← Pod Save the World
Pod Save the World
Election 2024: Israel, Gaza, and the Future of the Middle East
00:55:10
In this special episode of Pod Save the World, Ben looks at the expanding conflict in the Middle East and how either a Harris or Trump electoral victory could impact the actions or motivations of countries in the region. He also looks at the growing rift among Democrats on the issue of Israel, anti-semitism in the US, the Palestinian perspective on the ongoing destruction in Gaza, and the broader regional dynamic. Ben is joined by Peter Beinart, Editor-at-Large of Jewish Currents and author of the forthcoming book “Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza”, as well as foreign policy analyst Rula Jebreal, and The Economist’s Middle East correspondent, Gregg Carlstrom.
Loading summary
Transcript52 lines
- [00:01]
Advertiser
Get ahead of your 2025 goals at 50% off with Pluralsight's online technology courses. Learn from highly vetted industry tech Experts on cloud, AI, data security and more than 7,000 courses. Hands on practice and assessments plus personalized learning paths. Become a tech expert yourself by mastering these in demand skills and score yourself a six figure salary. Visit pluralsight.com and get 50% off Pluralsight's individual annual plans until December 3rd. Life can throw a lot your way in the morning. You might be battling drop off times while your kids are battling imaginary monsters or their shoelaces, but no matter what life brings, Life Cereal puts a smile on everyone's face. With 24 grams of whole grains and unexpected sweetness in every serving, it's sure to please even the pickiest eaters. Help start your mornings with Life Cereal.
- [00:57]
Listener
I really love my life.
- [01:11]
Ben Rhodes
Welcome to Patzi of the World. I'm Ben Rhodes and this is another special episode in the lead up to November's election, where we're looking at what the stakes are for our foreign policy and the world as a whole. Last week we focused on the war in Ukraine. This time we'll look at the war between Israel and Hamas and its continued escalation across the Middle east as Israel has decimated Hezbollah's leadership and bombed Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iran. It's been over a year since Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, killing nearly 1,200 people and taking over 250 hostages. In the aftermath, Israel has waged a relentless military campaign in Gaza, killing over 40,000 people, including 20,000 children, more than all the civilian casualties in the war in Ukraine. It's almost impossible to describe the horror of the conditions in Gaza. Just about every person has been displaced. Most homes have been destroyed. Gazans have been living on the precipice of famine. Multiple health crises have broken out. The bulk of this destruction has been done with US weapons, which have continued to flow without conditions to Bibi Netanyahu and the Israeli government. The US has tried repeatedly to negotiate a ceasefire that could secure the release of hostages, including the 97 who remain in Gaza, but those efforts have failed. Meanwhile, rocket attacks into northern Israel by Hezbollah caused the displacement of tens of thousands of Israelis. Earlier this fall, Israel launched attacks on Lebanon, first with exploding pagers and walkie talkies to take out Hezbollah operatives, and then with a bombing campaign that killed Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, and a subsequent ground invasion. In the process, over a million people in Lebanon have been displaced and thousands have been killed. Now, as listeners to Pasadena know we've been covering the ever expanding nature of this conflict every week, including Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, back and forth strikes between Israel and Iran, and attacks on US Service members in Syria and Iraq. Every step of the way, we've called for a ceasefire for the Biden administration to use leverage on Israel and condition assistance for all parties to take a step back to avoid war and its inevitable humanitarian crises and political instability. In this episode, we continue to look at what the consequences or solutions could be in the future, depending on who wins the US Presidency. You'll hear my conversations about the message America's action, or in this case, inaction, sends on human rights with Rula Jabril, a Palestinian foreign policy and security analyst. We'll also talk about where the regional geopolitics are headed among the Gulf states and Iran and ask how much influence us Actually has with Greg Karlstrom, the Middle east reporter for the Economist. But first, we'll start here in the United States with a look at how this conflict has become central to our own political dialogue and how it's dividing the American Jewish community and the Democratic Party with Peter Beinart, the editor at large of Jewish Currents. Peter has a new book coming soon called Being Jewish after the Destruction of Gaza. We started our conversation the same way we're starting all of our episodes in this series, asking how the winner of this election could define American foreign policy.
- [04:24]
Peter Beinart
Well, I think the Trump record, based on what he did when he was in power the last time, is that he will support the Israeli government in doing basically whatever it wants. And so since what it wants is to annex the West Bank, I think it's already moving in that direction. And I think Trump would give the green light. I also think that Trump would give the green light to efforts to depopulate Gaza through a kind of mass ethnic cleansing. So I think there are certainly elements, strong elements of the Israeli government who want to pressure Egypt to open the border and basically just push large numbers of people out of Gaza. And I think the Trump administration, I think, would be quite likely to go along with that. With Harris, it's a little bit harder to tell. And I think a lot of it really depends on how much pressure there is from the Democratic base. There is momentum inside the Democratic Party for some kind of conditioning of military aid. I think it's possible that the pressure from inside the base and from some in Congress could push her in this direction. But my guess will be that there's a fair amount of range of different options that we could see in a Harris administration, depending on how the political. How the politics of this evolve inside the Democratic Party.
- [05:39]
Ben Rhodes
Okay, so I want to spend most of the time talking about that Harris possibility, but first, just to kind of complete the thought on Trump. I mean, it does seem to me like a four years of Donald Trump is kind of this window of opportunity for the Israeli right. We've seen already things ratcheting up in the west bank with recent military operations. Obviously, we see what's happening in Lebanon, and there are Israeli ministers talking about maybe even annexing southern Lebanon. What is the window? If you're one of the more extreme members of the Netanyahu coalition, Ben GVIR or Smoltrich, or just settler movement generally, how do you think they would approach the window that a Trump presidency presents to them?
