Loading summary
Transcript152 lines
- [00:00]
Phil Stewart
Tyler redick here from 2311 racing another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Chumba. Jump in@chumbacasino.com let's Chumba.
- [00:10]
Chumba Casino Announcer
No purchase necessary. BTW group void where prohibited by law. CTNC21+ sponsored by Chumba Casino.
- [00:15]
Chelsea Handler
Ugh.
- [00:16]
Phil Stewart
Could this vintage store be any cuter?
- [00:18]
Matt Jones
Right?
- [00:19]
Chelsea Handler
And the best part?
- [00:20]
Chumba Casino Promoter
They accept Discover.
- [00:21]
Phil Stewart
Accept Discover in a little place like this?
- [00:24]
Chumba Casino Promoter
I don't think so.
- [00:25]
Phil Stewart
Jennifer.
- [00:25]
Chelsea Handler
Oh yeah.
- [00:26]
Phil Stewart
Huh? Discover's accepted where I like to shop. Come on baby.
- [00:29]
Chumba Casino Promoter
Get with the times.
- [00:31]
Matt Jones
Right.
- [00:32]
Phil Stewart
So we shouldn't get the parachute pants.
- [00:34]
Chelsea Handler
These are making a comeback, I think.
- [00:38]
Phil Stewart
Discover is accepted at 99% of places that take credit cards nationwide, based on the February 2025 Nielsen report.
- [00:46]
Chumba Casino Announcer
Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor. Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete Disclosures available at public.comdisclosures I'm here
- [01:47]
Spinquest Promoter
with Spinquest where you can play and win from the comfort of your own home with hundreds of slot games and all of the table games you love with real cash prizes. Right now thirty dollar coin packs are on sale for $10 for new users. It's all@spinquest.com that's S P I N Q U S T.com Spin Quest is
- [02:10]
Chumba Casino Announcer
a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details. This is Interrupted by Matt Jones on Newsradio840 WHAS now? Here's Matt
- [02:28]
Matt Jones
welcome to episode 27 of Interrupted by Matt Jones. We of course if you've been following the news. There have been a ton of, you know, national and international news stories. And one of the things we try to do on here bring people on who know a lot more about it than I do. And so Phil Stewart is a national security reporter for Reuters. He has covered 60 plus countries over the years and is covering the situation in Venezuela now with the capture of Maduro by the United States military Justice Department. And Phil, I appreciate you doing this. Nice to meet you through this. We've never talked before, but I followed your work on social media and I appreciate you taking the time.
- [03:13]
Phil Stewart
Well, I appreciate it. Thanks for having me.
- [03:15]
Matt Jones
All right, I'm going to assume most people know what has happened, but let's take a step back from Phil. For people, Maduro kind of comes on the radar probably for the average American during this, but let's go back to him seizing power, taking over from Hugo Chavez. What, what are some of the reasons why America would have, if it was, would have felt the need to go in and give us a little background on Maduro as the, as the leader of Venezuela?
- [03:45]
Phil Stewart
Well, you know, he, he had been a very controversial leader for some time. I was on a tr. South America with the last chairman of the Joint Chiefs, not the one that's there now. And during that trip the head of Southern Command had actually called him a dictator back then in Chile, which had a very left leaning government and he was seen as a dictator there too. And so Maduro had been quite controversial even among the left in Latin America because of the fact that, you know, his last election victory was widely condemned by international organizations as being fraudulent. And so, you know, although there's a lot of questions about the legality of the operation, there aren't so many questions really about how the international community viewed Maduro.
- [04:38]
Matt Jones
Do you think the actual decision to go in was made back in October, November, or do you think it was made much more recently?
- [04:47]
Phil Stewart
Much more recently, yeah. They said that the decision had been made just in recent days and that, you know, I think the president himself said that they were going to go in four days before they, they did, but the circumstances didn't work out and they rescheduled Christmas Day. Right, right. And so, and so it was, it was one of those situations where the president, as is traditional, retains the ability to kind of decide, you know, at the very last moment whether to really go forward or not because you want to have all the information available to you. You don't want to pre decide a military operation and then maybe some other opportunity to resolve it appears so. He did. But the, but the, but the military option from what we understand was, was given enough support that, you know, you saw Delta Force soldiers training on a mock version of this compound and really,
- [05:40]
Matt Jones
Kentucky, where we are actually.
- [05:41]
Phil Stewart
Yeah. And so, and so there they are training hard on an operation that's extraordinarily dangerous. I mean the ability of anyone to go into a well guarded compound like that and come out, you know, with no casualties, no debt anyway is really just incredible.
- [05:59]
Matt Jones
What do we know about the operation? I mean a lot of my listeners probably have seen or read about Zero Dark Thirty, about the bin Laden, the bin Laden takeover. What do we know about what actually went down? And just from afar, I mean, when I hear they went into the presidential palace, took him and had no American casualties. What do we know about how that actually occurred?
- [06:22]
Phil Stewart
Well, I mean it was, it was a very, it was a massive operation. I mean, I've heard someone describe it as an operation that was even more complicated than the bin Laden operation partly due to the weather, you know, and the fact that you're coming off the sea and there's a lot of unstable air, so you're coming in with, with helos off the sea, you know. You know, around 150 aircraft were involved in this thing because they, they didn't just come in. They used all kinds of effects beforehand to blackout part of the city and kill comms and knock out air defenses and knock out all the kind of threats that, that they could, you know, preemptively deal with. So that when they got in the ground they had to deal with Maduro's personal security, you know, the security of the compound. And that was quite deadly. You know, when they landed, they flew in, you know, at about 100ft off the, off the water in the darkness of night with the city blacked out. And they landed and they, and they piled out of the, of the, of the helicopters. You know, you're talking about a team of, you know, less than 200 probably. And they came in and from what we understand, I think the Cubans have said there were 32 Cuban nationals who are protecting Maduro who are killed and I think at least a couple dozen more, if not more than that of Venezuelans who are killed in an operation.
