The President's Daily Brief - PDB Situation Report | October 12, 2024: Iran & Russia vs. The West & Leadership Tested Against China

Episode Date: October 12, 2024

In this episode of The PDB Situation Report: We'll begin with the latest from the Middle East, as Israel expands its offensive in southern Lebanon while Iran-backed Hezbollah fires rockets at Haifa for the first time since the war began. Lieutenant General Ben Hodges will join us to share his insights on the growing conflict and its broader implications for the region and the world. Later in the show, we'll turn to the Far East, where the armed forces of the Philippines, the United States, and four other nations have begun joint exercises in a show of naval strength, as tensions with China continue to rise. Retired Rear Admiral Mike Studeman, former commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence, will join us for more on that. 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]. ☕ Blackout Coffee: https://www.blackoutcoffee.com/PDB 🏅 Patriot Gold: Call 1-888-870-5457 for a free investor guide. 🕶️ MySudo: Go to https://MySudo.com/MIKEBAKER & use code 'MIKEBAKER' to get 30 days free on a SudoPro yearly subscription. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Fox News is now streaming live on Fox One. When it matters most, turn to the voices you trust. We go beyond the headlines, bringing you the stories you won't hear anywhere else. Live coverage, sharp analysis, real perspective. At home or on the go. Stay connected when it counts. Stream Fox News on Fox One. Download today.

Welcome to the PDB Situation Report. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage. All right, let's get brief. We'll begin today with the latest from the Middle East as Israel expands its offensive in southern Lebanon while Iran-backed Hezbollah fires rockets at Haifa for the first time since the war began. Lieutenant General Ben Hodges will join us to share his insights

on the growing conflict and its broader implications for the region and the world. Later in the show, we'll turn to the Far East where the armed forces of the Philippines, the United States, and four other nations have begun joint exercises in a show of naval strength as tensions with China continue to rise. Retired Viradm Admiral Mike Studeman, former commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence, will join us for more on that. But first, today's PDB spot.

This week marks the one-year anniversary, believe it or not, of the brutal Hamas terror attack that ignited the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. Now, while Israel continues its battle against Hamas in Gaza, it has intensified its ground offensive against Hezbollah along the southern Lebanese coast, vowing to secure its northern border. This effort aims to allow tens of thousands of Israelis displaced by Hezbollah's cross-border fire to return home. Looming over Israel's fight with these Iranian-backed groups is the possibility of a direct strike on Iran itself.

in retaliation for last week's missile barrage, raising concerns, of course, about the potential for a region-wide war. Joining us today to provide insight as retired Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, former commanding general of United States Army, Europe. General Hodges brings decades of military leadership and expertise in strategic operations.

And, General, welcome to the show. Thank you very much for taking the time. Thank you for the privilege of being on the program, Mike. I'm going to start with a fairly 30,000 foot question here, and then hopefully we can drill down from your perspective, from all your experience. Is the U.S. heading towards a direct conflict in support of Israel with Iran? I don't see it as a direct conflict by the United States in terms of offensive action, but I would assume that we will continue to help protect Israel as we have been.

done in the past to include having our aircraft in the sky and our Navy helping to knock down Iranian missiles. So I can see that, which is different, of course, than U.S. direct involvement in actions against Iran. No, I understood. I mean, at this stage of the game, do you feel, again, we don't spend much time talking politics there on the PDB, but do you see that there would be any sort of sea change, any difference between whichever administration's in place after November or going into next year

in terms of a willingness to defend or stand for Israel? Well, I don't want to make predictions about hypotheticals, but the United States has consistently protected Israel regardless of what administration was in office. And certainly the current administration has made it very clear. that they will protect Israel. And they took some domestic heat for doing that despite protests by pro-Palestinian students, for example. So I think what the administration is doing now, delivering capability to Israel,

and even to the point of having our pilots up in the sky, that's as far as I've ever seen us go. Yeah, I guess regardless of who wins in November, What would be your guidance to the next administration when it comes to this existing conflict? And it's against, I know that's a big playing field. We're talking about Gaza. We're talking about Khazbalah. We're talking about the Houthis. We're talking about the issues with the Red Sea and international transport.

But top line, of course, we're talking about the Iranian regime. So what would be your advice to that administration in terms of how to deal with the Iranian regime? if what the end goal is for us and for most of the players in the region is long-term stability and peace. Well, I think that most of the problems in the Middle East can be tracked back to trace right back to Tehran in the regime that's empowered now. So it would be to the advantage of the United States and our friends and allies, including most of the Arab countries in the region, were that regime to collapse from internal problems or to at least be beaten back in.

into a box so that they don't feel that they can continue to threaten and support terrorist organizations around the region. But my advice to any administration would be that what's happening in the Middle East is connected to what's happening in Russia's aggression against Ukraine, that Iran has no friend on the planet except for Russia. That's the only country that they have any sort of positive relationship with. And so if we help Ukraine defeat Russia, then Iran is truly isolated. Likewise, if we help Israel pound Iran in diminished air capabilities,

Iran is much less capable of providing drones and ballistic missiles to Russia. So from a strategic standpoint, looking at both Ukraine against Russia, Israel against Iran, it's our advantage that both of these are successful. That's a really important point. And I think sometimes it gets overlooked. I mean, the world is very interconnected. The globe seems to be constantly shrinking.