- [06:26]
Peter Beinart
I think their general view is that you can't really live alongside the Palestinians because you're not willing to give them their own state. You're not willing to give them citizenship in the state in which they currently live now, which is the state of Israel. But you recognize that the right recognizes, certainly since October 7, that Palestinians are likely to resist their denial of basic freedoms. And because Palestinians are gonna deny their basic freedoms, from the rights perspective, therefore, they represent a threat. And since you won't solve their legitimate political desires, the ultimate answer is basically to push them out. I think that's the view of people like Ben Guvar and Smotovic. Smotrich famously wrote about it in an essay in a paper called the decisive plan in 2017. But I think this goes way into the Likud Party as well. And so I think for the right, the question is, what are the opportunities to do this? Maybe another intifada in the west bank creates the opportunity to push a lot of Palestinians into Jordan. Maybe. The Trump presidency certainly means that you have a level of impunity in the United States that I think that would make this much easier to do. And I think that would be the thing that certain elements and strong elements inside this current Israeli government that I think would be their agenda.
- [07:44]
Ben Rhodes
I think a lot of us had a lot of hope when it shifted from Biden to her on this issue, that she was someone that seemed to have different instincts, was willing to call out the Israeli government's military operation in Gaza a little bit more forcefully than Biden. And yet there are also these signs of not wanting to go there. At the Democratic Convention, no Palestinian American was allowed to speak, including even a Democratic elected official who's gonna endorse Kamala Harris. In that speech, I mean, how do you read the mood music? I know you've worked with some of the organized opposition to the war in Gaza and the Jewish community and the uncommitted movement. I mean, how do you assess what we've learned thus far in the few weeks that Kamala has been the standard bearer?
- [08:33]
Peter Beinart
Well, we know that there's been a big shift in opinion in the Democratic Party in general, led by young people, and that Democrats oppose the war and are very sympathetic to. To putting limits, if not outright end to Israeli sales, military weapons sales to Israel during this war. But as you know better than most people, there's not an easy transmission mechanism between that public opinion and actual policymaking. And I'm frankly somewhat pessimistic about how much Kamala Harris will be able to do. I mean, first of all, because the public opinion shift that we've seen is not really being translated into a shift in the composition of Congress. There are some members of Congress, like Chris Van Hollen and a few others, who become more outspoken. But we also see that because of the astonishing amounts of money that AIPAC has been able to raise without anything on the other side, that you actually have some of the most pro Palestinian members of Congress losing their reelections, which reminds politicians to basically remain intimidated on this issue. Kamala Harris doesn't have a long track record on foreign policy of her own strong convictions. And I worry that that. And combined with the fact that, I mean, to be perfectly honest, I think it's harder as a black woman to take on these fights. I think that you are already. You saw this with Barack Obama. I think people are already more suspicious of you if you're not a white guy, if you try to move foreign policy in a progressive direction. And she doesn't have a group of close advisors who've been with her for years. And so I worry that. And we don't have a strong bench, again, as you know as well as any, we don't have a strong bench of people who can come into a Democratic administration who have a different foreign policy vision, especially on this issue. We have an entire generation of people who've basically been socialized into a kind of a very, very cautious, basically don't pick fights with Israel kind of view. And I imagine most of those people will be the people around her. So I hope I'm wrong, but in all honesty, I'm not super optimistic about how radically she will change US Policy.
- [10:47]
Ben Rhodes
And what about. I mean, just stay on this question of, like, what's happening inside The Democratic Party and some of the external forces that might have some influence on Kamala Harris. There's clearly this rupture in the sense that you have a growing progressive movement that wants to dramatically change American policy. Then you have kind of majorities of Americans that if asked the question, say we should condition some military assistance, and as you say, that's not kind of translating into results by politicians. Look, one of the sources of influence on this, let's just name it, has been the kind of organized American Jewish community that has been kind of central pieces of it. Even though AIPAC has moved further and further right, and I would argue is kind of almost Republican aligned in its ideology and outlook, there's still big chunks of the organized American Jewish community that are kind of pretty key parts of the Democratic Party's coalition. As someone who's kind of observed that dynamic for years, do you see any of the debates that are happening in the country writ large bringing any change within the structures of the organized American Jewish community or does it continue to kind of be status quo anti where it was on October 7th?
- [12:03]
Peter Beinart
I mean, I think the problem is when you look at interest groups and this is not just true for American Jews. I think it's true for Cuban Americans, which is subject. You knew really well. I think it's true for gun owners, right? I don't think most gun owners actually support the position of the nra. I think most gun owners, if you poll them, have a more moderate position, probably do support some kind of gun regulations. I think polls show that, you know, there are a lot of Cuban Americans who don't support the really hard line position on Cuba that they. But interest groups don't represent an entire community. They tend to represent the most politically organized and the wealthiest elements in that community. And so the divide you have among American Jews is that American Jews who are younger and less affiliated are much more critical of Israel. American Jews who are older and more affiliated and wealthier tend to still take the view that basically the United States should support Israel whatever it does. And those people really, really punch above their weight. And again, you could see this when AIPAC decided to start directly raising money, the fact that they were just able to go to a bunch of people who could write million dollar checks. There's nothing on the other side, whether it's among progressive Jews or Arab or Muslim or Palestinian Americans who can do anything like that. And so that's still where the balance of power remains inside the American Jew.
- [13:20]
Ben Rhodes
One other last question that's closer to home. Which Is the other aspect of this, since we're kind of wading in all the dangerous waters here, Peter, is that this question of anti Semitism in the United States, I think we saw a good illustration of the dynamic in recent days, and this will air a little bit later, but I think the examples will still hold. So you had. Right now there's a pretty concerted effort to kind of shame Rashida Tlaib over some statements she made about the Michigan Attorney General for her going after pro Palestinian protesters. And the allegation is this was an antisemitic charge, even though she didn't say anything about the identity of the Attorney general being the motivating force. The attorney general's Jewish, but we're having one of these debates where there's a very loud chorus of people that throw the charge of antisemitism at anyone who's a critic of. Of Israel. On the other hand, you had Donald Trump just the other day saying, quote, any Jewish person that votes for Democrats hates their religion is something. Well, that's something he said in the past, but he's updated it now by saying that if he somehow loses in November, Jewish voters will, quote, have a lot to do with it because presumably they should have acted on their dual loyalty for Israel to vote for him. The deepest, darkest, you know, right wing, anti Semitic trope about essentially Jews having dual loyalties or Jews being, you know, a stab in the back narrative if things go wrong. The way I'm gonna frame the question is like, how worried are you, you know, that all of the focus of the conversation about anti Semitism shifting to kind of college kids and Rashida Tlaib is kind of taking our eye off the fact that the kind of right wing, ethno nationalist version of anti Semitism that has been the most destructive one in history kind of is just right there. And, you know, and yet there's much less, you know, the ADL is not issuing statements of what Trump said. Like, we're kind of taking our eye off the target here when it comes to antisemitism.