- [07:52]
Matt Jones
So they black out the city. So first of all, were these helicopters, et cetera, stationed on some of those ships that we had heard were being surrounding the country? I mean, do we know where they came from?
- [08:06]
Phil Stewart
They haven't said that. So that's a Safe, That's a safe assumption, but they haven't said so.
- [08:11]
Matt Jones
They black out part of the city. There's, I've seen a couple of videos where people are like filming themselves. When the city goes black, they go in. And so they recreated a mock up of the, of his residence. Do you know, like how big are we talking about the place being? Is it a palace, is it a house? I mean, do you know,
- [08:33]
Phil Stewart
I couldn't tell you. You know, I wouldn't want to venture a guess about the size and scope of the compound itself and just not knowing it well enough.
- [08:42]
Matt Jones
Okay, so Venezuela is a country. How much do you as a reporter or do Western journalists know about like what happened during like on a day to day basis? There were people from the west allowed in to sort of see what going on is like, what is, how much is known about sort of the day to day life of people in Caracas
- [09:02]
Phil Stewart
and in Venezuela, you know, international organizations for, for press freedom have, have said that there needs to be less restrictions on foreign access to reporting inside Venezuela. That said, you see foreign journalists who are on the ground there and take risk to report on what's going on even in these recent days. And that includes reporters who are, who are, you know, going to the aftermath of these strikes, interviewing survivors, going to hospitals, speaking to soldiers who survived, who were wounded. And so there is, you know, very vibrant reporting, but not, you know, as you might see in neighboring countries like Colombia.
- [09:39]
Matt Jones
So the day the decision is to go ahead and go in, there's obviously a lot of danger there. Donald Trump said in a New York Times interview yesterday that he was worried it could be his own Jimmy Carter Iran situation where, what is it that made, what is it you think that made it to where the administration or from what you've heard with your reporting, finally decide, okay, yes, we're going to do this.
- [10:04]
Phil Stewart
You know, that is a great question. I'm glad you asked that. We are trying to understand the risk appetite of this administration because you've seen now since the summer, two major operations that are hard to imagine have happened. Really when you sit back, one is the bombing of Iran's nuclear program. People have talked about that for years and years and years. And the risks of carrying out that operation and the blowback afterwards were enough to make a lot of people quite nervous. And then an operation like this, as we discussed, there are enormous risks. I mean, let's say hypothetically only one of the helicopters had gone down. One of the helicopters was shot, was shot at and took fire. And people aboard were injured at least one. And, you know, had there been casualties, you know, would the media have seen it as a debacle with the United States or hostages? Right. Or have you had a Black Hawk down, you know, moment kind of like, you know, the US Saw in Somalia? What would that have been like? And so I think, you know, we're trying to understand the risk appetite, what it was that got the president to decide that this was an operation worth pursuing. But I would say the success of both his operations probably will
- [11:33]
Matt Jones
lead the
- [11:34]
Phil Stewart
president to think this is a valid way of accomplishing foreign policy goals.
- [11:39]
Matt Jones
Well, I want to get to that because I think that is obviously the next question is, does it embolden them? But if you. Okay, so now, as of this moment, who is in charge? I know the vice president is in charge, but we've also seen the president say something like, we're running the country. So how would you describe to the average person listening here the status of who is running what is happening on the ground in Venezuela today?
- [12:09]
Phil Stewart
So today, you know, you've seen the extraction of President Nicolas Maduro from Venezuela, but Maduro's government is still very much intact. And it is, you know, according to President Trump, is very responsive to Washington and its interests and its plans. But this is a government that has been fiercely anti American for many years, fiercely concerned about the United States, and a lot of its supporters are very skeptical of the United States. So it really remains to be seen, you know, how long the cooperation will last, if there will be a breaking point, if there'll be a request that it just goes too far for them. And then also this sort of, you know, there are a lot of private discussions, we understand, between, you know, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the acting, the interim president. And, you know, it remains to be seen whether the kind of goodwill that's been described to the media, the goodwill in private, will become something of an, you know, something public that the Venezuelan government would talk about.
- [13:21]
Matt Jones
But you would say, would you say that Venezuela as a country still runs their country and still has like, I mean, again, part of it is the president uses language that sometimes we don't know what the meaning is. But would you still say at this moment Venezuela runs the country, even if you would say that America has a strong impact on their decisions?
- [13:45]
Phil Stewart
I would say that the Venezuelan government would certainly say that. And I would say that the Venezuelan government is very concerned about being seen as a US Colony or anything like that. You know. Sorry, go ahead.
- [14:00]
Matt Jones
Well, no, I was going to ask you, when you say the Venezuelan government would be concerned, I mean, I know there, there are questions about whether the election last time was, was legitimate. Is there any sense beyond, I guess, those election results, how popular, like, what the stance of Venezuelans in Venezuela is? I know a lot of the Venezuelans in America are for it, but a lot of those people left probably for a reason. So what do we know about the people there now?
- [14:31]
Phil Stewart
Well, I mean, there was. I mean, if the, if the international organizations that judge the last election are correct, there are a lot of people that do not, you know, support the government and voted a different way. And so I would say that based on the election, those were.
