B (5:06)

Now, I know this is speculation, but do you think it's, is it that he threw this out there? I mean, oftentimes you'll get comments coming out of a Trump administration that, you know, are just being tossed at the wall to see what sticks at times. And you know, sometimes it's for negotiation purposes. Do you think that this was with it, with this increase in visas for Chinese students? Was it just part of a larger game plan for negotiating with the Chinese over trade talks? Or do you think he actually believes this idea that it's a way to, to fiscally shore up universities around the country because they, you know, tend to pay full freight when they come over.

C (5:47)

I just don't know. He has said the second is operating. The first sounds right, but whatever the motivation, I think he's got to reconsider this. And as you say, sometimes they just, you know, run the flagpole something and, and see if anybody salutes. I, I think this is being pretty uniformly and on a bipartisan basis, you know, do described as a very, very well, actually dangerous idea. Not just ill advised, but dangerous idea for the American people and for our country. And I, you know, my hope is that the president will see that, you know, like cracker barrel. You've made a mistake and, you know, pivot.

B (6:39)

You know, I did not see you using the cracker barrel analogy here, Frank, but I think it fits. It's good. But look, the problem here is, I think the general public, it's become more of a focus because of the Trump first administration and now the second administration. They have shined a light on the theft of intellectual property, economic espionage, the theft of R D and, and the costs to the US over the decades has been incalculable. We just, we, we don't know. We can't put a price tag on how costly it has been. And they've been very aggressive in a variety of ways, including the academic arena. I will say, one of the very first things I did in the Agency, I spent some 20 years on the operations side. One of the very first things I did was work a case that involved a student, a Chinese student attending grad school. And, you know, that was a, that was back when I could pass as a grad student. Right. That's not going to happen anymore. So that was a long time ago. And what they had done was they basically just sent him over to go to school and he was, he was associated with the PLA intel apparatus we'd identified. And he was, his job was just to get great grades in grad school after he graduated from undergrad. And, and that his job would. To be get a job. Right. And they didn't really care. Right. That's their vision is, is way down the road. So their thought was get a job, get another job. Eventually you end up a Raytheon. You know, maybe you'll, you'll end up at Corning, we don't know. But they were willing to put in that investment. And considering how many years ago that was, I don't think he's the only one. Right. So whether they're cooperative contacts or they're coerced or their willing contacts or their actual assets working with the intel apparatus, they have been extremely aggressive using the academic arena for this. So I am 100% on board with your comments. I don't understand, you know, what the White House is currently thinking. I do keep going back to the idea that, well, maybe it is just a bargaining chip he's thrown out there and we don't actually intend to do it. But from your perspective, have you seen, I mean, I know that you mentioned the bipartisan pushback. What I worry about is that.

A (8:55)

You.

B (8:56)

Know, not much happens in Washington, D.C. in a bipartisan manner. But are you seeing, you know, A stronger effort to push back against this. I know it's just been announced recently, but what are you seeing from your perspective?

C (9:11)

Well, I think at the moment it's sort of the commentary that's been heard from because Congress is out of session, they'll be back next week. And I fully expect you're going to see people raising ruckus about this. And, and just to go back to something you touched on, you, you talked about one piece of this, which is a very serious problem. And you know, to, to provide, as, as I'm sure you're very well aware, to provide sort of round the clock eyes on an actual intelligence operative of the Chinese government, Communist Party inside our country, you got to have, you know, round the clock shifts. That's at least three people, maybe four, maybe more. But a lot of infrastructure goes into that kind of monitoring. But that's when you've got a, an actual asset that you're trying to keep an eye on. When you're talking about people who, you know, may not be distinguished in any way, that you're also supposed to be making sure don't get their hands on sensitive information, classified or simply proprietary or, or otherwise engaged in, you know, activities that we must not permit in our country. This is a Herculean job. And when you talk about, you know, hundreds of thousands of these guys, again, to say nothing of those professionals, we're not up to it right now. So we, we just have to make sure that we don't have a self inflicted wound here. And I think that the Congress will almost certainly repudiate this now. They have a couple of legislative vehicles that are coming down the tracks. They've got to, by the end of the fiscal year, they've got to get some money in the bank to keep the government going. I think the National Defense Authorization act, which would be a very appropriate vehicle, is first order business in the Senate on 2 September. If there's not an amendment saying no, we're not doing this, I'll be very surprised. And more to the point, I think the American people need to be heard from on this. We're very much of the view that Donald Trump's instincts are generally good. I don't think there's a person in public life who's been more attentive to the Chinese Communist threat than he has over decades, I mean, long before he entered politics. It's just that for whatever reason, and you know, some speculation is that this is kind of a, a personal favor to Xi, who seems to have this as A, a very high personal priority. Sounds right. If I were him, I would want to get as many of these guys inside our wire as he can. But whatever the reason, and again, one of the things that we know is operating with President Trump is he does not want us to be economically disadvantaged or compromised or perhaps losing our lunch. This is one of the reasons, quite apart from the national security imperatives here, for trade, for, you know, competitiveness, for, you know, protecting the R D that we do. Mike, as you know, that the Chinese are only too happy to contract out to us effectively and then just steal and go right into production. You see all of these fifth generation fighters and other advanced weapon systems that look an awful lot like ours. Well, that's because they've just ripped them off. And it's an enormous cost savings and far faster to get stuff in the field than if you have to do it the way we do it.