- [15:23]
Peter Beinart
Right. I mean, yeah. The problem is that so many of the people who are setting the agenda in the debate about what defines antisemitism are really basically thinking about how they defend Israel from criticism rather than thinking about what actually constitutes bigotry. There is genuine antisemitism on the left. Of course there is. But if you look at the data that we have, right. By academics, by social scientists. Right. Not by the adl, whose definition of antisemitism often shifts to basically incorporate whatever criticisms of Zionism they don't like. But actually academics, what they find is that antisemitism bigotry against Jews is far higher on the right than it is on the left. And this should not really be surprising. We would expect that anti black racism would be higher on the right than on the left, that homophobia and transphobia, that anti. That misogyny. Of course it's not that there are not people on the left who have all of those bigotries, but the right by its nature tends to idealize a prior version of America which was less equal. That's kind of almost baked into how American conservatism functions. Right? The kind of pre civil rights America is the better America. And so why it's kind of bizarre that we would think that antisemitism would be different than all of these other ideologies. The NAACP doesn't say we think there's as much anti black racism on the left as on the right. They understand that the right by its nature has a more hierarchical and unequal view of society. It's the same with, with antisemitism. It's deeply integrated. The people who are most anti Semitic are also most anti immigrant, most anti Muslim, most anti black. And yet we have a kind of an organizational establishment, a group of politicians who always want to obfuscate that because they need to obfuscate that in order to try to protect Israel from the consequences of its behavior.
- [17:20]
Rula Jibril
POD the World is brought to you by USA for unhcr. Unhcr, the UN refugee agency, responds to emergencies and provides long term solutions for refugees in more than 130 countries including Ukraine, Syria and Afghanistan. UNHCR supports people forced to flee from war, violence and persecution at their greatest moment of need. During the winter, people forced to flee are faced with increased hardships and costs. As temperatures drop, families struggle to meet basic needs like heating their shelters, buying warm clothes and cooking hot meals. Refugees and displaced people are struggling to survive like never before. Funding shortfalls and rising food prices force UNHCR to dial back its life saving aid to vulnerable families around the world. Donor support is crucial to address the need for essentials for millions of families. Without sufficient funding, life saving assistance will be threatened, cutting off a vital lifeline for refugees and displaced people. This is a tremendous challenge for people forced to Flee. Donate to USA for UNHCR by visiting unrefugees.org winter all gifts before December 31st are automatically matched. The credit card companies are ripping you off and you don't even know It Every time you use your credit card, they charge a hidden swipe fee. It costs the average family more than $1,100 per year. Really? $1,100? That's because the credit card companies organize banks into pricing cartels. It's like OPEC for credit cards. That's terrible. Awful organization with no competition. We have the highest credit card swipe fees in the world. And that is just wrong. Thankfully, the House and Senate have a bipartisan bill to fix this problem. It's called the Credit Card Competition Act. It would finally make credit card companies compete like every business across the country is supposed to. So call your senators and representatives and tell them to pass the Credit Card Competition Act. Pod Save the World is brought to you by Tommy John. For a guy that says he wants the best of everything, your underwear leaves a lot to be desired. Don't skimp on your base layer. Upgrade to Tommy John's second skin underwear and feel true luxury. When you wear Tommy John, you're much more comfortable, so you can do everything better. Tommy John's stylish and soft second skin underwear has dozens of comfort innovations like a supportive contour pouch and breathable, lightweight moisture wicking fabric with four times the stretch of competing brands. God love you if you need all that stretch, right?
- [19:32]
Peter Beinart
Everybody needs that much stretch, Tommy.
- [19:34]
Rula Jibril
Oh, there, the waist. Got it. With over 20 million pairs sold in thousands of five star reviews, guys everywhere love their Tommy John.
- [19:41]
Peter Beinart
I love Tommy John.
- [19:41]
Rula Jibril
Plus wearing them right now, most valuable assets are Tommy.
- [19:44]
Peter Beinart
I'm wearing them right now.
- [19:45]
Rula Jibril
What color?
- [19:46]
Peter Beinart
What do you think?
- [19:48]
Rula Jibril
Green? Like, I don't know.
- [19:51]
Listener
Where are we?
- [19:52]
Rula Jibril
We're always covered with your best pair you'll ever wear or it's free guarantee. Tommy John's really are the most comfortable underwear you ever get. Here's what I recommend to all my listeners. Go to your underwear drawer, throw them all out, replace them entirely with Tommy John. Like Cortez burning the ships. That's exactly right. Get 20% off your first order right now at tommyjohn.com world. Save 20% on second skin at tommyjohn.com world tommyjohn.com world See site for details.
- [20:28]
Ben Rhodes
Okay, so as you heard from Peter, there are many dimensions to this issue in the United States. Identity issues, political issues, ethical issues. And what is clear is there's some change happening in terms of views of Israel and the Palestinians in the Jewish community, in the Democratic Party, among the US Public. This is clear. You see it not just in protests on college campuses, but we've also seen it in opinion polls, you know, majorities of Americans want condition assistance to Israel. Kind of want to rethink the nature of this relationship, which feels pretty dysfunctional right now as the Israeli government basically ignores everything that Joe Biden has told them. Now, to be clear, though, that's not enough to change policy. Just those changing attitudes have not really impacted US Policy at all. And so the question is, what comes next if Trump wins? I think we all know what we're getting, a kind of blank check on steroids for Netanyahu. But what about Kamala Harris? What happens if she wins? Well, to take a step back here, it's not just a question of how are we dealing with Israel, how are we dealing with the Palestinians. It's really important to remember that beyond even the immediate, overwhelming concern about Gaza, US Policy has once again deeply compromised our international and global position on issues like human rights and the rule of law. This is pretty simple. When the US Makes arguments about the war in Ukraine that are based on the rules based order, the need to avoid civilian casualties, when the US Tries to name and shame Vladimir Putin in Russia for strikes that harm children inside of Ukraine, when the US Embraces the International Criminal Court in going after Vladimir Putin, all those words ring pretty hollow when said against the arguments that we make to defend Israel's conduct in Gaza. In the broader Middle east, where the majority of global opinion, frankly, is horrified at what's taken place in Gaza. And so America's capacity to kind of make this argument for the rules based order, for human rights, for international law, well, that's all been compromised by what's been taking place in the Middle East. Now, Kamala Harris, as we've heard, offers a new opportunity to kind of turn the page to a new generation of American leadership and given her background as an Attorney general, to take a strong and principled position based on international law. I discussed this with Rula Jibril. Now, I've known Rula for a long time. She's been a journalist and one of the smarter political analysts watching not just the Middle east, but also American politics. We began by talking about how she feels about this election as a Palestinian who's been watching the tragedy unfold, but also as someone who's thought long and hard about American foreign policy in the Middle East. We began by talking about how Rula feels about this election. As a Palestinian who has been watching the tragedies unfolding over the last year.