Nothing happens in a bubble anymore. So if we could talk about that, from your perspective, how important has Iranian support to Putin been in Putin's efforts regarding its invasion of Ukraine? Well, certainly in the last couple of years, the provision of the, Shahi drones from Iran was important for Russia, but I would say that the Ukrainians have adapted quite well. They're able to knock down most of these Shahid drones that are launched against Ukrainian cities. I don't know how many or how much of the missile

capability that Russia uses actually comes from Iran. But clearly, these two countries are working together. And it's in the interest. of Russia, which has bases in Syria, of course, to continue to facilitate Iranian transfer of weapons and ammunition through Syria into Hezbollah. So I think that the Russians and the Iranians working together is not a good thing for Ukraine or for Israel or for the United States. And if you can begin to isolate Iran, for example, so that it is not able to be able to. to support Russia or receive anything from Russia, that also lessens their ability to support Hezbollah, Hamas,

and the Houthis, which obviously helps our ally Israel. So I really do see these things as connected. And of course, as always, the Chinese are watching to see, does the United States and our allies, do we have the political will and the industrial capacity and military capability, to help Ukraine defeat Russia, help Israel defeat Iran and its proxies, isolate North Korea. If the Chinese see that we don't, then I think the risk of them being emboldened goes up.

So even China is connected at least indirectly to what's going on in Ukraine and the Middle East. Yeah, there have been some interesting intel reports recently talking about a joint production facility in China between Russia and China to produce long-range attack drones, which shows a deepening relationship on that side. So this, I guess the term used to be axis of evil. I think it still applies or evil league of evil or however we want to refer to it. But this nexus with Iran, Russia, China, North Korea. have you seen any credible intelligence or reporting talking about weapons technology transfer from Russia

to Iran? Because I assume that Iran is not providing the goods to Putin pro bono. I mean, they're not out of the goodness of their heart. No, I think you're right. I think that there is technology transfer specifically regarding nuclear weapons that's going on that Russia has been supporting here on in that regard. I would imagine it goes beyond that, but I don't know. I mean, Russia's, to be honest, Russia's equipment has performed so poorly in this war that I don't think there's a lot of nations lining

up in a queue to purchase or buy Russian technology in the conventional sense. But there is no doubt that Russia does have nuclear capability and technology that would be solved after by countries like Iran, North Korea, and others. So I assume that that's going on. Now, about 90% of Iran's oil goes to China. So is a sort of a triangle connection there. I don't see Russia and China as allies, but clearly they have similar interest in turning upside down the international rules-based order from which the United States has benefited over the last 70-plus years, where you have transparency, rule of law, respect for freedom of navigation, respect for sovereignty, China and Russia hate this sort of construct with the United States sitting on top of it.

So that's really what's at stake here is the United States with our allies trying to protect this international rules-based order, whereas China and Russia both have an interest in turning that upside down, not because they like each other, but because they both see the benefit of turning that upside down. I think that's also a fascinating point. And again, something I think that we tend to simplify or oversimplify is the idea that, look, nations act in their own best interests. And sometimes those interests are aligned with other nations, right? But the idea that somehow China and Russia or the Xi Jinping, you know, has this boundless,

limitless partnership with Putin, you know, I think we could argue that only goes so far as to the point where it no longer serves Xi's interest. So I think that's a very pragmatic way to look at things. And Russia and China, of course, are also engaged in this effort, as you pointed out, to reorder the world, the Global South Initiative, trying to decrease U.S. and Western influence around the globe. So all of this comes into play, kind of shifting from the Middle East, shifting from Iran and that conflict there.

now kind of landing squarely in Russia. What's your perception of the ability of Putin to continue this effort in Ukraine from an economic perspective? I mean, can Russia's economy sustain a long-term invasion beyond? Obviously, it's been three years, but beyond that, does he have that ability or do you believe that at some point that may actually come into play in terms of his willingness to sit down at the table? Great question. I think Putin will continue doing what he's doing until he realizes he can't win.

He doesn't give a toss for how many casualties they have. They intentionally avoid drafting men out of Moscow and St. Petersburg. So all the troops that Russians are losing over 600,000 killed and wounded come from all over the Russian Federation away from Moscow and St. Petersburg, the two main metropolitan areas. because they don't want to have funerals in these cities. That would begin to create a problem. But as long as they come from the poor, let's say, ethnic regions of the Russian Federation outside of the two metropolitan areas, they don't care.

