The President's Daily Brief - PDB Situation Report | May 25th, 2024: Bye Bye Butcher & China’s Dangerous Games

Episode Date: May 25, 2024

In this episode of The PDB Situation Report: We'll start off today's program by looking at the life and death of the man known as "The Butcher of Tehran"--late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, who met his fate in the mountains of northern Iran this week. We'll be joined by Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He'll give us some insight into what Raisi's death means for the regime. A little later, we'll turn to the Far East, where China has launched aggressive military drills surrounding its neighbor Taiwan. Author Gordon Chang shares his thoughts on the escalating tensions there. Plus, we take a look at a silent crisis at America's southern border as the horrible realities on the ground take their toll on America's border patrol agents. To listen to the show ad-free, become a premium member of The President’s Daily Brief by visiting PDBPremium.com. Please remember to subscribe if you enjoyed this episode of The President's Daily Brief. Email: [e-mail].   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Own it all. Pay off your home, travel for life, drive a Ferrari. In celebration of the world premiere of the Monopoly Big Board Buckslot Machine by Aristocrat Gaming, Yamava Resort and Casino at San Manuel is giving one person a $1.6 million dream package. The biggest prize in Yamava's history. Club Serrano members can earn daily instant prizes and secure a spot in the finale May 29th.

Don't pass go and own it all. Only at Yamava, celebrating its 40th anniversary. You win? Details at Yamava.com must be 21-20. Please gamble responsibly. Monopoly is a trademark of Hasbro. Hasbro is not a sponsor of this promotion. Welcome to the PDB Situation Report, brought to you from the PDB's secret lair in an undisclosed

location somewhere in Idaho. So I think I've just disclosed the location. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage. Let's get briefed. We'll start off today's program by looking at the life and death of the man known as the butcher of Tehran, late Iranian president, Ibrahim Reisi, who met his fate in the mountains of northern Iran this week. We'll be joined by Ben-Talablu of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He'll give us some insight into what Reis' death means for the Iranian regime.

A little later, we'll turn to the Far East, where China has launched aggressive military drills surrounding its neighbor, Taiwan. My good friend, Gordon Chang, esteemed author, and frankly one of the most knowledgeable folks that I know on Chinese affairs, shares his thoughts on the escalating tensions there. But first, today's situation report's spotlight. Iran said goodbye to Ibrahim Reisi this week, interring the late president at the nation's holiest Shiite shrine on Thursday. It comes just days after he, the country's foreign minister, and six others were killed

in a helicopter crash in a remote region along the Azerbaijan border. While state loyalists have dutifully packed into mosques in public squares to pray for Risi, there is reportedly little in the way of public grief being seen on Iranian streets, where shops remained open and ordinary life continued uninterrupted. Many opponents of the Iranian regime have even taken to the streets to celebrate, setting off fireworks and handing out sweets to Mark Ryssey's death, according to a Reuters report, because nothing says good riddance like fireworks and handing out sweets.

The public reaction stands in stark contrast to the massive outpouring of grief that followed the deaths of revered Iranian figures such as Kassem Soleimani, the former commander of the IRGC's Quds Force, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in 2020. So, you ask yourself, why has the death of Iran's president not triggered the same public response? Well, good question. It stems, though, from his controversial history

as a loyal enforcer of the theocratic regime. Known as the butcher of Tehran, Reisi served as Tehran's prosecuting. General from 1989 to 1994, overseeing a death commission, well, that sounds benign, that ordered the mass execution of thousands of Iranian dissidents in 1988. Now, Amnesty International estimates that at least 5,000 dissidents were killed in the decade following the 1979 revolution. The U.S. has accused Risi of decades of human rights abuses, including executing children

and imprisoning prominent human rights lawyers. So obviously, he was an ideal candidate for the Iranian regime. Reicy rose to the presidency in 2021 in an election that sparked widespread protests and allegations that it was rigged in his favor. Enthusiasm for his administration was already low, as the election had the lowest voter turnout in four decades. As president, Reisi loyally worked to implement the vision of his close allies, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, expanding Iranian terrorist proxy networks across

the Middle East and ratcheting up tensions with Israel to historically unprecedented levels. Now, at home, Reisi tightened morality laws and stepped up enforcement of Iran's Sijab and chastity laws. After two women died in custody for violating the law, protesters took to the streets and numbers not seen since the Iranian revolution. Reisi responded with a violent crackdown that killed hundreds of Iranians between 2022 and 2023, according to Forbes. A 21-year-old student in Tehran told Reuters she was not saddened by his death due to the violent crackdown on protesters, but added, quote,

I am sad because even with Reisie's death, this regime will not change. Another Tehran shopkeeper told Reuters, who cares? One hardliner dies, another takes over, and our misery continues, reflecting the sentiments of many Iranians who expect little change in their day-to-day lives, not to mention reflecting the sentiments in the classic Husong won't get fooled again. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. The cause of Sunday's crash is still under investigation, but most signs point to either a technical failure or weather conditions or both. Still, Iran's foreign minister, Javad Zarif, couldn't help himself and blamed the accident

on the United States, never waste an opportunity to blame the U.S., claiming sanctions were preventing Iran from having a more modern aviation industry. Now, Zerif forgot to mention that the sanctions are in place, due to the regime's support and funding of terrorism, their abysmal human rights record, including the constant suppression of women's rights, and, of course, their pursuit of nuclear weapons. All that likely just slipped to Zerif's mind. Reisy was traveling in a 40-year-old American-made Bell 212 helicopter.

