koreans have to flee crossing that border. And usually during wintertime, there's a frozen river. You have to make it out with our North Korean border guards catching you and sending you back. If you get caught, obviously, you'll be sent. to prison. Once you make it to China, then you have to be worried about getting caught by the Chinese services because China, the Chinese government, the policy is to send back the North Korean defectors. They don't even call them defectors. They call them economic migrants, and they send them back to North Korea. So you have to evade these people, the security services, get hooked up with people who can help you, brokers, people like Pastor Kim, some sort of NGO networks. And then

the journey really begins through the mountains, the valleys, the rivers, and trying not to get caught. It's a very harrowing journey. And, you know, we didn't know as filmmakers, by the way, when we were shooting this, whether we would have a film at the end because this is all about, as this defection was happening, we filmed their lives, but we didn't know if they were going to get caught and sent back. So you use the word harrowing, so I keep using it. But, yeah, it's perilous journey. It was, it's incredible filmmaking, but, you know, devastating to watch me. I won't ruin it for folks who want to watch it, but you track a couple different journeys, some more successful than others. And, you know, every step along the way, these people are putting so much trust into, you know, fixers, minders, whatever you want to call them. In the U.S., we probably call them smugglers, helping people get across. At times, it seems like, you know, some of these desperate people trying to rescue a son or a daughter.

or a grandmother are just getting the run around and extorted for more cash. And, you know, it's really, it's unbelievable. There are people who are genuinely trying to help North Koreans flee, leave North Korea because it's out of, you know, just it's to help them in genuine way. And then there are brokers who are, you know, for them, it's a business, right? It's a way to make money. So even after you help them, once North Korean defectors arrive in South Korea and go through the whole Hannawan and training in three months in this kind of facility and come back out,

they actually have to pay back the brokers. So for some people, it's a business deal to get these North Korean defectors out. You know, we talked about this journey. I mean, I didn't only fear for the defecture safety. I thought about Pastor Kim's safety, this heroic man who's helping so many people. You know, we know that North Korea has assassinated, quote-unquote, enemies abroad. We know that the Chinese government probably doesn't love someone running a smuggling operation in their territory and potentially making them look foolish in this film. I mean, how risky do you think Pastor Kim's work is knowing that he's not just sitting in an office in South Korea? He's like getting out into the world and physically helping people. Very risky. In fact, South Korean

intelligence service told Pastor Kim that his life is in danger because they got information that, you know, his life is in danger. His mother got imprisoned and prison. in China at one point. Pastor Kim himself spent some time in Chinese prison cell. You know, he's risking his life. He himself cannot now go back to China. The situation is that bad. He can only help people once they make it out of China. But there's no question about it. He's risking his life and his family's lives. But he believes this is God's calling and he believes this is his mission in life. Yeah, he seems like a truly incredible person. One of the families you guys feature in the documentary is multi-generational.

There's an 80-year-old grandmother down to, like, I don't know, three, four, five-year-old little girls. There's this remarkable scene, I believe, once they're safe, where you're interviewing the grandmother and then separately little girls about North Korea and asking them about Kim Jong-un, and they're still speaking about him in this sort of reverent way. I mean, I was wondering if you could sort of help unpack why you think that is. Is this fear? Is this the only narrative they've ever known? Like how long does it normally take folks who get out of North Korea to, I don't know, shake that narrative off if they do it all? Well, you're actually describing a scene that was very revealing. It's one of my, I don't know if I should call it favorite, but it's one, it's a very revealing scene about ideological indoctrination that goes on in North Korea.

Because we were able to shoot these people as it was happening versus, you know, they make it to South Korea and they spend some time in South Korea and they're able to process. They were still in this mindset, right? Grandmother didn't really know what she was seeing and what she's experiencing. All she knows is just her entire life, this indoctrination of the Kim regime. We've just treating them as if they are like, Kim Il was son of God and so is Kim Jong-un, and this is kind of like religion for them. So when you ask her this question, what do you think about Kim Jong-un? she gives a very honest and candid answer

that could not be scripted, that could not possibly. So that was very revealing. I don't want to spoil it for the people who are watching, but her answer was so authentic and real, and that really speaks to what happens, the brainwashing that goes in North Korea. When I say it's the most heavily indoctrinated society on the planet, it is, because there's no other regime

and no other country that this level of ideological indoctrination goes on than place like North Korea. And this is how the regime survives, right, with ideological indoctrination, the field tactic, the security service, and all of that. Yeah, I mean, I think it's probably very hard for people who live in the West, who live in a free society where you can Google anything you want to understand the real power of propaganda. If it's literally the only thing you've ever heard in your life, but you can see, you know, the Kim Jong-un's policies killing the people around you and still believe this narrative, as you mentioned, is essentially stolen from the Bible and ascribed to the sort of Kim dynasty

and has led to this sort of cult of personality in this regime that's still going. It's really interesting. Kim Il-Sung's mother was actually a Christian, and so there's, you know, a lot of Korea watchers actually think that Kim Rishong consciously modeled the state after Christianity, like literally putting himself as a godlike figure. There's something called like a Bible that's like for Kim Il-Sung, right? There's like a hymnal, North Korean version, that's singing praises about the Kim family. There's like Bible study groups that are all about Kimmer-sung studying of Kimmer-sung thought, right?