- [14:49]
Matt Jones
Do we know? Because I know. I'm not sure I've ever read.
- [14:51]
Phil Stewart
Yeah, they're deaf, they're public, you know, and the international organizations had, you know, what they thought were the correct vote tallies, and they did not correspond with the official tallies. And they were very public about that at the time of the election. And so the question is today, you know, you know, there is no real dissent in the streets. The Maduro government still is very much in charge. And as we discussed, you know, according to local media reports, they've arrested people who on social media criticized Maduro, celebrated his capture. And so I would say that the Maduro government is still very much in charge, it would seem, from the outside.
- [15:33]
Matt Jones
So let's talk about the arrest from the American standpoint. What is specifically Maduro charged with?
- [15:41]
Phil Stewart
So he is charged with different kinds of, of crimes related to narcotics trafficking, mostly cocaine trafficking. Yeah.
- [15:52]
Matt Jones
Okay, so the fentanyl, that's not part of the charging, am I correct?
- [15:56]
Phil Stewart
Well, we don't. It wasn't. I didn't see it in the charges. But we don't know the entirety of the case, and we have to. You know, there was an interesting interview by a former CIA station chief that I, that I watched recently where he was saying that, you know, the US Public needs to be a little patient here because soon they'll have a lot of evidence introduced into court that will detail the US Case against Maduro. And people who, like this person, who say that they know what's in that case file are quite confident. There's a lot there, but we'll have to see.
- [16:27]
Matt Jones
And is the connection to America that those drugs ended up here? I mean, is that ultimately what gets the connection to America?
- [16:36]
Phil Stewart
Yeah, I can't speak to the ins and outs of the case. I haven't read the whole, the whole case yet. What's been submitted to the courts. But I would tell you that, you know, the argument politically has been exactly that, that, you know, that the United States has suffered as a result of what Maduro has done. And they're drawing parallels to Noriega, the Panamanian president, who was also extradited the United States and died here in jail.
- [17:03]
Matt Jones
The reason I ask is, as a former lawyer, I'm just curious as to jurisdictional arguments. And that's why I wondered if they had said that. Okay, so the military, as I understand it's been described the military helped aid and abet a DOJ arrest. Is that kind of the official explanation?
- [17:25]
Phil Stewart
Oh, that the DOJ was with the military and executed the arrest.
- [17:30]
Matt Jones
But it was very clear this was not a military regime. I mean, normally you can't just go into a foreign country and arrest somebody just because you have an arrest warrant. In America, they did this. Talk about the international law aspect of that because I, I mean, there are, there are criminals America has arrest warrants with all around the world. We don't just go into those countries and take the person. So explain to me the international law component of this.
- [17:59]
Phil Stewart
Well, you know, I think that the administration has been, been seeking to, you know, create a legal framework by having DOJ folks, you know, in, on the mission, reading him his rights, bring him to a courthouse immediately after his, his seizure in, in. In Venezuela's rights.
- [18:22]
Matt Jones
I didn't real. I didn't read that.
- [18:23]
Phil Stewart
Okay, that's what they said. That's what they said.
- [18:25]
Matt Jones
Interesting.
- [18:26]
Phil Stewart
Okay, I, I didn't see that, though. But that's what they said.
- [18:29]
Matt Jones
Interesting. I didn't, I hadn't read that.
- [18:33]
Main Event Jay
But.
- [18:33]
Matt Jones
So that's, I guess, the framework. Now internationally, generally speaking, have the rest of the countries in the world acknowledged this arrest as valid or not?
- [18:49]
Phil Stewart
It's been mixed a lot of countries, even in Latin America. It's actually really interesting. In Latin America, there was a meeting of South American leaders the day after the operation. And Latin America has a long history of concern about US Military intervention dating back many decades.
- [19:09]
Matt Jones
Panama, and you mentioned Grenada.
- [19:12]
Phil Stewart
You could go on and on. I mean, there's, you know, the US Occupied Nicaragua for a period of time. You know, I mean, there's, there's a long history of US Military activity in Latin America. And so this meeting happens, and there was some expectation they might come to a consensus, but there was no consensus on whether to condemn the operation. And internationally, you saw the same thing play out at the UN where there wasn't a consensus there either. So there are countries that are condemning it. And there are countries, including US Adversaries, like China and Russia, clearly. And there are countries that are trying to not get involved and not take a side. And there are some countries that support it. So it is a real mixed bag there.
- [19:56]
Matt Jones
You mentioned, I am curious about the sort of thought in the rest of the world. Obviously, the president has brought up, well, we could go into Colombia, we could go into Cuba. He's even mentioned Iran. Okay, Colombia and Cuba strike at least me as the two in our hemisphere. Two, most likely. I know you don't give opinion in the sense of this is what I think will happen, but in Colombia and Cuba, do you think there is a real concern that that's next?
- [20:29]
Phil Stewart
Well, listen, I am actually, you know, I'm a former Latin America correspondent, right. So I used to be based in Colombia. And, you know, I'm one of the. I'm one of the people. I actually spoke to Fidel Castro once. Oh, really? Yeah. And so, like, I'm, I'm very interested in, you know, Cuba and very interested in Colombia. And I watched. It was funny. I was watching a rally last night in Colombia where their president, who President Trump does not like, Gustavo Petro, he was about to give this big rally and he was late. And it looks like he was late because he was speaking to President Trump.
- [21:03]
Matt Jones
He talked during the New York Times interview.
- [21:04]
Phil Stewart
Right, right, right. The journalists were in the room, which
- [21:07]
Matt Jones
is crazy that he didn't.