No word on whether it was blasting fortunate son from its state-of-the-art eight-track player as it careened into the side of the mountain. Well, that's not fair to denigrate the eight-track player. I love the eight-track player. I had one in my very first car, which was a classic Ford Granada. As for the vacancy that Reisie's death left,

he was immediately succeeded by his first vice president, Mohamed Mulkber. He'll now serve as acting president until new elections are held on June 28th. Iran's Guardian Council, the 12-member body, responsible for organizing the election, said that the next president will run the country for a new four-year term,

not just for the remaining years of Reissy's term. Now, RISI's death isn't expected to have much of an impact on the regime's policies in the short term, especially when it comes to foreign policy. Most of the power in the country remains in the hands of the nation's supreme leader who acts as Iran's commander-in-chief. However, it's in the race to succeed Supreme Leader, where we may see some very interesting developments. The ultra-conservative RISI was seen by many to be the top contender for the position. RISI was a favorite of the 85-year-old Hamini and had very good. received his backing during the 2021 presidential election. During his presidency, the two had worked

closely on both domestic and foreign policy matters, with many saying Reisi was being groomed for the top spot. He was a loyal toady for the Supreme Leader and an avid fan of cracking down on dissent and protest from the Iranian people. Raisi's rivals are now likely to scramble to fill the vacuum his death has left, and one of those rivals is Mostab al-Khamenei, a hardline cleric who also happens to be the Supreme Leader's son. All right, when we come back, we'll have more on this with Senior Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies,

Ben Umbandem, Ben Taliblu. Not loving your AT&T or T Mobile Bill. Yeah, we've been hearing that a lot. Good news. Bring your AT&T or T Mobile Bill to Verizon and we'll give you a better deal. So get away from that unfortunate phone bill and get to Verizon.

Run, ride, canoe. Whatever it takes, we'll be here. Bring your AT&T or T Mobile Bill to a Verizon store today and we'll give you a better deal. on the best network. A better deal. No surprises. That's Verizon. Best network based on route metrics, best overall mobile network performance U.S. second half 2025. All rights reserved. It must provide a recent consumer mobile bill in the name of the person who gave me the deal. Additional terms, conditions, and restrictions apply.

USAA knows dynamic duos can save the day like superheroes and sidekicks or auto and home insurance. With USAA, you can bundle your auto and home and save up to 10%. Tap the banner to learn more and get a quote at usa.com slash bundle. Restrictions apply. President of the U.Bahim Reiki. I'm joined by a senior fellow from the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Ben-Talablu. Ben, Ben, thank you very much for joining us here on the Situation Report. If you don't mind, I'm going to ask you a 30,000-foot question to get us started. What, if anything, does the death of Reiki mean for the Iranian regime? Well, it's a pleasure to be with you. And indeed, that's a 30- or even a 50,000-foot question because while there is a whole new regional situation in the Middle East

and people are talking about post-October 7 realities with Israel and really post-April 1 and April 13 realities given the tit-for-tat, the exchanges between Iran and Israel and even up to April 19, the most important implications of the passing of Iran's president, Ibrahim Reisi, has to do with internal dynamics, particularly with regime succession. Abraham Raeisi really only became a popular or, dare I say, household name here in the West when it was assumed by a lot of experts and analysts that he was going to be on the short list to succeed Iran's supreme leader. And the Supreme Leader is a title meant to be taken rather literally.

The 45-year-old Islamic Republic has really only had two Supreme Leaders. One, who was the founding father of the, you could say, Islamic Republic. His name was Ayatollah Ruhulah Khomeini. and the second one who was chosen in a rather dubious process and is the current supreme leader and in fact he's the middle east uh longest serving autocrat to date in the modern era and his name is ayatola saida alie hominy and uh this guy do you say benham if i could interrupt you i'm sorry for that but i wanted to catch it before before i forget and at my age i forget things immediately uh why do you say dubious in terms of how the current supreme leader was chosen so uh

there was a process that was managed by an individual who ended up becoming president shortly after Khomeini died. And that individual was a very wealthy individual, very well-connected individual. His name was Rapsanjani. In the immediate aftermath of the revolution, that guy basically served on the Supreme Defense Council. He was one of the gatekeepers to Khomeini. He believed that he could put a weak individual like Khamenei at the helm, and then ultimately have the presidency in terms of personality. controlled the Supreme Leader, who bureaucratically and legally would be much more stronger.

But he found out just the way all of the other enemies and adversaries of the Supreme Leader of Iran found out, that that was not to be the case, because Chaminet has either killed, exiled, rendered into jail, or out-maneuvered all of his domestic political opponents. And the reason, again, is passing of Raeci. When you talk about the current Supreme Leader, Hamini, with his, his ability to take control that Rafsenjani wasn't thinking of. He did that for quite some time now with the help of Reisi, is that correct? It was very loyal to the Supreme Leader.