The Russian officers don't care. I mean, that's who they are. So it won't be casualties, at least for now, that causes them to have a major problem. but the Russian economy to the point of your question is about the same as Italy. I mean, the same size as Italy. Now Putin does not have to worry about a Congress or a parliament, you know, the Russian Duma pretty much answers to him. He doesn't have to worry about tough journalists putting a microphone in his face, asking him hard questions. So he really is not accountable to anybody except the handful of oligarchs around him that keep him in power.

So I think he will continue doing what he's doing until he realizes that he can't just wait us out, that the West is committed to helping Ukraine, not because this is charity for Ukraine, but because it's in our interest. It's in the interest of the United States that Europe is prosperous because Europe is our biggest trading partner. And so having Russia invade Ukraine puts millions of refugees on the road, it disrupts energy delivery and food grain delivery, which affects food prices and gas prices in America. So it's in our interest that Ukraine is successful. And again, back to China, you know, the Chinese are watching to see, do we actually have the will to defend sovereignty, freedom of

navigation, international law? So I think if Putin sees that we are in fact committed to that, that it's not just about for as long as it takes, but whatever it takes, then I think he's stopped. Until then, I think he continues doing what he's doing. He believes that the West will get tired. I think he's waiting to see how the election turns out, and then we'll reevaluate early in the new year. Okay, understood. General Hodges, former commanding general of the U.S. Army, Europe, if you wouldn't mind staying right where you are, We do have a sponsor or two that we love to pay attention to because they're excellent sponsors.

But we need to take a quick break and we'll be right back. Bank of America recently said do what central banks are doing. Buy gold. That's what they said. And for good reason. Gold is up 20% in 2024. Well, get this, the tech heavy NASDAQ has only seen a 17% rise. Now, in recent market news, disruptions at major brokerages like Schwab and Vanguard left investors

feeling uncertain. It's no surprise that Google searches for buy gold surged nearly 100% during the first week of August. At the same time, reports of a breakthrough in Samsung's solid state battery technology have sent silver prices soaring. And you know why? Well, if you want to make a battery, you're going to need some silver. J.P. Morgan is forecasting silver to surpass $36 an ounce by 2025. Now call the proud Americans of the Patriot Gold Group today before it's too late. Mention PDB, and you'll always get best-in-class service from Patriots protecting Patriot. Patriot Gold Group has the no-fee-for-life IRA, where your IRA or your 401k can be in physical gold and silver, and you may be eligible for the no-fee-for-life IRA on qualifying rollovers.

Call 1-888-870-5457 for a free investor guide. Patriot Gold Group is Consumer Affairs top-rated gold IRA dealer. for seven years in a row. That's a lot of years in a row. Call 1-888-8-870-5-4-7. Choice hotels get you more of what you value. Here's a little tune to help you remember. Same drive, different day.

Don't you wish you were getting away? Pack your bags and come on through. Texas, Ohio, Alaska, we're up there too. Comfort Inn. It's calling your name. Save on the state. Oh, and free waffles are yours to claim. Well, I hope you like my little song book direct at sourcehiltails.com.

Welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Joining me once again is retired Lieutenant General Ben Hodges. Sir, we were talking before the break, Russia, Ukraine, conflict. I'm going to ask you one of those questions that I know most people hate to ask and I apologize in advance. it's a prediction. If you had to predict where this conflict, Ukraine-Russia conflict, is going to be, say, in a year from now, how do you see this thing settling?

Well, I would say, Mike, and I don't mind you asking that, because it is important for all of us. But the outcome depends really on the United States. I mean, if the United States says it is in our interest that Ukraine does. defeats Russia, defeats Russia, because it's important for our economy, for our prosperity, for the security of our allies, and because of it, it deters China from making the terrible miscalculation. If we recognize that and act on that, then this thing will be over.

It should have ended last year, actually. Russia, remember, this war started 10 and a half years ago when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2000. 2014. Russia had every advantage. And yet, after 10 and a half years, Ukraine still controls more than 80% of its country. The great Black Sea, Russian Black Sea fleet, which has a really cool name, is a terrible Navy. Most of it's underwater or has had to retreat to the east. The Russian Air Force has failed its two most important tasks, which are air superiority and interdiction of the Ukrainian lines of communication. They haven't destroyed a single train or convoy bringing. equipment or ammunition from poland into ukraine and so i think that the uh ukrainians have done a remarkable job without the full commitment of the west to help them win so i think in the coming year if we decide if we recognize it's in our interest that they actually win that's what will happen and puttum will realize there's no way he's going to win if we fail then it will be a disaster for you

Europe and it will have a significant impact on us. And I think the Chinese will be emboldened. Ukrainian President Zelensky and obviously the Ukrainian military, they've been pushing for some time now for approval from the U.S. administration from the White House to use U.S. munitions to strike military targets inside Russia. And there's been a lot of pushback against that. How logical is that position to say, okay, we're providing you with a variety of of munitions, you just can't use them to target military facilities inside Russia that are targeting Ukrainian infrastructure. So I believe in the metaphor of killing the archer is better than trying to intercept all the arrows.