- [21:09]
Phil Stewart
Which is a stunning. It is a stunning, stunning thing. So he gets out in front of this crowd of thousands and thousands of people in Bogota for what was expected to be a very anti US rally. And he says, and, you know, I'm summarizing here, but he says something along the lines of, you know, I had one speech prepared, but now I have to give another speech. And. And he's like, let me tell you, the first speech was really tough. And then he said something along the lines of President Trump not being. Not being dumb. He isn't, you know, he used the word bobo. He's not dumb. And the crowd kind of hissed or booed or didn't react positively to that. And it's this amazing thing. And then he posts something on social media afterwards where he has a Colombian jaguar and a US Bald eagle, and they're kind of like, you know, nuzzling up together. Really? Yeah. And this is a guy. I mean, there's been like a war of words on social media between Trump and Gustavo Petro for many weeks now. And so to see this kind of turnarounds in the last. It's just incredible.
- [22:18]
Matt Jones
So I don't know exactly how to phrase this, but I'm a critic of President Trump on the vast majority of things. But we had someone on here when we were talking about Israel and Palestine who said. I said something like, give me the best argument for Trump's foreign policy theory or capability. And he said something to the effect of. Because Trump is such a wild card and people have no idea what he's going to do, it leads to an unease that can often make him able to accomplish things maybe other people can't, because people are like, well, he might actually do this stuff. People have always said they would do, but wouldn't. So with Colombia and Cuba, I mean, we've been threatening to do stuff there for years. Could there be a little bit of those leaders actually believe, oh, this can happen? And that may be to explain a little bit of what you saw with the Colombia president.
- [23:16]
Phil Stewart
Well, I think with Colombia, you know, I would first take issue that for years there's been this kind of animosity, you know, to the point of military intervention. Gustavo Petro has never been, you know, a super fan of the United States. I think that's. That's a fair way to put it. You know, he's a former rebel himself, and so he, he has not been a fan. But the US Military and the Colombian military have a very, very strong relationship.
- [23:42]
Matt Jones
Is our objection there. Drugs, too, in theory.
- [23:45]
Phil Stewart
The US has been a partner for many, many decades now in Colombia's war against drugs for, you know, since I was based there in, you know, in the very early 2000s. And so, you know, the US counted Colombia as perhaps the strongest military ally in Latin America, period, full stop. And so it's a little bit of a different thing there because it's. Their objection, really is to the president, not so much even, you know, the broader situation. And there's a lot of Trump, specifically Trump. Trump and Petro. Trump and the Colombian president just do not get. Have not gotten along until the last, you know, hours, you know, basically, so. Which is a remarkable turnaround. And I realize it's difficult. I don't know when you're airing this,
- [24:30]
Matt Jones
but anyway, so it airs today. So you're Clayton. And Chrome was founded on a simple idea. All leather goods should last a lifetime. They make everything from bags, belts, wallets, and much more. And the best part, they're doing it right here in Kentucky. You can check them out at clayton and croom.com c-r u m e.com or visit one of their retail stores in Louisville, Charleston, and now open in Nashville. Clayton and Croome. Quality goods. Built to last. Okay, so. All right, let's go to Cuba. First of all, I got to ask you, you said you met Fidel Castro.
- [25:12]
Phil Stewart
I did.
- [25:13]
Matt Jones
Tell me about him.
- [25:14]
Phil Stewart
So I didn't. I never. I've never actually stepped foot on the island of Cuba. But I did talk to him when he was in Brazil, and I used to be based in Brazil. And. And it was a long time ago. It was during the Clinton administration, and it was a really bizarre interview where he. I asked him about the Monica Lewinsky scandal. That was what was going. And he defended Bill Clinton. And it was this stunning moment where he was like, you know, he's like, telling me I gotta respect Bill Clinton. And anyway, it was this real surreal moment for me because I was a Latin American studies major in college, and I had studied Fidel Castro, and there he is in his camouflage and talking about Bill Clinton and telling me that I should respect him.
- [25:57]
Matt Jones
So, yeah, so the Cuba. I mean, I grew up sort of always hearing that Cuba was, if not an enemy, at least something to worry about. And then it seemed like relations thawed. Marco Rubio obviously has Cuban heritage. How would you best describe how the American government looks at Cuba today?
- [26:24]
Phil Stewart
Well, I think Secretary of State Marco Rubio is. Put it pretty. Pretty bluntly. I mean, he's basically saying that the Cubans should take notice of what happens in Venezuela. And so the, you know, if anyone in the region should be, you know, really watching this, it's certainly the Cubans, because also they depended so much on their relationship with Venezuela, which the United States almost certainly seems to be moving to severe. Right. So if the Venezuelans can no longer provide any kind of oil, aid, support, cash, anything to the Cubans, that's going to have a real impact on an island that's already struggling economically.
- [27:06]
Matt Jones
But what is. I guess this is a basic question, but I actually think it's. It matters. What is the goal of all this at the end of the day? At the end of the day, I mean, there are bad people that run lots of countries, or at least people we think are bad in all these places, we don't seek to take them all over. At the end of the day, if you were to try to describe what the American interest is in who the Venezuela leader is, who the Cuban leader is, who the Colombian leader is, what is that interest?
- [27:38]
Phil Stewart
So I think that what we're, you know, as journalists, what we're trying to do is we're trying to make sense of this, too, because, you know, nobody's seen anything quite like this. Right. And so, you know, the closest thing is Noriega, and that's actually a different situation for a lot of reasons that we don't have to get into. So, you know, what we're doing is we're looking at, like, the national security strategy that the White House issued, which says, you know, which says basically that the Monroe Doctrine, you know, this idea that the hemisphere is kind of America's backyard and that the US Will look after it as such and protect its interests there, you know, really is the best way, I think, to understand. Well, I think that in the case of Venezuela, you're gonna see a real. A lot of pressure on them to cut ties with countries the US Sees as adversaries.