B (13:07)

No, they've, they've risen to where they are in the global stage through, for the most part, reverse engineering. They made a decision that they were going to bypass decades ago. They were going to bypass all the heavy lift of research and development and just hoover up what they could. That's just a fact. Look, I'm not, and again, I think when we're talking about the student issue, of course, what we're not saying, we're not saying every Chinese student is an asset or a cooperative contact of, of, of the, the Chinese intel apparatus or the ccp. That's not the point. The point is that they have been using them, and there have been many instances of people just Google Chinese counterintelligence cases in the U.S. the FBI opens up a new counterintelligence case every day. And so the point here is that if you double that number that we currently have, of course the Chinese Communist Party, of course their intel operations are going to take advantage of that in some fashion because it's a, now you've got a potentially deeper pool. So I, I, I, you know, from our perspective, I know sometimes, Frank, we can talk like this and, and some people will roll their eyes and go, oh, you guys are being paranoid. I would just encourage people to do a little research into the issue of theft of intellectual property and Chinese counterintelligence cases. I need to take a quick break, Frank, if I could. But we'll be right back with Frank Gaffney and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Reagan administration, now president of the Institute for the American Future. We'll be right back here on the Situation Report.

A (14:33)

Stick around.

B (14:35)

Hey, Mike. Baker here. Now, you've heard me talk about the great company Jacked Up Fitness and their amazing all in one home gym, right? Right. It's really a game changer when it comes to home fitness. Now, Don and his team, they know that many people are short on time and frankly, short on money, but still want to get fit. So now get this. You can start your fitness journey for under $60 and in just six minutes each day. That sounds pretty good. Introducing the all new. Now get ready for a blast from the past. The all new Shake Weight by Jacked Up Fitness. Fifteen years ago, the original Shake Weight, of course, shook the world. And. And now the fitness legend returns. Bigger, better and built to perform. And why now you ask? Well, that's a good question. It's because science has finally caught up with the importance of explosive power and fast twitch muscle training. Something that the Shake Weight delivers in a compact, powerful way for beginners, for heavy lifters, and for serious athletes alike. The spring loaded weights on each end send shock waves of energy throughout your whole upper body, forcing your muscles to contract up to some 240 times per minute. And now beginners can tone and tighten their arms and shoulders and chest lifters can prime their upper bodies in between sets and get that final burn. While athletes can sharpen reaction times and build explosive power for the competitive edge. Look, the Shake Weight is no joke. It is serious training made simple. So if you're looking for a fun way to jump start or supercharge your fitness routine, get the all new Shake Weight by Jacked Up Fitness. Just go to jacked upshakeweight.com that's jacked up Shake Weight. Hey, Mike Baker here. I tell you what, let's talk about plants. Well, let's talk about plants and trees. Well, also bushes. Don't forget the bushes. And let's not forget shrubs either. Now, did you know that Fast Growing Trees. Fast Growing Trees is the biggest online nursery in the US with thousands of different plants. And get this, over 2 million happy customers. They have all the plants your yard needs. Fruit trees, privacy trees, flowering trees, shrubs and. And really so much more. Whatever plants you're interested in, Fast Growing Trees has you covered. To get your dream yard delivered directly to your door. Think about the time that saves you. This is a great company and again, an amazing time saver. No more time consuming trips to the nursery, hoping to find something for your yard or your home. And this fall they have the best deals, up to half off on select plants. Even better, my listeners get 15% off of their first purchase. Just enter code PDB and at checkout that's an additional 15,1 5% off. At fast growing trees.com with code PDB at checkout again, fast growing trees.com code PDB now's the perfect time to plant. Use code PDB to save today. Offer is valid for a limited time. Terms and conditions may apply. Running a business comes with a lot.

A (17:22)

Of what ifs, but luckily there's a simple answer to them. Shopify. It's the commerce platform behind millions of businesses, including Thrive Cosmetics and Momofuku.

B (17:32)

And it'll help you with everything you.

A (17:34)

Need, from website design and marketing to.

B (17:37)

Boosting sales and expanding operations.

A (17:39)

Shopify can get the job done and make your dream a reality. Turn those what ifs into sign up.

B (17:46)

For your $1per month trial@shopify.com SpecialOffer welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Joining me once again is president of the Institute for the American Future, Frank Gaffney. Frank, thanks for sticking around here. I interrupted you during our last segment. We were talking about the issue of the visas to Chinese students. Please go ahead.