And the sort of, you know, so it's really very, very interesting. But it's a cult-like state. No question about it. Yeah. It's an amazing scene. I mentioned at the top, a U.S. Army private named Travis King crossed into North Korea back in July. When that happened, I assumed he would be there for years, if not, decades. if not, you know, forever. He was released recently. Do you have any sense or a theory about

how Travis King was sent home relatively quickly and if this is a signal of anything broader, any broader detente? I don't think it's a signal of broader deitant. I really think the Kim regime is done talking to the U.S. government. It's almost a signal that they don't need to use Travis King as some sort of a hook. Because remember, in the past, to get any American citizen out of North Korea, we had to send a high-level U.S. official, right? Bill Clinton went and so on. Bill Richardson. Yeah, Bill Richardson went. And so I think it's almost a signal that they don't, they're not interested in talking to us. So first of all, I don't think they value Travis King as, you know, in terms of propaganda value or intel value, they didn't see it. And then secondly,

they're not interested in talking to U.S. government or even using him as a bargain. And I think coming out of Putin-Kim-Zang-un meeting and this whole conversation about potential arms deal that they could be having on the side, North Korea closing up to Putin. And so, and at the same time, absolutely unwilling to talk to the Biden administration, to sit down with Americans, to talk about denuclearization, to talk about the nuclear program. It's almost a signal that they're not interested in coming back to talks, not anytime soon. That's troubling. Do you think that this, in these recent conversations with Putin and the fact that the Russians finally need North Korea, in this case, for artillery shells,

and sort of change the calculus and their political standing? A little bit. I mean, first of all, what a role reversal, right? Russia is supposed to be a patron sponsor of North Korea. So this really speaks to how pathetic Putin, Russia. You have to go to the 198th ranked economy in the world for artillery shells and ammunition. But the point is these two very isolated leaders need each other, and they have things to give each other, right? North Korea has a lot of ammunition artillery shells.

They are primitive. They're traditional. They're not smart shells with these GPS things and not advanced ammunition. But still, North Korea is sitting on a lot of them, and this is about war of supply lines. So it's helpful to the Russians. And North Koreans need technology from Russia. They had two failed satellite launches, military satellite launches, so they're looking for technology to improve on that. They rolled out diesel-powered submarine, but now they're looking for nuclear-powered submarine.

Russia's technology will help on that front. It will help on intercontinental ballistic missiles. So I think they can help each other, and so this is a disconcerting development for, you know, Putin and Kim Jong-un to get together even close and then get more close. And so I don't like it, obviously. I mean, looking at this, since we should be very concerned. No, it's very worrisome, especially the ICBM technology plus, you know, nuclear warhead miniaturization, plus sort of a reentry vehicle to safely get that nuclear warhead back into the atmosphere after it achieves orbit.

It's a very scary combination that could lead to a real security risk. And this is all, everything that North Korea has been doing. In the last, there was some 80 missile tests. They are just continually developing, advancing, modernizing, perfecting their nuclear missile arsenal. So, you know, this is only going to expedite their nuclear missile program. So very concerning. And you make an interesting point about the sort of role reversal here. I mean, you guys talk about this in the film, but historically, the Soviet Union was the benefactor of North Korea,

provided them with a lot of assistance, kept the economy afloat for many years. And then the collapse happened. And, you know, sort of North Korea was thrown to the wolves, unfortunately, horrifying. for the people. So, listen, you know, you and I both worked in government. We both saw a lot of sanctions go into place. Sanctions have not slowed or stopped, or maybe they've slowed. They certainly haven't stopped North Korea's nuclear program. You were just talking about how this new partnership with Russia could speed things up. They clearly have damage, sanctions, that is, the North Korean economy. I wonder if at some point, and I've asked U.S. officials this in the Biden

administration, whether the international community has to just say, listen, this guy's never going to give up his nukes. Sanctions are primarily seeming to hurt the North Korean people. Should we rethink our approach? Is there some way to pull back maybe the most broad-based sanctions, focus on human rights-based sanctions or just sanctioning specific individuals to see if that might, look, I don't think it's going to slow down Kim Jong-un, but maybe improve the lives of the North Korean people? Is that a naive thought? I mean, what's your take on sort of the approach here? Well, first of all, sanctions are only effective. when they're implemented