So in other words, hitting the airfields from which Russian aircraft are deploying and dropping these glide bombs against Ukrainian apartment buildings and hospitals, and schools, it's much better to hit the airfield rather than try and knock down the bombs and the drones and the missiles as they're coming in. So of course, we should be allowing Ukraine to use whatever means they have to include whether it's the 300 kilometer range ATICOMs that we provide or the British Storm Shadow or whatever other long-range system there is. this is about protecting civilian life. And I think that this is a policy decision of the administration with which I disagree. Despite all the good things the administration has done to keep 50 nations moving forward to support Ukraine, we have stopped short of the critical goal of declaring that we want Ukraine to win,

and therefore we're going to give them everything that they need so that they can actually win. So yes, to the point of your question, of course, they should. be able to use whatever we give them. But the problem is that there are too many people that have an excessive fear that Russia might actually use a nuclear weapon. And I think that Russia is not going to use a nuclear weapon. How would you answer this question? Because it comes up a lot, and I hear it from a lot of people, which in general terms is, why should we care? Why are we sending money, resources over for this fight? Why is it important to us? Why aren't we focused on what's happening? in the U.S. How would you answer that?

No, it's a great question. I get asked that question as well. And in my mind, it's actually quite simple. Number one, Europe is America's top economic trading partner. So it's in our interest that Europe is stable and secure so that it can be prosperous. And Russia's invasion of Ukraine has put millions of refugees on the road into Europe, putting enormous burdens on their economic and social networks and systems that affects our prosperity. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has disrupted grain supplies, which is needed not only for millions of people in Africa and Asia in the Middle East, but also it affects food prices for the United States.

And of course, Russia's disruption of energy flows from the region shows up at the gas pump in the United States. So it's in our interest economically that Ukraine is able to defeat Russia. That's the first reason. The second reason, of course, is if it looks like we are going to fail or that Ukraine fails because we allow them to, I think the Chinese, which everybody points to as the main long-term threat, and I don't disagree with that, that if we allow that to happen, then I think China will take the lesson that the West does not have. have the will or the industrial capacity to actually defend what we say is so important,

sovereignty, respect for freedom and navigation, respect for international law. So the chance of a problem with China goes up if we don't help Ukraine succeed. And then finally, of course, the Middle East that we've already talked about, Russia supports Iran. Iran supports Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. they attack our ally, Israel. So part of helping Israel includes not just giving them ammunition, but also isolating their principal adversary Iran. Okay. That's a very solid answer. To be honest with you, next time I get asked that same question, I'm going to use that answer verbatim. But I will give you credit for it. Okay. So retired Lieutenant General, Ben Hodges, former commander of U.S. Army, Europe, I hope you'll come back because I got a lot more questions for you.

But we're out of time, but we very much appreciate you, giving us your time and sharing your thoughts with us. Thank you, sir, very much. All right. The United States, the Philippines, and other regional allies, well, they began naval exercises this week, showcasing their naval strength in response to China's growing influence in the region. Coming up next, we'll be joined by retired rear-admiral Mike Studerman. I actually worked for his father at the agency. He'll give us his insights into the rising tensions and what will it take to?

confront the challenge posed by China. Stay with us. Look, if you're tired of the same old coffee from those mega corporations, you know which ones I'm talking about, pushing their agendas, well, listen up. It's time to take a stand and support a brand that truly embodies American values. Now, of course, I'm talking about blackout coffee. They stand with hardworking Americans who believe in family, faith, and freedom. They roast some of the most incredible coffee you'll ever taste, using only premium-grade beans

roasted and shipped to you within 48 hours. Look, 48 hours. The beans are in the roaster, then suddenly they're on your porch, then they're in your mug. For the cold brew fans, Blackout Coffee is now also excited to announce the launch of their two new ready-to-drink cold-brew coffee latte options. That's not easy to say, but they're delicious to drink. Don't settle for less. Make the switch to Blackout Coffee. Head over to blackout coffee. Coffee.com slash PDB, use the code PDB for 20% off your first order. That's blackout coffee.com slash PDB, and the code, of course, is PDB. Join the movement and taste the difference.

Remember, with every sip, you're supporting a brand that stands for America. And as we say around here, be awake, not woke. This is Euphoria Calvin Klein, the new elixir collection, featuring three perfum Intense Sense, inspired by a unique Orchid Accord, paired with vanilla. each with its own distinct attitude, each with its own universe, bold elixir, sensual, woody, addictive, magnetic elixir, sweet and romantic like a lingering touch, solar elixir, a radiant expression of joy, ultra-concentrated for amplified impact and lasting power. Find your euphoria. Discover the euphoria elixir collection by Calvin Klein. Some follow the noise. Bloomberg follows the money, because behind every headline is a bottom line. Whether it's the funds fueling AI or crypto's trillion dollar swings, there's a money side to every story. And when you see the money side, you understand what others miss.