C (18:08)

I just want to make one point you talked about. It's not likely that every one of these students is an asset or will be used for espionage or whatever other reason that may or may not be. So every single one of them has a legal obligation, though, to be if asked. And more to the point, there are these things called Overseas Chinese Police Service Centers. They rolled one of them up in New York City, but they're estimated to be another seven, maybe eight of them across the country. Their service, if you will, is to bring in any Chinese national or even first generation American, his family hails from China, and put him in a room where they can see on a television screen a loved one in police custody in China. The message is very clear. You will do what you're told to do or something bad will happen to your loved ones. That's the kind of coercive capability that the Chinese Communists have specialized in and will yield wield rather at will with any of these, these individuals who they feel could be of service.

B (19:22)

Yeah, no, absolutely. And we've talked about those so called community centers, as the Chinese regime like to refer to them as here on the PDB in the past. And, and it is true, their toolkit is enormous when it comes to how they hoover up information, not just from the U.S. but from, you know, the west in general. They're, they're equal opportunity when it comes to that. And they've got the mentality that says, and they have the resources that says that we'll gather up everything and then we'll sift through it and decide whether it's of use to, you know, to our government, maybe to one of their supposed pseudo state owned enterprises. And so, you know, they're, they've been aggressive for, again, for generations. And it's, it's one of those cases where I think the, the public is just now, in part because as you pointed out, the Trump administration has been shining a light on it. They're just now starting to understand the depth of this, of this problem. So again, I agree with you. I want to shift off of the student visas.

C (20:23)

But the purpose of all of this, Mike, as you know, is to destroy this country. The whole unrestricted warfare of which, you know, Chinese students as spies is just one element.

B (20:37)

Yeah, no, they, they, they view this, and certainly she does, and in his predecessors, they view the Chinese regime as being at the top of the, the food chain. That is their percent that is there from their perspective, their right. That is exactly where they want to be. And whether we like it or not, you know, that has put them on a war footing in a sense for quite some time. We just don't seem to necessarily understand it. And let me ask you about this. I want to switch, I want to stay on China, but I want to switch our focus. The war in Ukraine and China and the role that they play. Why do you think the White House is reluctant? They slapped a 25% tariff on India, which is the number two consumer of Russian energy, China being the number one. So they went after India, kind of, you know, focused a light on them, but all they've been doing with China is talking about, well, there could be consequences, but nothing so far. Why the reluctance, do you think?

C (21:39)

It's a great question and I'm very anxious about it. I think it's a terrible mistake and especially if it's motivated, as my friend Gordon Chang has speculated, by the fact that President Trump has been persuaded that we must be concerned about the stability of the Chinese government, mustn't do anything that would endanger it, that would perhaps cause it to, you know, permit a chaotic situation to emerge as it falls from power. My view is it is in the vital interests of the United States that the Chinese Communist Party do exactly that at the hands of the Chinese people. I believe our policy should be aimed at trying to help accomplish that, because if we don't do that by going back to what you were just saying a moment ago, make no mistake, about it. Left to its own devices, the Chinese Communist Party will continue to brutalize and oppress and, yes, murder its own people. And it will not treat ours any better. In fact, it will pursue our destruction as a nation and enslavement, colonization in due course. It's a zero sum game. And that's not because I want it to be. That is because that's what the Chinese Communist Party believes. As you said yourself, their rightful place is the middle Kingdom, the center of the universe. They will pursue that until we're gone, unless they're gone first. And that ought to be our express policy. And I pray to God. I used to work for Ronald Reagan, as you mentioned. I played a very small role in his successful overthrow of the Soviet Communist Party. He set his sights on doing it. He pursued relentlessly a strategy for bringing it about. And it was arguably the greatest presidential legacy in our nation's history, short of, you know, creating our own government. But I think Donald Trump has a choice now. And I think if he's opting, as I fear might be the case for trying to appease Xi Jinping and to try to prop him up even, he'll be in the category of, oh, I don't know, the Richard Nixons and the George H.W. bushes and the Bill Clintons who saved the Chinese Communists in the past and brought us to this present past, where they're at our throats and that unrestricted warfare we talked about. We have a series of, I think really powerful webinars. You can find them all for free, about 200 of them at presentation. China.org folks check them out. But bad as all of those are, those pre kinetic, those non explosive kinds of warfare, if you will, we've now put the Chinese Communist Party, partly thanks to the technology transfer that we've allowed, partly to the funding financing via Wall street with our money that we've allowed, we've now put them in a position where they have a shooting war option as well. And I fear they will exercise it if they have the latitude to do so. That must not be allowed. And I hope President Trump will choose the Reagan model, not those of those benighted predecessors who opted for the other.

B (25:11)

Frank, in the time that we've got left, Frank, China's support of Russia in their conflict with Ukraine, their invasion of Ukraine, from your perspective, how important has that been to Putin?

C (25:22)

This deserves a longer conversation. I hope we can come back and do it again.

A (25:25)

Sure.