- [28:35]
Matt Jones
Okay, so, like China and Russia and
- [28:37]
Phil Stewart
actually, I was on a trip with Secretary of Defense or Secretary of War. I guess that's what he calls it. Pete Hegseth. The name isn't official yet, so I can't use Secretary of War. But in Panama, that's when you get
- [28:51]
Matt Jones
to use one or the other Congress.
- [28:53]
Phil Stewart
But the. But the. But the name has been. Officially, the name has been changed on the building itself. So it's a tricky one for reporters. We still say secretary does.
- [29:01]
Matt Jones
What do you do?
- [29:02]
Phil Stewart
Anyway, so I was with Secretary Hegseth in Panama in April, and he was basically really focusing on China and trying to keep the Chinese government. And the Chinese economy has really become more interested in Panama in recent decades. And that canal is quite important for U.S. commerce, but also for the U.S. military, where there are contingency in Asia. So I think if you look at the broader US Policy, it seems to be more about rolling back the inroads of U.S. adversaries in the hemisphere, and then I guess the drugs, too, because that's still a priority for him. But I don't remember him running on. I don't remember him running on cocaine, though. So it's a trick.
- [29:50]
Matt Jones
Yeah. I mean, you don't have to comment on this because I don't want you to feel like you have to. But it almost makes. It's odd to me the way this case is made by the administration, because I actually think American would oddly be more likely to support or understand an argument of we need to control this because we're worried or concerned about security in America long term. China, Russia, et cetera. Then let's keep the cocaine out. Which. Or even he's a bad guy. Well, I don't know that those arguments work as well today even as they did maybe 40 years ago, but I don't hear that argument being made. Matter of fact, the only time I've heard it Billy and I talked about was a scene from Jack Ryan, the television show, where there's a two and a half minute scene that's gone viral of the guy from the office making the case as to why Venezuela was so important. Why do you think they. Or maybe you don't want to give your opinion, but the administration has not talked a lot about that publicly, am I right?
- [30:58]
Phil Stewart
Well, no, I think that they've been, I mean, the rationale for a lot of the actions they've taken, like the boat strikes in the Caribbean and on the Pacific side have been squarely based on the drug trade. But then, you know, the intervention in Venezuela has this kind of dual nature to it. So it's, you know, on the one hand, they're serving, they've extracted Maduro based on his indictment on drug trafficking charges. Right. Or his involvement in drug trafficking. And then they're also talking about the oil industry. Right. And they're saying that the nationalization of the oil, so then it becomes a little bit different. Right.
- [31:39]
Matt Jones
And so I think their drug argument plays not as well as some of the, as the other one, but yet they always focus on that one.
- [31:47]
Phil Stewart
You know, there is one thing I would say that I think, you know, as reporters covering the strikes in particular, we were, we were really interested in, which was that, you know, the preponderance of US Military firepower that was assembled in, in the Caribbean didn't match up with the majority of the drug trade. Right. And so if you look at the main trafficking route actually is not through the Caribbean. It's, it's through the Pacific. And so, you know, there isn't a big flotilla of ships off Mexico. You know, they're in the Caribbean. So it always, it was something that we've sort of scratched our heads about a little bit. You know, there have been strikes in the Pacific side, but the military firepower and everything else was really aimed at, in the curb, was really in the Caribbean. And the policy is really aimed at Venezuela. And so, you know, this seems to be a policy as much about Venezuela as it is about drugs. Not to say that it hasn't been about drugs.
- [32:43]
Matt Jones
Let's talk about Venezuela now real quick. So we always hear about oil, has the most oil reserves. To what extent is oil something that Venezuela can produce en masse in the near future? How long does it take Trump initially said, we're going to have all this oil. Then he said to the New York Times yesterday, now, this is actually going to take years. What is actually the truth about that?
- [33:09]
Phil Stewart
So Reuters has a lot of really great reporters that are working on this exact issue right now. And the reporting that they're producing, you know, really does indicate that it's going to take years to recover for Venezuela and years and some good luck, you know, really, for Venezuela to recover anything close to the industry it once had. You know, the Venezuelans, I think, used to produce about 7% of the world's crude, and I think now it's down to like, 1%. And as a comparison, just for context, you know, people talk about Venezuela as this massive, you know, the world's largest oil reserves, blah, blah, blah. But the, but the truth is they produce about the same amount as the US State of North Dakota.
- [33:51]
Matt Jones
So they actually produce almost the same as just North Dakota.
- [33:56]
Phil Stewart
Just North Dakota. And so right now, their industry is not this titan and powerhouse. It's kind of not doing so well. And from folks that Reuters has talked to, the Venezuelan industry has really been plagued by, you know, corruption and mismanagement, and it will take a. It'll take a long time to fix all that. If you bring an American company and they're going to want to rebuild everything, you know, that takes. That takes a lot of time.
- [34:26]
Matt Jones
So that leads me to two questions. When the US Administration says the Venezuelan government took our oil or took our equipment, explain to people at least what they mean by that.
- [34:41]
Phil Stewart
So, you know, Reuters doesn't know. I personally don't know exactly what that means, but we assume that that means they're talking about the nationalization of the oil industry, that, you know, U.S. companies used to be operating there. And during the Hugo Chavez years, particularly, you know, between, you know, prior. Prior in the early 2000s, he really did take a lot of. He did. He made a lot of efforts to bring the oil industry under state control and, and really make US Companies either leave or become, you know, very.