- [23:20]
Greg Karlstrom
I would like to answer this not as a Palestinian or as a journalist, as actually a foreign policy expert who look at global events and who has been looking at the fight between authoritarianism or dictatorship and democracy. And you and I, regardless of our background, our religions, our ethnicity, our upbringing, we truly are committed to this absolute fight to advance democracies everywhere. So in this vision that brought forth the presidency of Joe Biden, clearly in the last two years, there's two, you know, two approaches to foreign policy. One, when it comes to Ukraine and Russia, and we understood that Putin is exporting his authoritarianism and dictatorship with propaganda, with bombs and with starvation and with corruptions, and I might add, looking at Europe also with blackmail. And now, and rightly so, Joe Biden approached these issues and the administration approaches issues, saying the difference between us Democrats and others, we uphold and enforce international humanitarian law. We don't endorse invading country, annexing country. All of these principles were basically abandoned, undermining the case for all of us internationally and globally that really, truly we are fighting against authoritarian states. When it came to Israel and its approach and its execution of the war in Gaza and now the expansion of the war in the west bank, the former Prime Minister of Sweden and Foreign Minister of Sweden, Carte Bell, actually tweeted something that is very relevant to this conversation where he says, Benjamin Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin have shared values. They have the same approach to international humanitarian law. So again, I understand that Biden and I have no hope that Biden would change his approach. I believe you met him very well when you were in the White House. You understood his approach. And I read in your book, obviously, that generational dynamic there when it came to the Arab Spring and supporting authoritarian stability, Mubarak and others, it was clear from day one that this is Biden's approach and it's not going to change. It is disappointing, it is heartbreaking, and I think it is misguided. But here we are in a different dynamic. We have a younger woman of color running on the fact that she is a former prosecutor, that she wants to uphold America's law and enforce America's law here in the United States. The real questions that many people around the world are asking today, not only in Palestine, in Israel, in Europe, Southeast Asia, but also, I think the Chinese and the Russians. Will this next President of the United States, will she also uphold international humanitarian law or even enforce America's law, the Leahy Law, for example, that forbid funding of military unit that are engaged, are committing war crimes? The question is still open. And I hope, and I'm going to push like you, for the next administration to actually to understand that if they want to win this fight, generational fight, global fight against authoritarianism, they need to start at home by enforcing our own law. It is not possible that you abandon this law when it comes to allies, and then you enforce it when it comes to enemies.
- [26:56]
Ben Rhodes
That's very well put. And I think you and I agree that with respect to the war in Gaza, following the law would mean halting military assistance to Israel because of the human rights violations it's engaged in. I also, like you, I'm sympathetic to the icc, applying a uniform standard, because you put this in, I think, usefully, a bigger context too, because I agree with you and with Karl Bilt that Netanyahu is cut from the same cloth as Putin. I think we should expect not only the ongoing challenges in Gaza, but we've seen Israel move into the West Bank. We've seen Netanyahu recently appear in front of a map that presented the west bank as just a part of Israel. We know people in his coalition would like the annexation of the West Bank. And by the way, we also know that Joe Biden, in addition to his Gaza policy, had kind of a Middle east policy that was about making deals with The Saudis, bringing BB and MbS together, that stability mentality that excluded the Palestinians entirely from the Abraham Accords. So if Kamala is elected, in addition to enforcing the law and applying the law to our Gaza policy, how should she shift off this paradigm of support Netanyahu and try to bring him together with mbs? What would be the right approach to the Palestinian issue, to the west bank, and to the future of Gaza for an incoming Harris administration?
- [28:20]
Greg Karlstrom
Look, Ben, we know that what President Biden failed, foreign policy, if I may, is actually Trump's foreign policy. It's the continuation of Trump policy, which is the Abraham Accord. Who cares about the Palestinians? Let's keep dealing and bringing autocrats to the equation so they can normalize with Israel. And the whole promise around this policy, the Abraham Accord, was that somehow this could constrain Israel and prevent annexation of the West Bank. That didn't happen. Actually. It emboldened Netanyahu's government, who are ideologically committed to the annexation of the West Bank. So Kamala Harris will be faced with a very important question. What do we put first? America's stability, security, the fight for standing in the world and also national security, or continue to back this far right government that is willing to dismantle every resolution, that's willing to violate every law, America's law and international law. So Kamala Harris will be faced with all these questions, I hope people like you will be surrounding her and will be actually advising her because whatever she will be doing in the next four years or three years will determine if America will stay safe, secure, will not have another war, will not fight another war in the Middle east, but will determine if we fight this global fight against autocrats and against dictators, whether it's China, Russia and others. Make no mistake, when the Germans, the far right, you know, fascist party in Germany basically recently was rising in the polls, the first thing they did, they said we would, they held the Israeli flag. They said, this is what we believe in ethnonationalism, that Jews should not stay in Germany. Somehow they have a homeland, they should go to Israel. And this is what we're fighting against here in the United States. A multiethnic, multiracial democracy. Palestinians should be included not only in the solution and the conversation, but should be, actually should enjoy the same rights and the same, you know, the same aspiration that Israelis are enjoying in the west bank and inside Israel and everywhere. And I think this case, she can understand better than anybody else because she was a former prosecutor, a former, you know, DA and a woman that understand the role of the rule of law and how nations that claim to be a democracy has to anchor its policy around the rule of law. I just came back from Europe, Ben. I mean, we have Borrell, chief diplomat of Europe, who is placing sanctions on ministers, Israeli ministers. We have Spain, who is calling Spain, Belgium, Ireland and others who calling to examine their relationship with Israel and saying if we don't comply with the ruling of the icj, international law is rendered obsolete, doesn't mean anything and nobody will obey. And basically people will start using the formula of Gaza and the doctrine that was unleashed by Netanyahu in Gaza as a precedent everywhere else, Taiwan, Ukraine and elsewhere. And I think this is very dangerous, a dangerous precedent.