Get the money side of the story. Subscribe now at Bloomberg.com. Welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Now, this week, in a show of strength, the United States and the Philippines participated in joint naval exercises in the South China Sea. alongside them, the armed forces of Australia, Japan, and New Zealand also took part in the exercises. The exercises come amid rising tensions with China, and it's become increasingly aggressive in recent months, repeatedly ramming Philippine ships and attacking Vietnamese fishing vessels. It's all part of Beijing's pursuit of dominance over the South China Sea and control over shipping lake.

It's also a direct challenge to the United States, which has long upheld a free and open South China Sea through freedom of navigation operations. Now, for more on this, I want to bring in retired rear Admiral Mike Studeman, former commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence. He's also the author of Might of the Chain, forging leaders of iron integrity. Admiral, thank you very much for taking the time to join us here on the PDB Situation Report. I'd love to start off by talking about the book. What prompted you to write this book? Yeah, thanks, Mike. Great to be here. Thanks for all your coverage. I wrote the book because I was so disturbed by leadership as I was watching it from beyond my uniform. There are certain traits of leadership, things that are effective, they're timeless about leadership. And I saw so many poor examples

of leadership in different places across American society. I looked at the polls and it was very clear that trust was at its lowest point. People didn't believe in their leaders in a way that we had lost some of our capabilities as a country because of the failure of leaders to lead right. And I thought, you know what, I can put together 35 years of my experiences. When I learned about leadership, I learned by doing. doing, but I also learned from other great leaders. And I kind of wrapped that up into a package, which I wrote right after retirement, and then published it with an eye towards influencing

younger people, too, maybe those who aren't set in their ways who need a guide to figure out how to do leadership the right way, because some of the examples we have in America today just aren't the kind of people to follow, either their technique, their comportments, the way that they operate in their positions of key influence. So this cuts across the board. This is not just leadership for government, leadership for military. It's across the board in the public sector and the private sector too, right, through commercial operations.

That's right. If you look at Harris and Gallup and U.S. News and World report statistics, four out of five people in America think that there's a crisis in corporate America and in the government. Four out of five people don't see leaders that they can trust around them. Lack of trust in media, lack of trust in, you know, other people who have gained position in our society and are exercising leadership in a way that's just flawed. You know, it's worrisome because if you think about the current state of the world, right? it seems like it's a bit on fire right now. And you could argue that now more than ever,

we actually need excellent leadership in a variety of, again, a variety of sectors, public, private, but is there one, can you distill it down to one top line issue? What has led to this problem? Is there something you can point to, or is it far more complex than that? Yeah, I think the divisiveness, of the United States is the basic problem.

But you know what? We've always had our disagreements of any type, including political disagreements. We found that there are ways to disagree. You can do so with civility, with respect, with dignity, and you can carry yourself in a way that gets you through those tough times. But we've lost our footing with regard to using these basic timeless leadership traits to be able to compromise for the common good. and find our way through a very tough time.

And look, the domestic environment and the international environment is looking scarier, more volatile, more uncertain, more complex than ever. So if we can't get our house in order, then we won't be able to fix our own problems here at home, much less deal with a world that's becoming more antagonistic in many ways. Yeah. You've got a really impressive, amazing, long resume that I expect all that experience fed into. this, obviously. Oh, and I should mention, by the way, here's a fun fact. Your father, also an admiral, William Tudeman, was at the CIA. It was a deputy director and a couple of times,

I believe he was also the acting director when I was a young spook stomping around overseas in a variety of odd places. So I thank you and I also thank your father for your very long. record of service and duty and dedication to this country. This is going to be a question that, again, maybe not easy to answer, but is there one common characteristic that you've seen over the years and through your experience writing this book that makes a strong, effective leader? And conversely, is there one that makes somebody ineffective as a leader? Yeah, I think at the root of all leadership is character and the quality of your character is the deciding factor for so many things. Senator Allen Simmons said it, hey, if you have integrity, nothing else matters.

If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters. We can replace the word integrity with character in there. And that is essentially the font from which you will kind of guide your every behavior. And if you have strong, good, moral, honorable character, it, it, it expresses. itself and it's manifest in everything you do. And it actually ends up building trust. And trust is so essential to be able to kind of work with anybody else, whether a teammate or potentially an opponent, but you have to work with them to be able to get something done. And so if you don't have strong character, good character, those flaws show up and you don't have enough trust to work

with and things just are not going to work out. You won't be able to build the kind of, you know, unity of purpose and to move forward in common cause with the people that you're working with because you're not the only one that can get things done. In fact, the more important things we have to do requires us to work with a whole diverse group of people. And everyone has a different view on matters. But if they can trust that your intentions are honorable, that you are aiming for the greater good and the noble transcendent cause, then they will be willing to kind of throw in with you and you'll get 100% effort and you can tap into the talent that's there. If you are not of that sort, then the trust is always something that's suspect and you never

get the fully employed individuals who are part of a team willing to give of themselves for whatever you're asking of them. What was the toughest part about writing this book? Writing about myself. I actually didn't have myself in it. And I thought, you know, leadership is, I'm going to do this sort of, you know, examination is going to be very clinical. I'll spell it all out.