- [35:17]
Matt Jones
They take, when they say they took. What did they take?
- [35:20]
Phil Stewart
They. Well, they. They canceled, you know, contracts that the US Companies had told the companies that they either had to become, you know, I think essentially contractors or, or leave. And I think a lot of the companies left. So that was. That's the history there.
- [35:37]
Matt Jones
So just canceled contracts. Okay. I mean, I mean, that just seems like an odd. I actually thought they might have even stolen equipment. Is it?
- [35:47]
Phil Stewart
You know, I, I don't know. I mean, you'd have to, I mean, I have to go and talk to the folks at Exxon to see whether, you know, their equipment is still there and whether they were compensated for anything because.
- [35:55]
Matt Jones
So what do we know? I keep hearing the president say the oil companies are ready to go in and they want to go and rebuild Venezuela.
- [36:03]
Phil Stewart
Yeah.
- [36:03]
Matt Jones
Is that true? Are we hearing that oil companies do want to do that or do we know?
- [36:09]
Phil Stewart
I think that the companies are about to meet. They're going to have a meeting at the White House and they're going to talk about it. I think that right now there's some interest potentially, but there would have to be a lot of probably Reuters is reporting there would have to be some guarantees for them because of the kind of crude that Venezuela produces isn't, you know, the kind of crude that frankly, even North Dakota produces, which can fetch a higher price. It's, it's, you know, it needs, it needs a lot more work to be, to be used. And so I don't know. I don't know whether they're going to, you know, go running into Venezuela or not without quite a lot of US Government guarantees support.
- [36:50]
Matt Jones
You know, there used to be a time, Phil, even when you were, when you probably started your career, where the American government was seen worldwide as like, regardless who the president was, the American government was like a unified thing that acted. How much do you think, in countries like Colombia, Venezuela, Cuba, when they're thinking about these things, or even the oil companies, you know, now if somebody besides Donald Trump is president in three years, a lot of these policies might completely change, change. Especially if, as you said with Colombia, a lot of it's just personally, these two leaders don't like each other when they're making these calculations. Do these countries in Latin America look at America as the American government, or is there, is it like Donald Trump and then we have to wait and see what happens three years after that? Does that make sense, what I'm asking?
- [37:44]
Phil Stewart
Yeah, I mean, I don't know really how to respond to that. I mean, I would say that U.S. debt ratings agencies that look at American debt, you know, sometimes speak about, you know, political volatility as a risk to, to, to the US to the United States, financially, economically. So political volatility plays out in different, different areas. It's easier to see when it comes to, you know, bond prices than it is, you know, maybe in, in relations with other countries. But I think, you know, if you were, if you are in Colombia and there's, right now there's an election coming up in the spring. You know, there is volatility there. I mean, the government might not be, you know, a left leaning government in four months. It might be a very pro Trump government in four months. And so this kind of era of political volatility, I would say is, you know, is global. You know, we're seeing a lot of political volatility around the world and swings between different ideologies in different countries.
- [38:44]
Matt Jones
I will start to wrap up and by me asking you this question, I was listening to two, what I call bro podcasters discussing this and I like to sometimes listen to them less for their insight, which I find to be little but to see. How do people like that think about all this? Because these were Trump supporting people and I heard them ask a question that I do think a lot of. I've heard a lot of my conservative listeners, listeners wonder which is okay, I followed all this was impressive that we pulled it off, had no casualties. But how does this affect me? Kind of like the average American's life, how does this affect you? See, you've dealt with these issues for a long time. The bigger picture, if you're the average American listening beyond just being curious about world affairs, do you think what is happening in Venezuela, what could happen in Cuba, Colombia, Will gas prices go down? Will that, like, are there things that you actually think would have impact on the average everyday American's life based on these events?
- [39:51]
Phil Stewart
I mean, it's really hard to say right now. You know, it's really, really hard to say. You would need a crystal ball to know whether or not this is going to devolve into some sort of quagmire that is going to drain US Resources or not. You know, you'd have to have a crystal ball to know whether or not the, the impact, whether there'll be an impact to America's standing internationally as a result of this or any other follow on actions that could, that could happen. And so right now we're at the precipice of, you know, potentially quite a lot of impact. You know, that could maybe explain to
- [40:24]
Matt Jones
me what that, like what that would look like if there was a lot.
- [40:26]
Phil Stewart
Well, I mean, on the negative side, you could see, you know, if there is a situation where the US Government becomes frustrated with the government in Venezuela, it might require further action. And that action could become a military action or it could become something that would drain U.S. resources. If the United States has to create a subsidized Venezuelan oil industry, the questions then become about return on investment. How long would that be? How many Billions of dollars or millions of dollars, would the US need to put up in the short run, and would there be a payoff, you know, on the positive side, you know, what does it mean? You know, what is the advantage to U.S. citizens of having, you know, countries, you know, close to close to the United States that have less contact with, you know, U.S. adversaries like Russia, China, Iran, you know, and so is there a security upside there? Is there, you know, is there less of a need to have? I don't know. There are so many variables when you start talking about future effects that it's one of the things that kind of paralyze a lot of policymakers even from doing a lot overseas in the short run, because they just don't know, because they don't know what's next. And so, as journalists, we're all asking that very question, is, what is the benefit? What could be the repercussions to the United States for this? And that's the big question we all have.