C (25:26)

I believe that the Chinese dictator Xi Jinping greenlighted this war in Ukraine, has perpetrated what he needs to to keep it going in terms of funding Russia, in terms of selling it arms, in terms of enabling the chaos that it has precipitated, including distracting us, leading us out in terms of both finances and arms. I believe that it will continue interminably as long as Xi Jinping is there and sees that it is in his interest to do that. And don't take my word for it, the Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi has actually said we don't want this war to conclude precisely because it keeps us away from checking them where we need to.

B (26:14)

And in a way, it weakens Russia. And look, I mean, it's, you know, they're not you know, that's not a tight marriage. That's a marriage of convenience. And so I think and and you're absolutely right, China, the regime will always ruthlessly do what's in their own best interest. Frank Gaffney, president of the Institute for the American Future, thanks again for joining us here on THE SITUATION REPORT and sharing your insight. All right. Coming up next, could Hezbollah finally be pressured into laying down its weapons? Lebanon is preparing a new proposal to persuade the group to disarm, while Israel signals that it might scale back its forces. Those are big developments. Dis David Dode from the foundation for Defensive Democracies will join us for that analysis. Stay tuned. Hey, Mike Baker here. Now, let's be honest, right? Most of us on occasion or often are tired or stressed or dealing with some kind of pain, right? I mean, especially pain after a workout. So what do we do? Well, typically we power through because the last thing we want is another prescription taking up space in the medicine cabinet. And that's why I'm glad I found CB Distillery. You got to check them out. I their CBD products are helping so many people, including myself, sleep better, feel more relaxed and ease everyday pain. And the best part? Well, it's all made with premium quality natural ingredients, but they've got a full range of solutions for stress, for sleep, pain after exercise, and they've even got CBD for pets so Fido and little Snowball can get in on the action. Their soothing relief balm is a huge customer favorite and so are their sleep products like the relief balm. I use that after workouts because, frankly, at my age, every workout involves some level of pain and the balm really works. So if you're tired of being tired and stressed, well, you just want to feel better. Check out CBD from CB Distillery. And right now you can save 25%. Think about that. 25% off your entire purchase. Visit CB Distillery and use promo code PDB that CB distillery.com promo code PDB again CB distillery.com specific product availability depends on individual state regulations.

A (28:19)

Mint is still $15 a month for premium wireless.

B (28:22)

And if you haven't made the switch.

C (28:23)

Yet, here are 15 reasons why you should One, it's $15 a month.

B (28:28)

Two, seriously, it's $15 a month. Three, no big contracts.

A (28:33)

Four.

B (28:33)

I use it. Five, my mom uses it. Are you, are you playing me off?

A (28:36)

That's what's happening, right?

B (28:38)

Okay, give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront.

A (28:42)

Payment of $45 for 3 month plan $15 per month equivalent request New customer offer first 3 months only, then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra. Cmintmobile.com Trip Planner by Expedia. You were made to outdo your holiday, your hammocking and your pooling. We were made to help organize the competition. Expedia made to travel.

B (29:05)

Welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Lebanon is preparing to present a plan aimed at persuading Hezbollah to disarm. US Envoy Thomas Barrack said Tuesday the proposal won't involve military coercion, but rather political and economic measures designed to encourage Hezbollah fighters, many of course funded by Iran, to put down their weapons. Israel is expected to submit a corresponding framework for a partial military withdrawal if Hezbollah complies. Now. It's a very unusual development. For decades, the group has been seen as Lebanon's most powerful armed faction, unwilling to to part with its arsenal. Still, financial strain, waning popularity and Iran's own troubles could be changing the calculus. To break down what this could mean for Lebanon and the wider region, we're joined by David Daoud, senior fellow at the foundation for Defense of Democracies. David, thank you very much for coming back on THE SITUATION report. I'm glad we didn't scare you away the last time.

A (30:02)

No, it's been great every time. Glad to be back on.

B (30:05)

Okay, let's, let's start from the top with this. How important from your perspective are these developments regarding Lebanon?

A (30:14)

Well, look, I mean, I think what we're seeing is in some ways a momentous change and in some ways it's some of it's more of the same old. Who could have imagined just a handful of years ago or even last year that the Lebanese government would have taken a preliminary decision to disarm Hezbollah? It's pretty significant that this boldness has emerged. It's a testament to the weakened state that the organization finds itself in between the war with Israel, between the loss of its lifeline through Syria with the downfall of Bashar al Assad and the weakening of the Iranian regime with its recent war with Israel and decimation of most of its regional assets, so has more than a squeeze, and it has one card to rely on that it's pushing back on. Now, I like to say I'm not the confessor of Lebanese president or the prime minister. I don't know what's in their heart of hearts. Part of me seals. I'll admit that this is the same old Lebanon that is trying to buy time with empty gestures and wait until international attention just moves elsewhere. We're talking to Hezbollah. We have to talk it out. We don't want to lead the civil war. I mean, this is the talk that kept Lebanon from disarming Hezbollah for the 18 years between 2006 and 2023, when most recent war erupted. We're starting, we're seeing a little bit of that. That's still there. So it's problematic. But at the same time, there is more potential today for Lebanon to do something than at any point in the past. So those two things are in competition.