I used to write leadership missives to my team that were just a page long. You could read them in 60 seconds or less. I call them leadership minutes. And I never wanted to put me in there. And I had a four star who just wrote a book, Sandy Winneville. Admiral Winnefeld. His book was Sailing Up, Williams, a great memoir. And he gave me a advice saying, hey, listen, people aren't going to read this until you put yourself in there and you have the courage to do that. Tell your stories, Mike. And then people will probably want to listen to the leadership traits that you're trying to talk about.

And so I bit the bullet and, you know, spent some time after retirement. And, you know, I figured out that I could do a few myself. I put a fair number in there. But then I got to the point where I really wanted to pull in other people in my life during my career who were the better exemplars of certain leadership traits and characteristics. And I really enjoyed kind of writing about them. Was there a moment in your military career where maybe there was an incident, whatever, and you were in command and maybe you came back, you sat down your desk and you went, no, no, I should have dealt with that differently. Yeah, plenty of times.

I think sometimes as a senior leader, you're very fernet. you're running from one thing to the next. And sometimes you know when your mind's still in the last meeting or you know you have to deliver something kind of in the next couple of hours. And you don't give that meeting. It's fair due. And you're not really listening as attentively

and paying attention and giving your best self. And you kind of know when you come through that and you're like, geez, you know, I really should have been more in the moment, very mindful that you will never get this hour back. And the issue is, you know, for many junior people, that may be the only time they get to interact with you. You know what I mean? So you're kind of moving along. So you owe it to your juniors, people who are working hard in the line to give it your all in every session. And sometimes you're really good at that and sometimes

things can get the better of you. That's an example. And sometimes I would just tell you, you know, because you're so absorbed with the mission, sometimes, you know, you want to drive faster than what the team can do. And you don't understand how, how those limitations are until you encounter them, right? You don't understand that your max RPMs in a certain, you know, place are here before orange turns into red, right? And you've gone too far. And you kind of, hey, have to learn how to, you know, temper yourself. I was never as good at that at being patient as I should have been. And so, yeah, you have to introspect and look at yourself and find out, okay, you're a work in progress. How do I continue to try to be better tomorrow than I was yesterday?

That's excellent advice. The book, again, if I could remind everyone, it's called Might of the Chain, Forging Leaders of Iron Integrity. Adwold, if you could stay right there, we do have some terrific sponsors and we need to take a quick break and then we'll be right back. You know, every day we hear more about surveillance and how our right to privacy is being infringed upon. Well, we hear about it because it's happening. It feels like we're living in a world where nothing is truly private anymore. You know what I mean?

Most of us, frankly, for the sake of convenience, we hand over our personal information without a second thought. Signing up for services, shopping online or using social media and I bet you use social media, but this convenience comes at a cost. It's time for us to take a stand and fight back for our right to privacy. Now, one tool that's been essential for me in this fight is the all-in-one privacy app, MySudo, that's spelled M-Y-S-U-D-O, MySudo. It's an app that lets you create multiple digital identities with separate phone numbers

and emails so you can keep your personal information private. In this age of constant surveillance, having MySudo is crucial. For my listeners, I've got a special deal. Go to mysudo.com slash Mike Baker and use code, here comes the code, Mike Baker, to get 30 days free on a pseudo pro yearly subscription. Take back your privacy with my pseudo. Trust me, it's worth it. It's only getting every customer's order right. It's only a point of sale system connected by Spectrum Fiber-powered business internet, helping you track hundreds of secure transactions.

And it's all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based customer support and local. technicians. It's only everything. Get business internet advantage free forever when you get four mobile lines from Spectrum. Visit Spectrum.com slash free for life to find out how. Restrictions apply. Service is not available in all areas. Welcome back to the Situation Report. Joining me once again is retired rear admiral Mike Studeman, former commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence and author of the terrific book Might of the Chain, forging leaders of iron integrity. Now, I suggest you pick up a copy, you read this, because as the Admiral's pointed out, right, in turbulent times, you need strong leadership. And I'd argue, I guess, Admiral, that part of our problem when people talk about, oh, they've lost faith in an institution, right?

They've lost faith in the credibility of some of the government institutions. That's not the institution. It's the leadership, right? I mean, it's who's in charge. And so I would say your book is right on the money in terms of timing. I'd like to kind of pivot, if we could now, to a topic that I know you're an expert on, which is China. And that's a broad playing field. So let me narrow it down a little bit.