More recently with the help of Reisi, but Hamine, once he entered the position of Supreme Leader in 1989, he knew he didn't have the legitimacy of his predecessor. So he cultivated military support. And after the Iran-Iraq War, there was a bunch of guys with guns. And the way you don't have them run amok among societies, you institutionalize them in places like the parliament and other big businesses. And it's really under the first 10 to 15 years of the post-Iran-Iraq War Islamic Republic that you have a lot of Iran-Iraq War veterans and IRGC friends and affiliates

enter the political sphere and economic sphere making the IRGC or the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps the political and economic behemoth that it remains today. And that institution has helped the Supreme Leader pursue some of the most ultra-hard-line policies. And when you marry that with presidents like Raezy, who since 2021, has really been an empty vessel for these ultra-hardline policies, you get to understand why the Supreme Leader wanted this individual. It was to succeed him.

It was not because of competence. It was not because of capability. It was because of loyalty, and it was because of zeal. So long story short, bottom line up front, the reason the passing of Raisi matters is that he was believed to be on the short list to become Iran's next most powerful person. He was on that short list not because of capability, but because of loyalty. And now that shortlist just got a lot shorter. I can't imagine you could have a situation where leaders aren't chosen for their competence. I've never heard of that before.

But as far as now that we're talking about succession, about who might get chosen, and if you had to put money on the next Supreme Leader, whoever, because at this point, I think if I'm not mistaken, he's 85 years old. Who is likely to step in to his shoes? Well, there's a couple of different scenarios, and we have to first be humble in hearsay. Obviously, we don't know that the regime has never officially tapped someone, but one person who kind of seems to have been socially promoted,

much like Raisi was, because neither this individual I'm about to mention nor Raisi, they didn't have the Ayatollah credentials. They had basically you could call the master's degree. The Ayatollah is basically a PhD level accreditation. They were both socially promoted around the same time, and that individual is the second son of the Supreme Leader of Iran, and his name is Muxtaba Hamini. And even though the Islamic Republic overturned dynastic succession,

certainly within the Iranian cultural zeitgeist, it's understandable, Second, this individual, Moshabha Khomeini, hadn't really held the government position, but that's actually why he matters more, not less, because he's had so much informal and indirect authority. And for an authoritarian regime like the Islamic Republic, that really does matter because he wields immense personal and political power without any of the accountability, even though the Islamic Republic is not a particularly accountable political system. He doesn't even wield it without the political exposure.

He's tied to the intelligence services, and he's tied to the Supreme Leader's office and inner circle. He's largely believed to be behind some of the major crackdowns in Iran, particularly post-2009 and particularly post-2019. I assume he was involved in the crackdown as well post-2020, 23 of the women-life freedom protests that overtook that country. But this individual, you could say, is a deep state religious individual. He dons the turban. He's looking to keep the Islamic Republic on this religio-political, Islamist authoritarian track. And another reason that I think that the Supreme Leader

may want his son to succeed him, even though, again, the Islamic Republic got rid of dynastic succession. Iran used to be a monarchy for at least 2,500 years before the 1979 revolution, is because Hamini, the current Supreme Leader, knows what happened exactly to the same thing, son of the first Supreme Leader. The first Supreme Leader had a son much like the current Supreme Leader. And his son was kind of a gatekeeper, a kind of informal political person who

operated in the House or the office of the then Supreme Leader. And that son's name was Ahmad Khomeini. His name is not known now by a lot of Iran watchers and analysts, but you go back to the press reports of the late of the mid-80s, the early 1980s, the late 1980s and even the early 1990s, he was a big mover and shaker. And it was largely believed that when his father passed away in 1989, he would have wanted to grow in political prominence, either become president or either become supreme leader. He did not. And then a few years later, he died under very mysterious circumstances in his home. It's largely believed that the security services in cahoots with some other officials may have been behind his death. And I think Khamene has seen this changing pattern

and to ensure the personal survival of his son and the political survival of this regime, he may try to marry those two and bring back this kind of dynastic succession. Okay, well, first of all, congrats to you for using the word cahoots, and for that, you'll receive a special situation report award. But if it's not the sun, if it's not Moshaba,

then do you have someone, in the wings that you would think is possibly the next in running? You know, the thing with the political and religious elite in the Islamic Republic today is that they are more cohesive, they're more ultra-hardline, but they are, again, much less capable than some of their predecessors. There was a word in the 1980s. There was a phrase, I'll say the Persian, that once the regime overthrew the monarchy and was urging a whole series of,

universities, political institutions, the measure of their purge was this phrase, which was Takva not Tavanov, which was zeal, not capability. And the most important people at the helm of a lot of Iran's institutions today, whether that's the Supreme National Security Council, whether that's the Parliament, whether that's the Guardian Council, whether that's the Assembly of Experts, these are not particularly competent or well-known individuals, but they are zealous and loyal. And it's this Kabbal zealous and loyal that is moving further and further towards some of these most important political positions. So there might be some people who are very old from the Guardian Council or from the