B (31:49)

Yeah. And, and so, I mean, I take from, from what you're saying that because in the past, look, the, the Lebanese military didn't really have the ability to, to unilaterally disarm Hezbollah. That wasn't going to happen. Right. I mean, the Lebanese military was very famously kind of, you know, second to Hezbollah. But so it's, it's more about the, the weakening that's taken place, certainly, rather than any sort of change of heart or any. I don't, I don't want to sound too cynical, but this is, this is not about, you know, the various factions in Lebanon thinking we want to move in the right direction and do what's best for our citizens. This is more about an opportunity. Because Hezbollah has been hit so hard over the past year and a half.

A (32:32)

I think, look, the cynicism is largely justified. I think there's partially that look, when dealing with Hezbollah, when, when wanting to disarm Hezbollah, the question is always a, it's kind of a calculus or a balance of pain. On the one hand, you have the trouble that you're going to have to go through to disarm Hezbollah. And part of it is that you touched on. It's Hezbollah's military strength that's been degraded, but the other part of it that hasn't been degraded. We've seen no indication that it's been degraded. Is Hezbollah's vast Shiite support, right? They brought out, according to Information International is Lebanese consultancy group, about 900,000 people maximum minimum, almost 700,000 people to Nasrallah's funeral. They swept the municipal elections, right? We haven't seen the massive uprisings of Shiites or even any uprisings of Shiites of any considerable number against Hezbollah, saying, hey, you destroyed our lives, we don't want you anymore. So that's still in Hezbollah's, in Hezbollah's back pocket. And when you as the Lebanese have to go against Hezbollah, not just worried about the organization, its military strength, worried about that entire deep support base that could lead you to civil war. So that's on the one hand, so you have civil war on the one hand. On the other hand, you have the pain wrought by Israeli military. The longer Hezbollah remained armed, the more it provokes Israel, the more Israel is going to attack. There's going to be future wars. Now there's an additional factor, additional factors on the calculus of pain for Lebanon. It's the fact that the international community for some time now is saying, hey, we're not playing along with this anymore, right? Lebanon's economy collapses in 2019. Lebanon is desperate for funds, it's desperate for assistance. None of its traditional financiers are coming to help. The United States is saying no international aid until there's overhaul of the system. The Gulf states are saying no money because we see Hezbollah. So you have to weigh these calculus of pain. Which is going to be more painful for you to endure the lack of assistance and, and potentially more Israeli military pressure or to go toe to toe with the Hezbollah. And that's where we are. And it's that, that calculus of pain that's motivating the Lebanese more than anything. And what's going to push them forward or hold them back is which one weighs heavier on their decision making.

B (34:34)

For the benefit of, of, of the viewers, can you give us in sort of short order, I know that's not easy, but give us a sort of an overview of the complications of the, the Lebanese political scene, the various factions that are involved and you know, we don't need to, you know, go all the way back in history, but, but I think it would be beneficial for, for the viewers to understand exactly how complex it is there.

A (35:01)

Look, I mean, Lebanon is a country that is, its identity is still in formation. To speak of a unified Lebanese national identity I think is, is premature. The country is pieced together by a sectarian power sharing system that allocates to each sect Prerogatives. Right. Protections. Prerogatives. Right. The Maronites get the presidency, the Sunnis get the, the premiership. The, the Shiites get the, the, the speaker of parliament. And who specifically gets that among the, you know, from among that sect? Which Maronite gets it, which Sunni gets it, which Shiite gets it? Depends on, you know, that doesn't just go to the sect. It goes to basically these sub sectarian feudal warlords, for lack of a better descriptor, and they take their, their sect share and they have the interest of the sect at her. At least they, they pretend to have the interest of the sect of heart. That's what they sell their people on. This is what they're representing. So, you know, any decision because of that, because Lebanon is so delicately held together in that way, any decision must be made by sectarian consensus, must be made by getting all the, the agreement of all these sub sectarian feudal warlords to say, hey, agree on this. Now, when it comes to Hezbollah's disarmament, it's a momentous decision. The Shiites in this, in this case are. We don't know how, you know, how big the demographic breakdown in Lebanon is because 1932 is the last census and even that's questionable. But we assume the Shiites. Right. There's an assumption the Shiites are the largest sect or the largest growing sect. So if you're a Hezbollah, you have a substantial number of these people in your pocket. The other part of the Shiite coin is Amal. Amal, right. This the secular Lebanese analog to Hezbollah, but it's working in lockstep with Hezbollah. So right now the government needs to make this decision. They need to have a Shiite voice, and both Amal and Hezbollah are depriving it of that Shiite voice. So that leaves it complicated because in the Lebanese national psyche, the civil war that happened not that long ago, unlike our civil war here in the United States, there's still people in living memory who experienced it, who fought it. That weighs on their mind. If you, if you touch a sect's prerogatives, you could lead to civil war.