- [31:43]
Ben Rhodes
So one more thing I wanted to ask you because you think you've laid out well, you know, the need to enforce the law, to abide by international law, to take a different a paradigm to the Middle east, to see the far right government, Israel, as part of the anti democratic trend globally with respect to this, Palestinians specifically though, what could a Kamala Harris do to engage Palestinians differently? There are questions of potential recognition of a Palestinian state. Then there are just questions around. Usually you see a US official, they go through Ramal, they meet with Abu Mazen, Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the Palestinian Authority, but they don't really engage Palestinians much more broadly. How would you like to see a Harris administration reach out to and kind of build a new relationship with the Palestinian people.
- [32:29]
Greg Karlstrom
Well, first of all, why don't you reverse what Trump did and open the embassy or consulate in Washington D.C. start with small steps, have represented the Palestinians back in the United States instead of dialoguing with the Palestinians via third party or somewhere else or going to Ramallah. I mean there's 159 countries that recognize the Palestinian state. I mean the fact that the United States is still unwilling and unable, yet Kamala Harris said they deserve self determination, they deserve freedom. Well, you know, just put your words where you put your money and make your policies, you know, somehow connected to your rhetoric. Secondly, do what you did, Ben. You traveled around the Middle East. You engaged with activists, journalists, human rights politicians, and also people who are leading the fight for democracy everywhere. You have actually to say something about enforcing international law about the illegality of the settlements. I mean, you have an order for the International Court of Justice, the highest court in the land in the world, telling you we order you to dismantle the settlements. So start by, you know, calling the settlements an illegal enterprise, sanctioning, you know, just do what you did in Russia. You have the Magnitsky act trigger the Magnitsky act against illegal settlements and settlers who are called terrorists. Not by the United States, by the head of Shabak, the Shin Bet, who call them terrorists. He said, and he actually said in an interview in a letter to the prime Minister said, I cannot do anything about these terrorists because they have political support. So I would say sanction the settlements, sanction these ministers. I would open the embassy immediately. But also arms embargo ban. Without an arms embargo, those weapons, you cannot say I care for Palestinians and yeah, I want self determination. And then you continue to provide the weapons that are killing scores of Palestinians, thousands and thousands. I mean, the last number of children who are killed are 18,000 children. We don't know any, you know, we don't know the numbers of Palestinian children under the rubbles. You cannot say that this is a legitimate tool of war. You cannot say starvation is a legitimate tool of war. And I think it also helps Israel. Why do I say that? We're seeing many human rights organizations in Israel who are begging the international community to intervene because they're seeing a radicalization in their own society. We've seen people who are protesting against the prime minister and for a hostage deal getting brutalized and beaten up. And now we have a conversation in the parliament of Israel that of people who are politicians and ministers who are calling to legalize basically the use of torture as a weapon of war against Palestinians. I mean, we're seeing a radicalization in Israel that is that need to be stopped. And the only way it can stop by pressuring Israel externally. There's no way they will change without international pressure. I want to repeat a sentence that I love very much, which is power. Never concede anything without demand, never did and never will. This was Frederick Douglass when he was talking about slavery that you need to pressure any entity, any regime to change. Otherwise it will not change.
- [36:09]
Rula Jibril
POD Save the World is brought to you by Oracle. Even if you think it's a bit overhyped. AI is suddenly everywhere from self driving cars to molecular medicine to business efficiency. If it's not in your industry yet, it's coming fast. But AI needs a lot of speed and computing power. So how do you compete without cost spiraling out of control? Time to upgrade to the next generation of the cloud. Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, or oci. OCI is a blazing, fast and secure platform for your infrastructure, database, application development, plus all your AI machine learning workloads. OCI costs 50% less for computing and 80% less for networking, so you're saving a ton of money. Right now. Oracle is offering to cut your current cloud bill in half if you move to OCI for new US customers with minimum financial commitment. Offer ends December 31, 2024. See if your company qualifies for the special offer@oracle.com world. That's oracle.com world. This show is sponsored by BetterHelp. I want to take a moment to say thank you to my mother. Oh, she was just here for a couple days. Hannah was out of town. She helped me with the two kids. We got to hang out, spend some time together, see her spending time with the grandkids. It was very nice.
- [37:19]
Listener
Lovely.
- [37:20]
Rula Jibril
This month is all about gratitude and along with thanking family and friends, there's another person we don't get to thank enough ourselves. It's sometimes hard to remind ourselves that we are trying our best to make sense of everything. And in this crazy world, that isn't easy. Here's a reminder to send some thanks to the people in your life, including yourself. Hey. Hey you. It's me patting myself on the back. That's me patting myself on the back. You're doing great. If you're thinking about starting therapy, give BetterHelp a try. It's entirely online, designed to be convenient, flexible and suited to your schedule. Just fill out a brief questionnaire to get matched with a licensed therapist and switch therapist anytime for no additional charge. Listen, it's a stressful time of year.
- [37:55]
Listener
Sure is.
- [37:56]
Rula Jibril
Politics. Seasons are changing. Kids are going back to school. Life's different. Talk to a therapist. It'll make you feel better. Give it a shot. Let the gratitude flow with BetterHelp. Visit betterhelp.com crooked world go today to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp. H E L p.com Cricut World.
- [38:15]
Tommy Vitor
Have you met All Modern? All Modern brings you the best of modern furniture. And right now through November 30, you'll score up to 70% off during their Black Friday sale. Prep your space for holiday hosting with deals on plush sofas, modern tabletop essentials and more. All on sale at All Modern. Then get them delivered for free in days. You heard that right. Days. That's modern made simple. Shop All Modern's Black Friday sale now through November 30th at AllModern.com.