Assembly of Experts. The Assembly of Experts is a body that is designed to pick the next Supreme Leader, but you could totally have a moment where the person who is aiding to pick the next Supreme Leader, you know, ends up maneuvering and becomes the next Supreme Leader himself. To this effect, I would look at an individual named Arafi, for example. then there's, of course, the theory of a dark horse candidate that is really more of a mask or a veneer for this trend we've been seeing in Iran, which is the militarization of Iran's politics, whereas it's not this kind of power-sharing agreement with the Supreme Leader being the most important, but it's really kind of the Supreme Leader being a puppet for the IRGC, and they could take someone who just happens to have a black turban and, you know, really become more military or political force behind that. individual. And in a way that the current son of the Supreme Leader has power without accountability, the IRGC, too, has a lot of power without accountability. So it's entirely possible that they just put someone there and expand their social, political, military, and economic influence.

The most important X factor, of course, in what we haven't talked about yet. If I could interrupt there. If I could interrupt there, I'm sorry, Benham again, I apologize for the delay that goes on. It makes us look like we're constantly talking over each other. But, and what they say, say is, you know, never watch TV or sausage being made. That's an old TV production line. Look, if that happens, if the IRGC as a result of Rice's death, if the IRGC and then the Supreme Kim, the Supreme Leader, sorry, once he goes and they have to have a replacement, if the IRGC plays more of a role, if they become more influential in how that process goes, do you view that as better or worse in terms of the potential for peace in the Middle East, the potential for Iran

to eventually move into, I don't even know what you would call it, the community of nations? I certainly don't see the theory of the militarization of Iran's politics in the short to medium term leaning to A, either a more responsible governments in Iran for the Iranian people, or be a more kind of responsible, respectful Iran within that, you know, quote unquote, community of nations. And the reason I'm saying that, even though there are a lot of people who believe that over time, the IRGC could change, particularly if you begin to gut the Islamist veneer of that organization, is because I don't believe Islamism is a veneer. As much as there is corruption and pessimism within that institution and within that bureaucracy and within its

veterans, there is still the origins theory. There are very much partners in power with the religious institutions. And they may not want to move as much beyond what they have now, which is the front and center. So people talk about a military dictatorship over time, whereas I think that is really already here. There is so much of Iran's politics that is militarized, but they're still quite content with this religious veneer, this religious front, the fact that it's these armed organizations

and these Islamist organizations in partnership with one another. creating this arc of instability that is coming out of Iran and this vector of pressure against its own population that is within Iran. And that's where I wanted to go back to because another really important X factor people should know about is whatever Hamina wants, whatever the IRGC may want, it's quite clear that the population of Iran drastically wants something different. And even though there were protests historically in Iran for the reform movements 1999 and 2009, starting in 2017, as much as people here in Washington where I'm sitting are kind of done with the regime change conversation, you've had large swaths of Iranians continue to turn out using every available issue to them, economic issues, social issues, religious issues, political issues, even environmental issues, foreign policy issues, to protest against the state and to signal to the world. that their views, their values, and their interest is 180 degrees opposite, that of the governing elite in Iran. So another X factor is what happens when there's another boom and bus cycle of protests,

and it happens at a time of regime transition. And the reason I want to focus this point on for your audience is because with the kind of emergency situation, the regime is in now, it's supposed to have a presidential, quote-unquote, election, even though most of these elections, as we know, are really selections. they're tightly managed, they're pushed from behind the scenes. You've had diminishing popular turnout in these selections, is that they're supposed to have them within 50 days. So I think about mid-July when they'll have it.

And Iran already had a presidential election scheduled for spring 2025. That's now canceled. And the individual who will win in the special election will be in office for four years. And it's entirely possible now, because Supreme Leader Haman is 85 years old, that whoever is at the helm of the presidency after this July could likely preside over the period of transition should and if Supreme Leader Hominee die in that four-year period, which is potentially totally possible, even though these guys tend to live long lives anyway. And in that sense, he could make the presidency, which on paper is not as powerful,

into a more important figure and ride the transition into something else. Right. I'm really glad you brought up this issue of the protests, the mood, the feel of the population. Look, I'm old enough to remember very well, the 79 revolution. And really, ever since then, there's always been this latent hope within the intel community in the U.S. and elsewhere that somehow the population was going to rise up, right, and eventually say enough is enough. and that's obviously had, you know, mixed results, should I say.

I mean, what I mean is within the intel community and the others in U.S. administrations over time in terms of their willingness to support that effort, right? I think they've thought, well, it could happen, it might happen, but when there appears to be an effort and protests appear to be building, there has always been this concern within Washington of, oh, my God, what's around the corner, what could happen? next. And, you know, there's, there is a fear within Washington, D.C., oftentimes, not just with one administration or another, but over years of change, no matter how bad the existing government in

whatever country we're talking about may be. But do you see any time, do you see any hope? And not to bang on about this, but in the wake of Racy's death, I've seen some quotes from just people on the streets in Tehran because I think there was some concern, there was, there was, there was, there was curiosity of why there wasn't a public outpouring of grief, not just from the loyalists, right, the people that, you know, have to get out there and weep, but the shopkeepers. And I've read some quotes from shopkeepers where it's basically just like, it doesn't matter to us, right?