- [41:54]
Matt Jones
Let me finish with this. A lot of reports that the administration is going to meet with the folks in Greenland and Denmark about whatever happens with Greenland. I understand, at least me, I feel like I understand why that matters to them. But it seems like it matters. We have military bases there. It feels like we get along with Greenland pretty well. What do you think motivates Trump's fascination with Greenland?
- [42:25]
Phil Stewart
That's a great question. I don't know that there is an easy answer for that. There is a lot of potential security implications for Greenland falling under the. Let me start again. I guess a lot of journalists are kind of trying to understand what the United States would gain militarily, diplomatically, economically by acquiring, you know, Greenland, given, you know, the treaty arrangements and the US Military relationship with Denmark, which is a close NATO ally.
- [43:06]
Matt Jones
I mean, what else do we need from them? We already are there. We already use it as a military base.
- [43:11]
Phil Stewart
Right?
- [43:11]
Matt Jones
What, what have you heard that we want?
- [43:13]
Phil Stewart
Right. Well, I think, I think that the answer the administration gives is that, you know, that Denmark simply can't, you know, defend the island by itself. Denmark just doesn't. Isn't the U.S. and doesn't have the, the reach of the U.S. military. And if you really want to make sure that, that Greenland is secure and that its assets in, you know, the Arctic are, are, you know, available to Americans, then you need to have it be American. And, and that's the argument they're putting forward.
- [43:40]
Matt Jones
Someone's coming after Greenland. Like, am I missing something? Like, is there, Are there, Is there Someone ready to take it over.
- [43:48]
Phil Stewart
I mean, again, like, I think that, you know, Denmark would, would tell you that, that they have Greenland, you know, under, under control and that, that, you know, the U.S. is a, is a NATO ally and that the U.S. has, you know, basing access and, and all kinds of military access should they need it and that they're a NATO ally. And so like, so the, so the, the, you know, for Denmark, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a problematic situation. But, you know, there are non military ways that the US could go about pursuing this. So do you think there's any chance?
- [44:21]
Matt Jones
Well, obviously there's a chance, but what, like, do you think it is likely that the 50,000 people that live in Greenland become Americans at some point in the next three years?
- [44:34]
Phil Stewart
I mean, they've done a lot to indicate that that's not their intent. The Reuters had a story out today saying that the US Is mulling payments to potentially lure them into becoming Americans. And you could imagine a scenario where the US Basically gives them some money. But I don't know, it's a wild card issue for a lot of folks. And I don't know whether it's something that's a front burner issue or a back burner issue or just. But the President said it's something that he would like to resolve within this term in office.
- [45:10]
Matt Jones
Would you like to give $100,000 a person to Greenland to become Americans? There would be a lot of Americans that would say, where is my hundred thousand dollars if that were to happen? No, absolutely not. Billy is just so, you know, Phil, my average person that doesn't care about politics. I cannot see Americans being excited that we would give every person from Greenland $100,000 to be an American. But stranger things have happened. I'll finish with this. Donald Trump. Every day when I wake up, I look at my phone before I do my sports show and I go, what in the world now what? Right? Like what's the next thing from other countries in the world? How do they handle in general a president that on any given day you have no idea what he's going to do?
- [46:09]
Phil Stewart
You're talking about Trump from a policy perspective.
- [46:12]
Matt Jones
You've talked, I'm sure, to leaders or in these. It's got to be. There's so much volatility in terms of a day to day thing. You mentioned the Colombian President was giving one speech, then he has to give another one. It has to be. Is it unique in dealing with him? Is it just different than dealing with other presidents or other world leaders.
- [46:31]
Phil Stewart
You know, I think that's an interesting question. I think that what I've seen in my conversations with diplomats, and I guess that's the best way I could. I could answer this question, is that in this administration since. Since last year, there's sort of been an understanding that Trump is. Is who he is, and that there's sort of an acceptance to the idea that he may, you know, say something, you know, quite provocative one day and then. And then. And then have a different position the next day.
- [47:02]
Matt Jones
Right.
- [47:03]
Phil Stewart
And I think the Colombian president's a good example of that. Right. He was. He was. He openly floated, you know, just a couple of days ago, the idea of a military action inside Colombia, you know, and is basically, you know, said that Maduro could face, you know, a similar fate. All right. That Petro could face a similar beta Maduro. And then now he's going to come to Washington and they're going to welcome the foreign minister from Colombia. And it's a total turnaround. So I think that people have kind of accepted that this kind of. Volatility in US Foreign policy is probably by design. Um, but it's definitely, you know, something that they're. They're dealing with, and they seem to be, you know, very. The diplomats that I talk to seem to kind of understand it.
- [47:54]
Matt Jones
Okay, well, listen, Phil, thank you very much. I enjoyed the conversation. You know, I will give you a. I mean, I enjoyed it, but also a compliment. I think it's rare today to hear someone talk about the issues or the news and distinctly not want to give their opinion, which is kind of what is supposed to happen but never happens. And is that like. Is that just on a personal level? Is that like a. Is that a Reuters policy? Is that a Phil Stewart policy? It's very refreshing. I don't. I'm not sure I've ever interviewed someone less likely to want to say what he thinks. What, is that just how the. Your news organization is?
- [48:38]
Phil Stewart
I mean, I've been at Reuters. Yeah, definitely. That's how Reuters is. But I've been at Reuters since I was in college, basically, you know. Yeah. So. So it's how I've always sort of carried myself. And if I did, you know, if you think I expressed an opinion anywhere, then that was certainly. No, no. Yeah, that would have been. That must have been an accident, because I didn't. I didn't. That was because I really don't. I try to keep myself out of it. You know, I try to.