and Russia and China have not been implementing sanctions. We saw a brief window in the fall of 2017 when they were actually doing something about it. But today it's not 2017, right? And they have not been implementing sanctions. I, in fact, even say that in some ways

for North Korea, external environment is actually favorable because there is complete impasse at United Nations Security Council, China, and Russia are not on board on implementing sanctions. So sanctions are not going to get anywhere. I don't, I think we're not going to get North Korea to denuclearize. That idea that North Korea could potentially give up nuclear weapons, there's a zero percent chance. I would go

out, I would argue there's zero percent chance. It is already nuclear weapons power. It has 60 nuclear warheads. It's making enough fissar material to turn out a dozen new bombs per year. It's just not. So then we need a new approach. But that's not necessarily just, you know, unilaterally easing up on sanctions, I think that's not going to really get anywhere either. So I really think we need a long-term approach, and it's really one that's focus on North Korean people, but it's more long-term. It's about getting information into North Korea. It's about trying to maybe work with technology companies. It's trying to find a way to bring some Internet access to North Korea.

It's really a long-term picture, because I think the only change that can come about in North Korea is through North Korean people. Trying to work with the regime, it's not going to get anywhere. And I would argue when you said, sanctions are only hurting North Korean people. It's the North Korean regime that's hurting North Korean people.

During the famine years when millions of people died, Kim Jong-il spent $800 million building a mausoleum for Kim Il. This is in 1994 when Kim Ilson died. So they are the one who's misspending money. they're the ones spending billions of dollars in armaments and developing nuclear missile programs instead of feeding their people. So I'll push back a little bit on the idea that we are somehow hurting North Korean people.

It's the regime that's hurting North Korean people. Yeah, no, I look, I totally agree with that. I think, obviously, a series of North Korean leaders have entirely focused on military spending and development at the great expense of their people. And anyone who gets out of line gets, you know, shot with anti-aircraft guns or other, you know, horrific torture devices or sent to gulags, et cetera. I just think that, you know, American politics are stupid and sometimes we continue with an approach for 20 years like we did in Afghanistan. And the outcome, I think a lot of people could have told you 15 years ago, 10 years ago,

would probably be where it is today. And I just worry that the politics of being seen as lenient on quote unquote bad regimes, which in this case, North Korea very much is, like North Korea or Iran or Venezuela or sort of like, pick your party and just sanctioning them to death with no real clear end goal or hope of changing the regime's behavior. Evidence that the behavior would change seems also kind of foolish. But, you know, I don't have a better idea. No.

So, I mean, that's, and I agree with you on finding ways to help North Korean people. And here, that's why I keep focusing back on let's try to get information into North Korea. At least let's raise awareness, you know, with North Korean people. so they know a little bit about outside world. And I also think we're talking about defectors stories. That information penetration campaign should be also targeted to the elites as well. So the elites know there could be life outside of North Korea. The reason why the regime, the Kim regime can continue is because the elites continue to support the regime.

Their fate is tied to the regime's fate. So we got to also get somehow the elite. to be aware or to be able to sort of separate their fate from the regimes. But it's a, you know, I always say it's one of the toughest challenge for U.S. policy, right? I'm sure everybody's like, oh, whatever country you're studying following Iran, Russia. I really think North Korea is one of the most difficult challenge. I mean, this crisis, even the nuclear crisis began in the Clinton administration, right? Look how many different presidents we went through from.

Clinton to Bush to Obama to Trump to now Biden administration. It's a really hard case. It's a tough situation. Incredibly, incredibly difficult. Well, listen, the documentary is called Beyond Utopia. It is an extraordinary look at what life is like in North Korea and what it's like to defect in the incredible hardships and heroic efforts it takes to get people out.

So thank you so much for doing the show. Thank you. Thanks again, Assumee, Terry, for doing the show. You know, happy trails to Kevin McCarthy. I mean, he might have more time to listen to podcasts. So if you see Kevin, maybe tell him to subscribe to Pod Save the World, he seems like, I don't know, he could study up in a lot of things, frankly. Yeah, the McCarthy era, such as it was comes to now. The McCarthy era.

Thanks those pandas. Lesser-known McCarthy era. Yeah, yeah, the other McCarthy. Thanks as pandas for bringing a lot of joy. I guess they'll be eating bamboo and sleeping a lot in China now instead of Washington. Yeah, we'll miss you guys. Well, that's it. And we'll talk to you guys next week.

See you. 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 Seaglin 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.