He's dead. They're going to put another hardliner in. Who cares? You know, we've got to get on with it. The economy, you know, it sucks. What are we going to do about it? So it's very depressing in a way, but do you see a moment in time in our lifetimes where that could change where there could be a popular uprising. Oh, absolutely. And everything we have seen from

2017 to present have been attempts to use a trigger issue, use a shock issue to create space for that popular uprising. The problem, I mean, and the Iranians are saying this in their own slogan. So, you know, you mentioned the IC, you mentioned political forces in Washington and around the world, people who may be a bit more risk-averse. And I will be the first to tell you, sir, yes, this is the Middle East. The theory of the case of the Middle East is that absolutely things can and often do get worse, not better. And now there's a lot of Americans who are looking at the Middle East in a much more transactional sense rather than a much more transformational sense. But the irony of ironies is that the place where there is still great hope for transformation is in Iran

because of that massive chasm that exists between state and society. You know, we're talking about the Abraham Accords right now with the potential expansion of the Abraham Accords. normalization with Arab states and Israel, there are real concerns beneath the state level as to how much that normalization will go. You do not at all even have these questions within Iranian society. Whereas in Iran, the only place you see, for example, I'm just, I'm just going to use this as one measure, but we can go deeper. One of the few places you actually see a Palestinian flag in Iran is in government offices, whereas you compare that to the rest of the Arab and Muslim world, from Malaysia to Morocco. Where would you see?

see this and where is this kind of a green light or a dog whistle for not just being, you know, pro-Palestin and anti-Israeli, but really anti-Western as rail, kind of like a thumbs, a thumbs down to the west. You know, less than a week after October 7, you had over a hundred thousand or at least tens of thousands of Iranians in a soccer stadium when some regime official tried to raise the Palestinian flag chanting and saying, shove that flag up here, you know where. Since 2009, Iranians have been protesting about the regime's foreign policy, saying, not Gaza, not Lebanon, my life only for Iran. And I know former President Barack Obama had reservations about supporting the Green Movement, not just because of the politics of a nuclear deal he wanted, but because I think a lot of people in that administration genuinely believed that Western support would be a kiss of death.

But really, weeks into that Green Movement in 2009, weeks into that street protest, you had Iranians chanting and And it rhymes, Obama, Obama, Yaba una, Yobama, which is Obama, Obama, are you with us or are you with them? In 2018, at the peak of sanctions. And again, the academic theory of the case here is that when there is foreign pressure, you would have a rally around the flag. You did not have that at all. All of the sacred cows need to be slaughtered when looking at this issue. And indeed, it does provide the West, not just the I-C, but the West and policymakers a real opportunity. an opportunity in the Middle East to marry your strategy and your values in a way that simply has not existed

in a lot of other parts of the world there. So this is not to say that Americans need to push the Iranian people out, but it's to say that the next time the Iranian people do come out. And indeed, it's a matter of when, not if, because of all these triggers, because of all these exogenous shocks, that we need to actually have their back. And actually the organization I work for as well as another organization has actually just put out a memo with like a 10, 12-point plan about what maximum support could really look like if one follows the policy of maximum pressure on the regime, what does maximum support look like for the

Iranian people to give them that fighting chance? Well, Ben, I got another couple pages of questions here, but we're out of time. I hope you will come back and join us again because there's a lot more ground to cover here. But Benham Ben-Talablu from the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy. I want to thank you very much for joining us today. Thank you so much. It's a pleasure. I'd love to be back. All right. Coming up next, we'll take a look at the escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait, with China launching aggressive military drills against the island.

We'll look at that situation and other China-related issues. Author Gordon Chang joins us for analysis when we come back. Pepsi prebiotic cola in original and cherry vanilla. That Pepsi taste you love with no artificial sweeteners and three grams of prebiotic fiber. Pepsi prebiotic cola. Unbelievably Pepsi. Tensions are rising in the Taiwan Strait as China intensifies its military maneuvers. Now, on Thursday, China encircled Taiwan with naval vessels and military aircraft in a show of force,

declaring that the blood of independence forces on the self-ruled island would flow. It's not very neighborly. These two days of drills are part of China's escalating campaign of intimidation, which has included a series of large-scale military exercises around Taiwan in recent years. The latest drills come on the heels of Li Ching-Tay's inauguration as Taiwan's new president earlier this week. His inauguration speech, which emphasized Taiwan's sovereignty, has been denounced by China as a confession of independence.