Tell me your thoughts on China. Let me try to narrow it down just slightly. If you could, could you describe in general. terms from your perspective, the current state of the relationship between the U.S. government and military and the Chinese regime and the PLA. Yeah, if you talk to the White House, perhaps they'd say, you know, this is managed competition or competitive coexistence, and they're trying to, you know, keep the relationship stable and to protect America while managing a more bellicose and aggressive China, who's rise.

seems to be accompanied by more aggression and pressure in a lot of different areas as they attempt to reshape the international order and make room for authoritarianism and, you know, their view of the world. And so this is an active rivalry. The rivalry is strategic to tactical in nature, and it will continue for many, many decades. Even as China faces economic headwinds, that doesn't change the ambitions of Beijing and Xi Jinping. And even if Xi Jinping goes, there are many hawks left in Beijing that believe what Xi Jinping believes, that it's China's time to come take center stage, that America was overly entrusted with managing many things in the world and proved to be what they thought

was an aggressive hegemon that, you know, was responsible for Arab Springs and Iraq wars and chaos in the Middle East and all sorts of other things that we've done that has led to chaos and suffering around the world. And they think that the Chinese way is going to be a better way. And so they aim to displace the U.S. as the strongest pole in a multipolar world. And they're actively trying to redefine the rules of the game. And they're trying to advance their sovereignty goals, which include, you know, trying to capture territory, which means that they're fundamentally revanchist and expansionist. And these kinds of activities put them in direct friction with not just the United States or the Western world, but the international order as we know it.

And so that's being tested in the places like the South China Sea, as you pointed out. If you could, talk to me about that, the aggressive actions that they're taken. and have been taking against the Philippines as an example, the Vietnamese, in the South China Sea. From your perspective, what's the point? Are they just, is it saber rattling for them to make a point? Is there a greater strategy there? What is their endgame with that?

No, they've asserted and they convinced themselves that all of the South China Sea within the 9-10-11 dash line, however you define it, that kind of loops up by Taiwan, that that's theirs, that's their territorial sovereign ground, and that they've laid out the rules of the road. There will be no more additional outpost building. There will be very clear efforts to establish, quote, effective control as they attempt to use their militia and Coast Guard and PLA Navy and Air Forces to do so. and anybody that tries to push back is going to get rolled over. And small states suffer what they must. Essentially, a little bit of the Meeleon dialogue, that big states do what they can do.

Small states will suffer what they must. So it's an affront to them that the Philippines is sort of pushing back to them. And this is the rub. The Philippines is an ally of the United States. and we are close to potentially activating the mutual defense treaty with them if the Chinese actually go ahead and commit an aggressive act that would lead to a loss of a ship or loss of life, loss of an aircraft, something along those lines.

You're very close to a miscalculation there. The Chinese think they can get away with it. They think they can manage these tensions. they think that they're actually exhibiting restraint because after all they didn't sink outright or kill people already. So they think by water canning and lasering and, you know, boarding, you know, ships surrounding them that that's actually a milder form of pressure that's totally acceptable.

And so far, because they haven't been held to account, except reputationally through videos and things like that, that there's no pushback that's been very strong in the international community that's affected other vital interests, that the Chinese can keep doing what they're doing because it enables them to have effective control over these key areas, whether it's Scarborough Scholl, Sabina Scholl, Second Thomas Scholl, or any of the holdings that Vietnam also claims. Yeah, they've been particularly aggressive in their military buildup over the recent past, and particularly with their Navy.

Could you talk to us a little bit about that in terms of their capacity compared to the U.S.? How would you rate the two? How would you compare the two? They're a modern Navy. They are up here to the United States in many ways. They are not globally deployed like we are. So we have less than 300 ships. They have 375-odd balance.

battle force ships that include submarines when you count in battle force. And so they'll be approaching 400 ships in their battle force by the 2030s. We will still barely be able to make 300. Ours will be a globally deployed force. Theirs will be primarily in the first and second island chains. If you take a look at 85% of the fleet today, that's operating within the first island chain. 95% of the fleet is within the second island chain on any given day. There are only a few other ships that are scattered further abroad, let's say, Djibouti and Africa. And so the vast majority

of their capability, which already outnumbers ours by volume, is they're concentrating around those flashpoints. And they have, you know, obviously shorter distances to go to replenish, refuel, rearm, et cetera. And they have very thick intelligence. and reconnaissance belts, whether they're in the space domain or the aerial domain or others. So they have a lot of advantages of what we call interior lines close to their mainland. And they have the bases that you talked about, the ones that they reclaimed in the South China Sea and built up to the strong points with missile systems and all sorts of capabilities there that are now the bases for many of the activities that the Chinese are conducting in the South China Sea.