- [38:52]
Ben Rhodes
Okay, so you heard some strong views from Rula. Now I just want to add that reflects pretty broad opinion, not just among Palestinians, but among many people around the world who've been watching this conflict. Now, Rulo had some, you know, pretty strong language and obviously some pretty clear recommendations about the need for the US to change policy. I don't expect everyone who's listening right now to agree with everything Rula said, but I would ask you to consider how many Palestinian voices you actually hear in our media and politics, because again, Rulo's voice is very much in the mainstream of what you'd hear from Palestinian voices. And I think it's important that we hear more of that perspective as we make these decisions. It's also important again to consider the impact all this is having on the US Position in the world, with Palestinians, with Arabs, also just globally. Now we heard from Rula a real focus on what's been happening in Gaza, what's been happening with the Palestinians. But just as Kamala Harris has an opportunity to kind of change course as she addresses that conflict, there's also the question of how she's going to approach the entire Middle east, whether or not she's going to change U.S. policies and certain U.S. assumptions about the Middle east in her presidency. What impact could Kamala Harris have on the very complicated set of relationships and interests and kind of competing interests that the United States has in the Middle East? Now, before we answer that question, I want to play a clip from a conversation I had with Senator Chris Murphy just because he gives a bit of A hopeful window into Kamala Harris record. One aspect of that record where she has been willing to kind of question assumptions around U.S. middle east policy and take a different approach. Let's give it a listen.
- [40:36]
Chris Murphy
She was one of the only senators who joined me in my first resolution on the Senate floor to stop US Arms sales to Saudi Arabia until they got serious about ending the war in Yemen. That was a contrary opinion at the time. There was certainly risk in voting to end US Military support for a key ally. But she was willing to take that vote because she took the time to really reconsider whether the foreign policy community, the establishment, the consensus was right that we needed to back Saudi Arabia's play in Yemen, which, if you really looked at it on the merits, was absolutely disastrous for US Security interests. So I've seen her be willing to challenge the consensus, to take a step away from it when she thinks there needs to be a reorientation. And I think that that will be a welcome ethos in the Oval Office.
- [41:33]
Ben Rhodes
Okay, so that vote on Yemen in Congress was a moment of Kamala Harris taking a strong position in opposition to existing policy, and she was joined in that by a majority of the Democratic Party. But right now, the consensus in Middle east policy among elites in both parties has essentially been unconditional support for Israel pursuing the Abraham Accords with the Gulf states, where they normalize relations with Israel in exchange for, well, a lot of things from the United States, and then putting maximum pressure on Iran, including over its nuclear program and support for terrorism across the region. However, we've clearly seen the limits of that approach and in US Influence in the Middle east over the last year. So what do we do about it to get a smart perspective on where the region is going and what influence the US has or doesn't have? I spoke with Greg Karlstrom, who lives in the region and covers the Middle east for the Economist. Where does Greg see things going after the U.S. election?
- [42:28]
Listener
I think the clearest view that anyone has in the region is probably Benjamin Netanyahu's view, which is that he is banking on a Donald Trump victory as a way to alleviate any pressure to reach a ceasefire in Gaza. And we can talk about how much pressure Joe Biden has or has not placed on Netanyahu over the past year. But I think there's a sense within his administration that Harris would put at least some pressure on him and Trump would not put any. And so he's very much hoping for a Donald Trump victory. I think, consequently, there are plenty of other people in the region who are not pulling for one. And then I think you have countries like the Saudis or the Emiratis where I think there's a view in Washington that the Gulf states are pulling for Trump. They can't wait for January for Trump to come back to power. And I'm not sure that's entirely true. I think there's a certain amount of buyer's remorse that people have in the Gulf about their dalliances with Trump the first time around. And they're not quite as enthusiastic about the idea of him coming back as people might think that they are.
- [43:34]
Ben Rhodes
If it's Kamala Harris, what are the options before her when it comes to trying to de escalate essentially the dynamic in which the Israeli government has both been fighting the war in Gaza and encroaching in the West Bank? She talked in her convention speech about a commitment to Palestinian self determination. What options does she have to actually change that dynamic in the sense that, yes, Trump would be less critical of anything Israel likely does. Yet Joe Biden didn't exactly exert a lot of leverage on these issues. How do you see the choices before her?
- [44:19]
Listener
Right. And I think what you outlined before, the two prongs of Biden's policy, this push for a ceasefire in Gaza and then this push for a bigger deal with the Saudis, the Saudi Israeli normalization deal, I think doing both of those things the way Biden did is going to be very difficult for Harris. She can't pursue them the way that Biden did on Gaza. If she wants to make a deal in Gaza, if she wants to push Netanyahu to make a deal in Gaza, there are going to have to be some very serious American threats attached to that. Biden and his envoys have spent many, many months now doing shuttle diplomacy, trying to bear hug the Israelis, as the White House put it shortly after October 7th, and trying to nudge them towards not just the ceasefire in Gaza, but various other policy priorities that the White House had. Taking more measures to protect civilians in Gaza, allowing more aid into Gaza, having at least a conversation about what the day after in Gaza is going to look like and who is going to take charge politically after the war. And Israel has not been willing to really do any of those things over the past year. So if Harris wants progress on any of those files, there need to be some serious threats attached around perhaps military aid, sale of weapons, diplomatic support to Israel. And then on the other piece of this, on the Israeli Saudi normalization, Mohammed bin Salman in a speech on September 18 just said very clearly for the first time that there is not going to be an Israeli Saudi normalization deal unless there is a Palestinian state. And he didn't say progress towards a Palestinian state. He didn't say a pathway towards a Palestinian state. He said very clearly the establishment of a Palestinian state. So that's a policy shift on the part of the Saudis. And it's a policy shift that obviously comes after a year of pressure on them from around the Arab world, from people who are watching what is unfolding in Gaza. And so that takes the prospect of an Israeli Saudi deal for now off the table unless there is, I think, some really serious progress on the peace process. And so Harris can choose to do what Biden did and sort of ignore the Israeli Palestinian conflict and try to keep working on it from the outside in. That was Trump's policy. That was a policy Biden then picked up as well. But she's not going to make any progress there. And so I think as fruitless as it may seem to try and work on Israeli Palestinian negotiations, given what's happening right now, I think if she's able to broker a deal to end the war before you unlock anything else in the region, you have to try to make some progress on the Israeli Palestinian conflict itself.