To take a deeper look into the implications of China's maneuvers and what they mean for regional stability, we're joined by Gordon Chang, author of the coming collapse of China and also China is going to war. Now you can follow him on X at Gordon G. Chang. Gordon, thank you very much for joining the Situation Report today. And I'm going to start, if you don't mind, with a sort of a broad question. There's a lot of room here to move. But these military exercises that we've just been speaking about,

what do they mean and are they significant given that it's not the first time we've seen this? They are significant, Mike. and I think for a number of reasons. First of all, they begin at the administration of William Lai, who was inaugurated on Monday. Now, in his speech, he was clearer about Taiwan sovereignty, but he was also, he took pains to emphasize that he was going to support the status quo,

which is music to the ears of the State Department, because they always talk about the status quo, and China, of course, is trying to change it. But I think that these exercises are significant from a military point of view because they go beyond what we have seen in the past. You know, after Speaker Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, the Chinese military exercised around the island trying to basically practice a blockade. They did this also this time, but they were also more thorough this time because they were not only exercising around the main island of Taiwan,

but also Taiwan's outlying islands, which are very close to the Chinese-Mexamination. mainland. So really what we see is a much more comprehensive exercise on the part of the Chinese military. And by the way, this is the first time that I can remember that they actually specifically openly talked about these exercises are meant to demonstrate its ability to, quote unquote, seize power. So there is now a more open declaration of China's intentions. So you don't see this necessarily as just a status quo, more of the. same. But do you think this gets us one step closer? Again, I know this is a 30,000 foot level question, but does this move us closer, both their drills, their exercises, and also their,

the way that they're phrasing all of this, does it move us one step closer to Xi's eventual move on Taiwan? And what's the timeline for that, do you think? Yeah. Well, it certainly moves the Chinese one step closer. The question is, what are Xi Jinping's intention? We know that Xi Jinping has already made the decision to risk war in East Asia. And we can see this from his various moves, not so much about Taiwan, but in the Philippines, in the South China Sea, which we talk about in the moment. But if we step back, you know, a lot of people say that China's going to invade this year. That's possible.

But I think that C has understood that his military is not ready to undertake a combined air, land, sea operation, something which China's never done before, against such a hard target. And my sense is that he's now trying to pick on easier targets, such as the Philippines, which is not as militarily ready to defend itself. So we see this very, very provocative and belligerent activity at Second Thomas Scholl, Scarborough Scholl, Witson Reef, and other locations that Beijing claims. What's really worrying me is that this our State Department, nine times in the Biden administration has said that the United States was prepared to defend the Philippines.

And we actually talk about the use of force. President Biden himself has at least twice, maybe three times, but twice that I can think of, where he said that he would use force against China to defend the Philippines and to discharge our obligations under our 1951 mutual defense treaty. And China is just continuing to ignore Biden and the state department. They're continuing with these provocative maneuvers, which means that deterrence is broken down. So we have to be prepared for anything at any place at any time. My sense is the Philippines, but it could be elsewhere. I mean, I take your point, Gordon, on the idea that deterrence has broken down.

I don't think that she believes that the Biden administration would step in and defend Taiwan. what do you think? Would the U.S. administration, whether it's the Biden administration or whatever comes after, would they, would the U.S. put boots on the ground to support Taiwan? I think Chinese doctrine. I don't know, but I think Chinese doctrine is to attack the United States in the first minutes of an action against Taiwan. And if that's the case, it's, it's, president, it really doesn't have any choice. And the reason I think that is, in order for, China to have an effective invasion, one that succeeds, he needs to impose a blockade. For that blockade to be successful, it needs to include Japanese, sovereign Japanese territory,

especially the island of Yonagumi. And Japan and the United States have a mutual defense treaty. You know, a blockade of a Japanese island would be an active war. And I think Japan is prepared to come to Taiwan's assistance. So, My sense is that we would be in a war in Taiwan, and it's not so much a question of people in Washington saying, are we going to defend it or not. I think that it's more going to be we're going to have to react to a Chinese attack. If China doesn't impose a blockade of that sort, then, you know, I tend to think the United States will defend Taiwan, but we really don't know, of course. Is there a possibility that this does not involve a military invasion, that somehow there's a soft approach, a soft invasion that eventually just subsumes Taiwan? Well, some people actually think that that is the most probable scenario that China imposes a blockade and does not invade and just hopes to strangle Taiwan and hopes that the international community will not come to Taiwan's resistance.

So that is one of these sly, cunning Chinese tactics that might or might not work. There's a lot of thinking behind that. My sense is that a blockade does lead to war. But, you know, you can think of scenarios where it doesn't. What do you think she takes away from the current conflict, Putin's invasion of Ukraine, and the international support over the past, couple of years that came to Ukraine's aid. How does he interpret that in terms of his views on Taiwan? I'm worried that he takes away the wrong lessons from that, Mike. If you remember just after