B (36:59)

Do you think that Israel, is it your perception that Israel is serious about this idea that they could pull back from Lebanon, at least in part, I think so.

A (37:10)

But I think, look, part of my skepticism here, I think what leads to your cynicism, what, you know, the. Is the hesitation we're seeing in the Israeli statement, as congratulatory was, as it was, is that Lebanon has said a lot of nice things in the past Lebanon has a habit of saying all the right things but then doing nothing. And I think what the Israelis are saying is like, look, this is a momentous decision that you undertook. We acknowledge the gravity of the decision. At the same time, it's not an action. Right. This is very many steps short of an action. Because what happened, you know, the government asked the LAF Lebanese army with putting together a plan to, to be submitted later this week, maybe early September, about disarmament at the end of the year. Right. That plan has not been put together yet. It's not been submitted to a cabinet note, it's not been approved, and it has been turned into a governmental order. To the laf. Is the government, the cabinets, the executive in Lebanon to the LAF to disarm Hezbollah. So the IDF is saying, look, this is nice, or the Israelis saying, this is nice, but we're not seeing action and we need to see action and then we can reciprocate with action. I think that's a very, very fair thing for the Israelis to say, especially in light of Lebanon's history.

B (38:18)

Listen, we need to take a quick break. I want to pick up where, where we are right now and then move in a different direction as well. But David, if you stay with us, we have to take a, a quick break. And we'll be back with more of David DOD and a situation report.

A (38:31)

Stick around.

B (38:33)

This podcast is brought to you in part by Stash. Now imagine investing without ever picking a single stock. Well, with Stash, the experts handle the hard part for you. Stash isn't just another investing app. It's a registered investment advisor that combines automated investing with expert guidance so you don't have to worry about figuring it out on your own. Choose from personalized investments or let Stash's award winning smart portfolio do the work for you. With Stash, investing doesn't feel like gambling. It's simple, it's smart, and it's stress free so your money can finally start working as hard as you do. That sounds pretty good, doesn't it? Get access to world class financial advice with personalized guidance for just a $3 monthly subscription. Did you say $3? I did. $3 a month. Come on. Stash has already helped millions of Americans reach their financial goals. Don't let your money sit around. Put it to work. With stash. Go to get.stash.com PDB to see how you can receive $25 towards your first stock purchase. And and to view important disclosures, that's get.stash.com PDB. The paid non client endorsement, not representative of all clients and not a guarantee investment advisory Service is offered by Stash Investments LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. Investing involves risk offer is subject to terms and conditions Right now at the Home Depot you'll find storage solutions made to fit your needs. Grab an HDX tough tote to protect your tools or keep your sports equipment contained with reinforced snap fit lids. Or stack up and make better use.

A (40:09)

Of your space with bins and totes.

B (40:11)

Built to last. Whatever your story, we've got the gear to keep it organized and protected at the Home Depot. How doers get more done they say.

C (40:23)

To only bring what you can carry. So with the all new 2025 Ford Expedition Tremor, bring a lot like three dirt bikes, a few tents, an entire crew ready to make memories, a panoramic 24 inch display and the confidence to push your limits. The all new 2025 Ford Expedition Tremor.

B (40:43)

Always consult the owner's manual before upward driving.

C (40:45)

Know your terrain and trail difficulty and use appropriate safety gear. Max payload varies based on accessories and vehicle configuration.

B (40:49)

See label and door jam for carrying.

C (40:50)

Capacity of a specific vehicle.

B (40:51)

Always properly secure cargo welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Joining us once again is Senior Fellow at the foundation for the Defense of Democracies, David Daoud. David, thank you for sticking around. We've been talking about the recent developments and potential for a real sea change in in Lebanon. I want to shift a little bit. I understand you were in Israel not that long ago. Give us your perspective, if you could, on where things stand right now, both with the the ceasefire that supposedly is on the table and is up for consideration and the IDF's potential move into Gaza City.

A (41:33)

Look, I mean, I was in Israel prior to all this, but I'd say the national mood has been for some time. Not everyone, obviously, but the predominant national mood has been shifted from a focus to total victory, which we actually haven't heard a lot of, even coming from the government to getting the hostages back. I think the Israeli public is tired of the continuation of the war. It's the longest war in Israel's history. It's having an economic drain. Obviously the IDF was not built for wars to last two years. It's having a social drain. You have these the IDF is a conscript army. It's an army made up of reservists. These people are coming back to job losses, economic. If they have businesses, the businesses are suffering high rates of ptsd. There's social fissures that this is this is highlighting between the Ultra Orthodox who are not serving in the army, refusing to serve in the army and reservists who are serving longer terms in the army now to make up for the IDF's manpower shortage. That's all on the one hand. On the other end you have where the government's consideration is that Hamas is refusing to surrender. It's that Hamas is refusing to give up its weapons, its control over Gaza. And what this means is that Hamas is trying to set itself up for A, claiming victory if the Israeli war effort ends and B, setting itself up for regeneration in Gaza to continue threatening Israel again. And I think that's a situation that Israel refuses to accept that another 10 7, even a potential 107 could happen in 5, 10 years. So you have this, this, this, this, this problem here between the Israeli government and the Israeli public and between Israel and Hamas where you have unbridgeable gaps.