- [46:53]
Ben Rhodes
Okay, so pulling back, you and I Talked shortly after October 7th, and one of the things that you were highlighting was that part of the Abraham Accords was an effort to kind of normalize relations between Israel and the Gulf, less because of any pathway to Palestinian self determination or statehood, but more to kind of have a security alliance that could counter Iran. And so if you look back at the last three US Administrations in the Obama years, we were trying to de escalate with the Iranians to kind of stabilize the situation in the region. Trump and Biden kind of took this pathway of the Abraham Accords to fortify this kind of security alliance against Iran and its proxies, including Hezbollah and the Houthis. Is that still a viable path? I mean, what is the nature of the kind of regional dynamic?
- [47:53]
Listener
I think when you talk about the Abraham Accords and when you talk about some of the other regional integration ideas that this administration has had, there are some things in there that on paper make sense. This idea of integrated air defense in the Middle east, this Middle east air defense system that various Biden officials have been pushing over the past four years, it's a good idea. If you had all the countries in the region, Arab states and Israel, tie their air defenses together so that they could protect against Iranian missiles and drones like we saw when Iran fired this barrage at Israel and this ad hoc coalition of Western and Arab states stepped in to provide defense. The problem is getting that to be sort of self sustaining. There's a lot of fear in Jordan, in countries in the Gulf, that if they are in some sort of overt military alliance with the Israelis, they are going to invite direct Iranian attacks on their own soil. And so over the past year, the UAE hasn't backed out of the Abraham Accords, Bahrain hasn't backed out. The Saudis have continued to express some willingness to normalize with Israel, but at the same time, they have all been trying to shore up their relationships with Iran. They have really tried to do everything in their power to make sure that no one brings them into this conflict, that they are able to almost sit on the sidelines. So I think for the Gulf states, the overarching principle at the moment is one of fear. They don't trust in the American security umbrella that has protected them for decades. They don't think it's that reliable anymore. And that is something that has to do with both Trump's non response after the attacks on Saudi oil fields five years ago, and then also Biden's non response after the drone attack in Abu Dhabi two and a half years ago, which shook officials in the uae. They're concerned about the reliability of the American security umbrella. They don't trust in their own military capabilities, even though they have lots of very expensive American made military kit. So they are just very concerned about being dragged into a conflict with Iran or Iran's proxies in the region.
- [49:56]
Ben Rhodes
So, you know, if the Gulf states are hedging like that and there's kind of this roadblock in terms of the Saudis not joining normalization apps in a Palestinian state. One other pathway is Iran. After the Iranian election, there was some sense that this was a president who would be more, in a kind of Rouhani fashion, more willing to pursue diplomacy, maybe around the nuclear program. Kind of return to the Obama paradigm of negotiation between the US And Iran to at least de escalate the nuclear side of things. But that could spread to other areas if there's a Harris presidency and Phil Gordon, her top advisor, he was there at the outset of the Iran negotiations. He supported that. Is there any opening there?
- [50:43]
Listener
I think a lot of that is going to depend on political dynamics in the region and political dynamics inside of Iran. And some of these things I think will be outside of the next president's control. With Rouhani, there was a moment where you had an Iranian president who was elected with a big mandate and with a mandate to do exactly what he did, to negotiate with the west and try to broker a deal that would bring sanctions relief and help the Iranian economy. And so he was able to deliver on that, of course, with the support of the Supreme Leader, who was, if not enthusiastic about it, at least open to it. Trump came in, obviously he shreds that Biden comes in. You can fault Biden, I think, in the first few months of his presidency for not moving quicker to try and revive the JCPOA. But I think by the summer of 2021, when Ebrahim Raisi was elected president, the window closed at that point. And after that, it was Iranian intransigence that prevented a return to the deal. It wasn't really anything the Biden administration did or did not do. And I think now you have this moment where, yes, Pseudonym, I think personally would be more amenable to negotiating with America in the vein of Rouhani. But does the Supreme Leader want him to? If you look at what he's been able to do with his cabinet so far, it hasn't been the sort of transformative cabinet that many Iranians hoped it would be. It's not stocked with young people and moderate leaning reformist voices. It's stocked with a lot of older conservatives because that is all of the political room that PDZHK was given. You've got a perhaps somewhat reform minded or pragmatic minded president, but many of the people around him are quite hidebound conservatives. So whether he's given room to negotiate something is a question. And then of course, the sort of question overshadowing that is what happens to the Supreme Leader? He's an old man. Statistically speaking, he's probably going to die in the next four years or so. And so the next president, if they're considering how they're going to approach Iran, I think a lot of that is going to depend on what happens after Khamenei's death, who replaces him, whether there's a smooth transition of power or whether it's only the second time Iran has ever had to replace its supreme leader, whether it is a more difficult, more fraught transition.
- [52:58]
Ben Rhodes
So kind of summing this up, listening to you talk, it kind of feels like absent, pretty dramatic change from either Trump or Harris. It kind of feels like the US Is being, you know, it's like a piece of driftwood in the currents of the Middle east here. I mean, is that a fair way of looking at it because it does seem like the US Is very important there, but doesn't seem to be driving events.
- [53:22]
Listener
No, it's not driving events. And some of that, I think, is just because America's influence in the region, I think it's been overstated for a long time. I think there's this belief that some policymakers in Washington have, and also that a lot of people here in the region have that, you know, America snaps its fingers and it can change regimes in the Middle east and it can overthrow governments. And actually, America's influence in many ways is much more limited than that and has been for some time. But I think also in so many places, American policy has just been stuck in this sort of path dependency where relations with the Gulf states. I mean, there's so much frustration when you talk to officials in the Gulf that neither Democratic nor Republican administrations seem to have any vision of what American Gulf relations can look like beyond an oil for security bargain that I think is often misinterpreted on both sides. America wants something on oil that it doesn't get from the Gulf states. The Gulf states want something on security that they don't get from America. If you're a Harris administration, and I think if Trump comes to power, it's going to be very much like his first term where it's very transactional with the Gulf states. He's pushing for normalization deals and, and various people around him find a way to make billions of dollars in the process. If a Harris administration comes in, there's a moment where you can think about and talk about something new. What does the US Saudi relationship look like in the 21st century if it's not just this old oil for security paradigm? What does the US Emirati relationship look like? And it has to be something more than what it was.