Russia's invasion, you know, everyone was saying, oh, Xi Jinping is looking at Taiwan as being a more difficult target because the Russians aren't doing very well. And, you know, the West and the rest of the international community were imposing sanctions. I didn't think that. I didn't think that. I didn't think that because the sanctions weren't as tight as they had to be, and they certainly weren't enforced with the vigor that was required. And we certainly, you know, especially now from the perspective of 2024, we can see that Biden has been hesitant in terms of allowing Ukraine to fight the way it wants to and has not been supplying the weapons that Ukraine needs. Also, he sees that there's a lot of opposition in the U.S. to continued support for Ukraine. So my big takeaway is that the

that he thinks he can get away with an invasion of Taiwan. Looking at not only Ukraine, but also that we have failed to protect our interests in North Africa. North Africa is essentially a war because you have China and Russia fueling insurgencies that look like wars and also from Biden's incomprehensible reactions to Iran's attack on Israel. I want to kind of keep our focus on Ukraine if I could just for a little bit. Talk to me about your understanding of what China is doing currently to support Russia. I mean, clearly they've been engaged in helping Russia's economy over the past couple of years. And there's been a lot of talk about how China's economic assistance to Russia has helped Russia essentially rebuild some of their military infrastructure that they've lost during the course of the war.

but to what degree is China shifting that to actually then provide lethal aid? Do you have any insight into that? China had been supplying lethal aid from the beginning of this conflict. We know from open reporting, for instance, that in the first moments of the war, China was feeding location data to Russia. That location data was obtained from Chinese-made drones that Ukraine was operating. Russia then took that data to take out the Ukrainian drone operators. Since that time, there have been these reports that China every day sells ammunition and other

consumption, highly consumed items to Russia for use in the war. There's that report that Russia's largest cargo plane, transport plane, leaves daily from Zhongjo, which is central China, with ammunition. And then, of course, we're seeing Chinese components in Russian weapons, especially chips. So the assistance has been there. And the reason why this is important is not so much China's material assistance, but the Chinese can see the reaction of the Biden administration. From the get-go, President Biden has told the Chinese in public that there will be consequences

for the provision of lethal aid to Russia for use in Ukraine. And China continues to provide it, and Biden continues to do nothing. And that was highlighted this week in really just an unbelievable scenario where we heard the U.K. defense ministers say that China's been providing such lethal assistance. And then Jake Sullivan a couple days ago from the White House podium says no, that the U.K. intelligence was wrong. Well, what we're doing is we're relying to protect China's support and lethal aid support for Russia. This is just unbelievable. Yeah, I'm glad you brought up the U.K. defense minister's comments because it was just this week, as you pointed out. And he did say that the U.K. has intelligence now that the Chinese government is providing military hardware.

I think that there's been this parsing of words, has been sort of this dance over the past couple of years, that if they're not actually providing weaponry, right, you know, significant, munitions, whatever it may be, to Russia, that somehow, okay, they're providing maybe location support, they're providing, you know, communication support, whatever it might be, Intel support, that somehow we could push that aside and pretend like that wasn't lethal aid. But to your point, it is, right? If they're using any type of intelligence or information from China to then target Ukrainian military, well, it's lethal aid. But I think the UK's defense minister was talking about specific intel citing weapon systems now being directly provided by China to Russia,

which then you could step back and say, we're in a proxy war with China at this point. Absolutely. And you know that reporting about China supplying ammunition, supplying bullets, that's lethal aid, Mike. You can't parse that one. And that's open. No, no, the recipient, the recipient, the recipient of a bullet would agree with you that that is lethal aid. Yeah, I mean, this is just unbelievable on the part of the Biden administration. The reason why this is so critical, and it goes beyond Ukraine, and this is basically Biden's been issuing hollow warnings. The reason why hollow warnings are important is just go back to the late 1930s,

where Britain and France, starting in 1936 with the remilitarization of the Rhineland, keep on issuing hollow warnings to the third. you get to August of 1939, London and Paris tell Berlin that they will go to war if Germany invades Poland. And we know from the archives, Mike, that nobody in Berlin believed the British and the French because they had not followed through on previous warnings. Well, guess what? September 1st, 1939, Germany invades Poland. What do London and Paris do? They declare war. And we know that the Germans were shocked. So this is how you start a great time. Great War. You issue hollow warnings and Biden has been issuing hollow warning after hollow warning.

Okay, let me ask you this, though. We've seen this with Ukraine as well. I feel this question all the time. Why do we care? Why do we bother? Why is this in U.S. national interests, right, for Ukraine? And I've heard the same when it comes to Taiwan. What would you say about that? Why does it matter to U.S. national security interests? Well, first of all, as you point out, China is fighting a proxy war against us in Ukraine. So we are the target. Also, a couple other things. We are a party to the Budapest memorandum of 1994.

That essentially issued, we issued guarantees for Ukraine's territorial and sovereignty. Now, those were soft guarantees, but there is reporting, which I believe to be true, is that behind the scenes, in order to get Ukraine to do something which was completely, you know, not in Ukraine's interest, we gave them secret assurances that we would guarantee its sovereignty. The reason why that's important is because Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons. And if we, you know, if we allow Russia to take over Ukraine, every country in the world is going to say, I need nuclear weapons of our own. That is not in America's interest.

But it's also not in America's interest to allow Putin to absorb Ukraine because then he's going to go after the Baltic states and after Poland. And he's already started to do that with his perhaps sabotage, as well as removing bullies from the water of the Baltics. He has made it very clear. He's going after NATO states. We've got to stop him someplace. We should stop him in Ukraine before we actually have to go to fighting war.