B (43:09)

How fragile is Netanyahu's coalition given what you've just described?

A (43:14)

Well, it's fragile for several reasons. One is the ultra orthodox conscription. We've already seen the withdrawal of the ultra Orthodox parties from the government, from the cabinet. And now. So this makes him more vulnerable to the remaining coalition members. If those, they've said, you know, the ultra Orthodox parties were drawn, but they said they're not going to endorse a no confidence vote in the Knesset. So that keeps the government secure for now. But you've had, you know, Smotrich Patel, Smotrich and, and it'samar Benvir, who were kind of the right flank of the government, much right of Likud, who are saying that if Prime Minister Netanyahu compromises on a ceasefire in a way they don't like, they'll collapse the government. So it keeps Netanyahu again, the withdrawal of the ultra, ultra Orthodox fight has left him more vulnerable to that, to that kind of pressure. You don't see centrist parties say Benny Gantz or Yeshatid willing to come into the coalition to offset that. They said they'll support certain things from the outside. So within the coalition he's more. Prime Minister Netanyahu is more amenable to the pressure of his right flank. We're insisting that the war continue even though again, unclear what the end goal is at this point.

B (44:27)

This, this may sound like, or may be a simple question, but if you could, what is from the ultra Orthodox? What's their justification for not engaging in participation in the idea?

A (44:42)

Well, again, it's a multi layered question with a multi layered answer. Part of it is the question of the Legitimacy of the state itself. Many ultra Orthodox Jews believe that a Jewish state should not arise in the land of Israel until the prior coming of the Messiah. Some object to the fact that the state is secular and not religious. Others say, we accept the state, we just want to. And it's legitimacy. We just want to live our lifestyle, which is to learn Torah all day, to study in Yeshiva all day. And that serving in the army is considered what they call Bitu Torah. Right. It's a, it's a, it's a cessation of the study of Torah. It, it would compromise the integrity of their religious lifestyle. There's a fear that sending one's children into the army will lead them to become secular and abandon their particular ultra Orthodox way of life. So it's a multilayered concern, but one that the Israeli public and several Israeli governments. It's been a problem that's been boiling in Israel, bubbling in Israel since, since independence. It's part of the reason why Israel doesn't have a constitution, and it's one that's been put off for so long. And now I think it's coming to a headway.

B (45:47)

Well, certainly, I mean, you know, you're talking about going out two years with this conflict and the stress that that's putting on the reservists, that that divide becomes more and more clear and I would think, disconcerting to those who are serving. I realize it's complex and I realize it involves, you know, religious issues and beliefs, so that's probably a minefield all by itself. Now, as far as, as far as a, a logical, you know, this is a speculative question. I know, and I, I, you know, that's what kind of my specialty is. But if, if Hamas is, is saying what they're saying, they've just come out not that long ago and said, okay, we, we're willing to, you know, go along with this latest ceasefire proposal. They've rejected so much about other potential plans. Are they just, is this just a ploy on their part? From your perspective, are they, are they just reading the tea leaves and thinking, okay, if we say now, in light of the fact that the Netanyahu government has said, no, we're not, you know, we're going to do this operation, we're going into Gaza City? Well, clearly, you know, Hamas has been fairly clever over the years and sophisticated in their messaging. So if I'm sitting in the marketing wing of Hamas and I look over and I see Netanyahu saying, no, we are going into Gaza City, we are going to Finish this fight. And you look at the population saying, you know, we're tired. We want to finish this, then a logical position for Hamas, that is to swing and say, oh, well, we will accept a ceasefire. So, you know, are they serious about it, or is this just another one of their narrative ploys?

A (47:29)

I mean, look, again, I'm probably the ultimate cynic here. So I look at it as a narrative ploy, as an attempt to put pressure on the Netanyahu government to end the world prematurely through presenting him as the. The impediment to a ceasefire. There's already this mentality among the protesters against the war in Israel that somehow the decision of war and peace rests exclusively Prime Minister Netanyahu. He has a big part of it. But then again, there seems to be this. The interlocutor. Hamas is forgotten. I just don't see a situation. Well, Hamas, it's not. It's not the ira, right? This is. This is. It's not. It's not an entity that is operating out of purely rational considerations. It's a religiously fanatical movement that views it as a. Not just a political imperative, but a religious imperative. Not to liberate a swath of territory, right? Not just to get Israel out of Gaza or Israel out of the west bank, but to. And this is the distinction between the IRA and the British. They weren't fighting over exactly the same territory. Ireland could rise, and Britain could still continue to exist. In Hamas's mind, Palestine and Israel are mutually exclusive. This is an ideological fixture. And I think for them to give up their weapons would be to give up the broader Palestinian cause and to violate the underlying religious principles from whence their political ideology stems. So I don't see an organization like that giving up just because it's been beaten. I mean, you look at isis, you look at Al Qaeda, these groups go into, you know, kind of hibernation periods, but they never really. They never really go away because the motivation is ideological.