So they're ahead. This is very simplistic way of looking at it. But they're ahead in numbers. What about technology in terms of the capabilities of the vessels that exist on both sides? They have advanced technologies with all of their combat systems. And so I would say if you're going to compare, first of all, if you were to do, Aggregate Navy to Navy, our volume tonnage is much higher because we have some bigger ships in terms of amphibia ships and aircraft carriers than they do at this point in time. Their tonnage line comes up and it almost meets us in the 2040s and 2050s.

Their volume is clearly higher at this stage of the game. And they're all clustered around a place where we're relatively thin even with our 7th Fleet forward. So there's the advantage of capacity, volume, or numbers. In terms of their ability to employ weapons, we don't doubt this. They are the most proficient in exercising their weapon systems. They do more live fires than any other force on the planet. You see that some ballistic missiles. You see this in air-to-air missiles.

You see this with regard to naval weaponry. They've been practicing Taiwan scenarios year after year after year, right there in the Taiwan straight or further north and south, and they have exercises that last, you know, four or five months at a time, as they practice to fulfill what Xi Jinping asked them to do, which is to have enough threshold capability by 2027 to be able to take orders to execute options, no matter what they may be,

including a high-intensity combat environment against Taiwan, factoring, quote, interventionist forces from the United States or any other allies. That's what they're building. They're building it like hotcakes in every area. And I would just add a point that it's not so much the Navy to Navy comparison or things like that. You have to look at the entire joint capability and think about in terms of their system of systems versus our system of systems and how they interact, who has advantages, you know,

how is it all going to work out in terms of net aggregate, comparison of capabilities. The Navy has to worry about the rocket forces probably much, much earlier than the Chinese Navy forces as we might close in into areas where we would deliver weaponry. Yeah. And with the time that we have left, sir, I do need to ask you about Taiwan. And it's probably not a fair question to ask, but what do you think we're looking at here from a timeline? Do you believe, first of all, that that is Xi Jinping, you, you know, you know, has designs and will act on them related to Taiwan to bring from his perspective it back into the mainland fold. And if so, then what sort of timeline and in general terms,

what might that look like? Yeah, I think confrontation and influence efforts to achieve a political decision to have Taiwan essentially cave and commit to unification talks, that's already underway with much of the military operations along with economic and informational activities that China is doing. And those things are, you know, exhausting wearing Taiwan's military down. But they haven't actually flagged the Taiwan spirits yet. They maintain, you know, a strong, clear-eyed approach to being able to maintain the status quo and to protect their democracy and their freedom.

But, you know, the sheer weight of the Chinese military is pretty intimidating. And look, she has a lot of options, including up to all-out assault with an invasion force, but he has things short of that that could also prove very painful for Taiwan and its population. Sabotage, cyber, simply using artillery or ballistic missile strikes every now and again to take out, you know, critical nodes in Taiwan, simply blocking the liquidation. liquid national gas tankers that might be trying to make their way to Taiwan, the energy that Taiwan depends on. There are lots of things that are short of an all-out invasion they can do, but they're planning every one of those, exercising many, and they are clearly getting ready

to fulfill the ultimate directive to invade if nothing else has worked to get the objectives that they're trying to see. So Xi Jinping, very serious about Taiwan, talks about it all the time. And if you're looking at a nation going to war, all of those checks in the box that you look at about a nation going to war are fully checked right now. Everything is underway. Stockpiling goods, preparing your society ideologically, you know, getting your military full on ready, being able to provide, you know, legal justifications and to establish some

legitimacy over actions over Taiwan. All of those things are happening. It's very clear that she is willing to go all the way up to major power war to recover Taiwan if necessary. That's fascinating. And you have to also assume that they've been watching the PLA and Xi and the party have been watching the West reaction over the past three years in Ukraine and how their response has developed towards Russia. This has been very interesting and very Admiral, Mike Studeeman. I got to tell you, thank you very much for answering the phone when we called you. And I hope you'll pick up the phone again when you see our number on there, because I'd love to have you back. The author of Might of the Chain, Forging Leaders of Iron

Integrity, Go out, Get Yourself a Copy. I got to tell you, thank you so much, Admiral, for joining us today. Yeah, thanks, Mike. Great questions. Happy to come on any other time. Well, that's all the time we have for the PDB Situation Report. Oh, don't look so sad. 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. We love getting your feedback. We love getting your questions.

We compile them all once a month into an episode that we call Ask Me Anything. And go ahead, just ask me anything. I may not answer it, but still. To listen to the podcast of this show ad free, well, become a premium member of the president's Daily brief by visiting PDB Premium.com. Couldn't be easier. I'm Mike Baker.

Until next time, well, you know the drill. Stay informed. Stay safe. Stay cool. Ryan Reynolds here for MintMobil. I don't know if you knew this, but anyone can get the same premium wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying.

It's not just for celebrities. So do like I did and have one of your assistance assistants to switch you to MintMobil today. I'm told it's super easy to do at mintmobile.com slash switch. Up front payment of $45 for three-month plan equivalent to $15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra.

See full terms at mintmobile.com.