And if you've got 30 seconds, I know this is one of those impossible questions, If you've got 30 seconds to explain why Taiwan is important. Why are we concerned? Why are we talking about Taiwan? Why are we talking about the need to support Taiwan in the event of a Chinese regime invasion? They make all our chips for 150 years. Taiwan's been in the center of our Western defense perimeter. We could not allow the Chinese to take any democracy, especially when as important as Taiwan.

and after the fall of Afghanistan in 2021, Taiwan has become the test, the test of American credibility and resolve. Gordon, this has been delightful. We got a lot of other questions that I want to throw your way, so I do hope that you'll come back. But I really appreciate your time. Gordon Chang, author of The Coming Collapse of China, and China is going to war. We appreciate you very much, and we appreciate the time you've given to us today. Thank you so much, Mike. I really appreciate it.

Coming up next, a silent crisis is unfolding at the southern border. A new investigation is shining a spotlight on the horrors that border patrol agents face on a daily basis and the toll that it's taking on their mental health. Stay with us. To close out today's show, I wanted to bring your attention to an issue that, frankly, isn't getting much play in the mainstream media. When news outlets report on the crisis at the U.S. southern border, they focus almost exclusively on the well-being of those attempting to make their way into the United States.

The stories are framed in a way to garner sympathy for the plight of the migrants, the economic and social struggles they face in their home countries, and of course their dangerous trek north. Now, whether it's driven by bias or an agenda, the media is only giving you part of the story. An investigation by the free press is shining a light on a growing and, frankly, mostly invisible problem at the border. The toll that the current crisis is taking on the mental health of U.S. Border Patrol agents and a sad rise in suicides amongst their ranks. There were 14 suicides

among the agency's 25,000 agents in 2022, and that's nearly double the amount from 2020 before Biden took office and three times the amount recorded in 2014. The suicide rate is also double that of U.S. law enforcement agencies overall. Let me repeat that. The suicide rate among border patrol agents is double that of U.S. law enforcement agencies overall. According to a number of agents interviewed by the free press, much of the struggle has to do with the horrors that these men and women regularly encounter in the line of duty, everything from dead bodies to extreme cases of child abuse. One veteran agent told the outlet, quote, we regularly see things that people should never see, like riding human remains, abuse of every kind,

babies and kids dying or dead, end quote. He added that over time, agents have had to shut down a part of themselves just to keep going. Another agent, identified as Juan, recounted one of the many stories of rape on an almost daily basis. Juan told the free press, quote, I had to sit there and listen to a 13-year-old girl from El Salvador, tell me how she'd been raped twice by her smuggler.

She was traveling with her nine-year-old brother, and the smuggler said he would hurt the boy if she didn't cooperate. So she let him do what he wanted, end quote. Juan went on to say that this is not the job that Border Patrol agents were trained to do. Instead of spending their time protecting America from criminals and potential criminals, they often spend their days processing migrants who have crossed the river, sometimes in groups of 100 or more. According to the free press, the agents they spoke to universally believe

that the Biden administration has no interest in protecting the border was some calling their treatment by the White House, quote, a betrayal. Even worse, at times it seems that the Biden administration appears to be actively working against them. If you'll remember back in the fall of 2021, several agents on horseback were accused of whipping some Haitian migrants. Now, before any investigation could be conducted, President Biden vowed to make the agents, quote, pay for their behavior. Ultimately, of course, those agents were cleared of wrongdoing. but President Biden's comments were not forgotten. It demonstrated a clear willingness on the part of the White House

to stab agents in the back for cheap political points. Taken together, this has all led to a cratering of morale amongst members of America's Border Patrol, making an already thankless job unbearable for some. Now, look, the point of this story isn't to portray CBP agents as helpless victims. They're not. Instead, I just wanted to highlight

the difficult and often dangerous task of patrolling America's southern border, and the importance of providing these men and women with the resources that they need to do their job. The federal government, the White House, has a duty, a responsibility, and possibly it is their most important job, to do everything possible to ensure the security of U.S. citizens. And we're talking both national security and public security concerns. Frankly, the current administration has failed in this regard.

They spent three years, loosening, border security and ignoring the growing problems for both national and public security. They now want to act like they're concerned, in part, frankly, because Democrat mayors are publicly complaining about the strain on their city resources, and in part because poll numbers show it's a political problem for President Biden ahead of the November election. Now, I don't care what actually spurs them into action as long as they actually fix this problem for the sake of all U.S. citizens, including the men and women of the women of the United States. the Border Patrol. You can't have national and public security without knowing who is entering

your country. And for that, I award myself the PDB Situation Report's statement of the obvious award for this week. That's all the time we have for this week's PDB Situation Report. If you have any questions for me that you'd like me to address on the air, reach out to me at pdb at thefirsttv.com. And remember, to listen to the podcast of this show, add free, become a premium member of the president's daily brief by visiting PDB premium.com. It's really that easy. I'm Mike Baker. Until next time, well, you know the drill. Stay informed. Stay safe. Stay cool.