- [54:56]
Ben Rhodes
And last question, we've talked about areas that people are focused on right now. Obviously Gaza, the West bank, the Palestinians, Lebanon, Hezbollah, the conflict dynamic with Iran. What are the other wild cards, spoilers, things that an ex president may have to face that you think are not getting that much attention? I mean, the Houthis are still entrenched in Yemen. The Iranian nuclear program is perilously advanced. Iraq, Iraqi stability can always become an issue. I mean, is there something you would introduce as the potential surprise crisis of the next presidency with the caveat that.
- [55:41]
Listener
I think trying to predict the future in the Middle east is always a fool's game. Right. I mean, I'm sure the Obama administration didn't predict the Arab Spring when it came in 2009. But I think there's this focus on, as you say, on Israel and Iran as sort of two of the central problems in the. But there's a related problem, which is the fragility and the weakness of so many states, so many Arab states. You look at a country like Egypt, which has spent now a decade lurching from one economic crisis to another, which seemed earlier this year like it might be on the brink of default because it had burned through so much of its hard currency. It got a bailout from the UAE, it got a $35 billion bailout from the UAE, which then unlocked some more money. So it staved off disaster for a year or two. But all of the underlying problems in Egypt, the economic dysfunction, the military control of the economy in Egypt, corruption, all of these things are still big issues. And in a couple of years, they're going to burn through their bailout money and they're going to be facing another crisis. Tunisia right now teetering on the brink of default. It's had almost four years now of being ruled by a very, say, erratic president who has done nothing on the economy and has let the economy just fester for the past four or five years. Jordan is a perennial basket case. You have countries where more than 100 million people in total live in just those three countries. They are all going through huge socioeconomic problems. They are all going through crises of political legitimacy. And I think there's a real concern in the coming years that what if Egypt defaults? What if the economy in Egypt really goes off a cliff? The Sisi government has spent years counting on the idea that it's too big to fail and someone will always bail it out. But what if Egypt becomes too big to bail out, essentially, and its economy does go through the sort of collapse that the Lebanese economy went through four years ago? You have potentially a massive wave of migration leaving Egypt, trying to go to Europe. That has implications for European policy. You have implications for the stability of Egypt, which then is of concern for Israel, for the Horn of Africa, for other countries. And I think it's not just the job of America to deal with those things. Europe needs to play a role. The Gulf states need to play a role. But I think American policy has ignored a lot of those economic issues, both under the Biden presidency and under the Trump presidency before it. And those are, to me, some of the most overlooked, depressing issues in the region.
- [58:22]
Ben Rhodes
Okay, so I thought one of the most interesting and underappreciated points that Greg made there was towards the end, which is the fact that there are many problems in the Middle east and we're all focused right now, understandably, on Gaza and the west bank, on Lebanon, on the potential for conflict with Iran, on what's happening in Yemen. But as you heard Greg say, there's also challenges inside other countries like Egypt and Jordan that have kind of very brittle political systems right now. Now, in both Egypt and Jordan, you have the potential for instability in Jordan because a large part of the population is either Palestinian or certainly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and, you know, is dissatisfied with what King Abdullah has done there. But also in Egypt, where you have a brutal dictator who's kind of keeping the lid on things. And I will just tell you that having lived through the Arab Spring, I don't know if it's going to be Egypt or Jordan where there's a new political crisis. But the one thing I do know is that every president of the United States gets tested in a way that they don't expect by some crisis in the Middle East. So whoever's elected, they're going to be facing an ongoing war in Gaza and Lebanon, potential conflict with Iran, an Iranian nuclear program that is getting very close to Iran having the capacity to build a nuclear weapon. But we should also remember that whoever is elected is going to be dealing with the unexpected. So far in this series, we've talked about two ongoing wars, one in Europe, one in the Middle East. But perhaps the biggest geopolitical conflict in the world right now is actually between the US And China. Where is that competition going? What are the risks of war over Taiwan? An issue that will surely be on the front burner for the next president. And I have to say, given that we already have a war in Europe and Middle east, the last thing we need is for this to go truly global. So how can we balance competing needs to stand up to China at times to protect American jobs and industry, but to work with China when we need to, to combat climate change? And how do we avoid conflict, particularly over Taiwan, in our relationship with China? We'll look at all of those questions next week. POD Save the World is a Crooked Media production. Our producer is Ilona Mankoski. Our associate producer is Michael Goldsmith. Our executive producers are me, Ben Rhodes and Tommy Vitor. The series is mixed and edited by Charlotte Landis with audio support by Kyle Sukhlin. Our senior video producer is Phoebe Bradford and video editor is Brady Kane. If you want to get ad free episodes, exclusive content and more, consider joining our Friends of the Pod subscription community at crooked.com/friends. Don't forget to follow us at Crooked media on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter for more original content. Host takeovers and other community events. Plus find Pod Save the World on YouTube for access to full episodes, bonus content and more. If you're as opinionated as we are, consider dropping us a review.
- [61:45]
Unknown
There's a reason you do it yourself because you want it done right. When it comes to protecting your engine, only the best filters will do. That's why you reach for Wix filters backed by 85 years of innovation and a premium assortment of filters for oil, air, fuel and more. Wix is a trusted name in the auto industry, and you deserve filtration you can trust to keep your vehicle running strong. Wicks filters engineered for experts. Visit wixfilters.com to find your filters.
- [62:16]
Tommy Vitor
Have you met All Modern All Modern brings you the best of modern furniture, and right now through November 30, you'll score up to 70% off during their Black Friday sale. Prep your space for holiday hosting with deals on plush sofas, modern tabletop essentials and more, all on sale at AllModern. Then get them delivered for free in days. You heard that right, days. That's modern made simple. Shop AllModern's Black Friday sale now through November 30th at AllModern Combination.