- [49:03]
Matt Jones
I Just think that's very refreshing because the biggest thing I hear from my listeners, and they know. Eileen left. Most of my listeners lean right, but the biggest thing I always hear from them is how do I know what's going on without hearing the tint of what people think while I'm hearing what's going on? And even the people who lean right, they understand that there are news organizations that are trying to tell them what they want to hear, and they sort of go, how do I find what's actually happening without the tent of opinion? And I just, just on a journalistic level, I think that's harder and harder to find. Do you agree?
- [49:44]
Phil Stewart
I mean, our goal at Reuters is really to do just that, is that you should. You shouldn't know, you shouldn't have any sense of any opinion about the journalist when you're reading an article. And if you do, you should write the ethics folks at Reuters to tell them that they made a mistake and they need to address it. So that is definitely the policy that I've always kind of lived by in Reuters.
- [50:09]
Matt Jones
All right, shout out to Reuters. Last question. Give me. You've been all over Latin America. You've been all over 60. You've been in 60 countries. Give me the most scared you've ever been doing your job.
- [50:25]
Phil Stewart
Most scared. You know, I don't know how to answer that question because it's, it's a. I've been a war correspondent for a lot of my career, so I don't want to get too personal on your show. And, and I feel. I would feel like that might actually also get in the way of the, The Reuters rules. But I would say.
- [50:44]
Matt Jones
Vulnerable. Okay.
- [50:44]
Phil Stewart
But I would say. But I would say. I will say this, though, that, you know, in the, in the, in the years, in the early years of my work in Colombia, there were moments where I, you know, it was a guerrilla war. And I remember we would travel in and out of what was then the Farcarilla's demilitarized zone. They had a country inside Colombia that was all theirs, about the size of Switzerland. And as journalists. Yeah, and as journalists, it was our job to go in and out of that. And sometimes that would be. You just didn't know whether or not you might have some problems coming in and out of that area because these are teenagers with guns patrolling the border of that zone and always worried about. About folks. And, and I guess another time would be when I, after there was a coup against Chavez, and I remember the. Our folks in Caracas needed, you know, flak jackets and helmets and bulletproof vests because there was gunfire in the streets and, and I got in a plane and I, and I brought, and I brought it over there. And then in the wake of the coup, I landed with an American passport. And the folks at the airport in Caracas were wondering, you know, was I CIA? You know, and, and there was a moment there I was, I thought to myself I should have come with more documentation, you know, and, but it was, it was, you know, I, you know, I had a good conversation with them.
- [52:06]
Matt Jones
I bet you have great stories. I mean that would be. Maybe that's the next time we Stewart on to tell stories. Seriously, I do want to bring you on again because I found this very informative. Thank you very much for your time.
- [52:19]
Phil Stewart
My pleasure, My pleasure. Thanks.
- [52:20]
Matt Jones
That's Phil Stewart, national security reporter for Reuters. And this has been interrupted by Matt Jones.
- [52:28]
Chumba Casino Promoter
What's up fools?
- [52:28]
Main Event Jay
Main event Jay USO here from the wwe. When it's just me between matches, it's day one Ish. And that means it's Chumba time. With hundreds of casino style games and new titles arriving weekly, there's always something French to try at Chumba Casino. The daily boost make it even more fun and have me bout to get them all during my downtime. Ready for a fun way to chill out and enjoy a few minutes for yourself?
- [52:51]
Phil Stewart
Let's chomp.
- [52:52]
Spinquest Promoter
No PURCHASE NECESSARY VGW Group VOID WHERE
- [52:54]
Chumba Casino Announcer
prohibited by law CTS and C's 21+ sponsored by Chumba Casino.
- [52:58]
Chelsea Handler
This is Chelsea Handler from Dear Chelsea. After the Big Game. Like most people, I kept thinking about the commercials. And there was one that stayed with me. It was from the Blue Square Alliance Against Hate. And it wasn't loud or flashy. It showed a Jewish kid being targeted at school and another student who chose not to ignore it. As someone who was Jewish, that moment felt very real to me. Not dramatic, just familiar. And what struck me was how clearly it showed that hate doesn't always announce itself. But the impact is still huge. If you saw the Blue Square spot during the big game, it's worth thinking about. And if you want to show support, sharing the Blue Square is one small way to do that.
- [53:35]
Chumba Casino Promoter
Time for a sofa upgrade. Introducing Anabe Sofas. Where designer style meets budget friendly prices. Anabe brings you the ultimate in furniture innovation with a modular design that allows you to rearrange your space effortlessly. Perfect for both small and large spaces, Anabe is the only machine washable sofa inside and out. Say goodbye to stains and messes with liquid and stain resistant fabrics. That make cleaning easy liquid simply seal slide right off. Designed for custom comfort, our high resilience foam lets you choose between a sink in feel or a supportive memory foam blend. Plus our pet friendly stain resistant fabrics ensure your sofa stays beautiful for years. Don't compromise quality for price. Visit washablesofas.com to upgrade your living space. Today sofas start at just $699 with no risk returns and a 30 day money back guarantee. Get up to 60% off plus free shipping and free returns. Shop now at washablesofas.com offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.
- [54:36]
Spinquest Promoter
Whether it's slots or live dealers, Spinquest.com has the fun and action you're looking for with Spinquest exclusives blackjack, roulette, baccarat and even live dice with craps and bubble craps. The games never stop so you don't have to to and right now new users get 30 coin packs for just 10 bucks. Play now@spinquest.com SpinQuest is a free to
- [55:00]
Chumba Casino Announcer
play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.