B (49:00)

Yeah, no, that's a. That's a great point and one I think that we sometimes miss because we tend to try to frame these things from our perspective in the West. Right, okay, well. Well, what's the negotiating strategy? How would I. How would I deal with it? And you're talking. And you're right, you're talking about fights. If you consider Gaza City as kind of their primary or last stronghold for Hamas, I mean, if you want to. That's a simplistic way of putting it. But if you do, then you look at the fighters that are There. And you think, for the most part, they're in that age group that grew up almost from kindergarten being indoctrinated. Right. That's a powerful thing. So I think your point is excellent, which is this is. You're not dealing necessarily with a, With a rational adversary here. You can't, you can't put your Western values on them when thinking about strategy. And I think that confuses a lot of people when they hear Netanyahu talk about, we have to destroy them. Now, do the people that are like the, the Hostage Families Coalition and, and, and those that are taken to the streets and protest and saying, we got to stop this thing now, we have to accept a ceasefire by definition, does that mean that they're fine with capitulating to Hamas and leaving Hamas operational and in charge?

A (50:12)

I don't know if they view it that way. And look, can I, can I, can I blame them if my child were being held in Gaza?

B (50:18)

Right.

A (50:18)

I have no idea what their, what their condition is, what. And I've seen other hostages come out in terrible conditions and heard horror stories about sexual abuse and so on and so forth. We think, if we think that's limited to the women, then we are very naive about how these actors operate. Torture and so on and so forth. Starvation. If that's my child, I, I'm not seeing anything after that. I'm not thinking about anything after that. It's, it's, you know, and it's a purely emotional response, one that comes from, like, I guess, the most innate and basic instincts that a human being has. And I don't think anyone can fault them for saying, look, I just want my kid back. Whatever, whatever happens after, let it happen. I want my loved one back. And I think there's, there's also this idea that, you know, get the hostages back and then you can continue the war through other means. A lot of people on that side of the ledger will point to, you know, the alleged ceasefire, and I emphasize alleged ceasefire that happened between Israel and Hezbollah and Lebanon, and then Israel continues to degrade Hezbollah to attack Hezbollah. And they're saying, well, why can't we adopt a similar model in Gaza, get our hostages back, end the war, and then move to kind of a slow erosion of what remains of Hamas. And again, is that feasible militarily? Is that a smart strategy? Does it end up being a capitulation? Perhaps. But for the person who's desperately trying to get their, their loved one back, I don't think they're. And you can't expect them to Think that far?

B (51:41)

Yeah, no, 100% agreed. I think that's, that's correct. You know, you sometimes, you know, obviously we're removed from this and, and so, you know, we can tend to have these conversations on some theoretical level without the emotion involved. But that, that is, that's very true. I do like the idea of saying we're going to get a deal that get the hostages returned both living and dead, and then, but you can't. There is no medium to long term stability as long as Hamas, nearby Iran are involved in the governing of Gaza. Is that something that, despite their differences in terms of whether we take a ceasefire or we continue a military operation, is that something that most people in Israel can agree with that, that Iran will return? What I mean is. Yeah, well, what I mean is, is you can, can do most people still, despite where they think we should draw the line here and end the, the, the conflict, do. Would they still agree that there is, there is no stability or long term peace if Hamas remains in charge in Gaza?

A (52:48)

I mean, even without that, I think the, the concept of long term peace and stability isn't something that's in the Israeli lexicon nowadays. But especially, yes, especially if Hamas somehow makes its way back to power, claws its way back up to, you know, regaining, regaining its strength or the path to regeneration. Even then, of course, there's no way to. Hamas has made it such that there is no compromise that can be reached between Israel and a Hamas governed territory, be it in Gaza or the west bank or elsewhere. I think most Israelis understand that, but I think the emphasis now is, look, you know, we're, our soldiers are tired, the army is war now we want our hostages back. International credibility and credit and support is at the lowest it's been in Israel's history. You have countries left and right and not, you know, adversaries like Russia, but partners like France and the UK and Canada. Friends of Israel coming out and saying we're going to support a Palestinian state unilaterally. I mean, this, you know, Israel could, from, from their perspective, Israel's winning the battle and losing this broader war for legitimacy, which is even more dangerous, in my opinion. So I don't think there's any illusion that, you know, Hamas will somehow moderate or become a responsible actor. I think those illusions died on October 6th or on October 7th rather. And it's just, it's just a calculus of what, you know, what's, what's the worst of two options right now, of two bad options?

B (54:11)

I think, yeah, I think Israel lost the international narrative shortly after October 7, remarkably quickly, right after the brutality of October 7, in part because again, I would argue that Hamas is, is fairly sophisticated in understanding how to drive the various narratives. And then you get something like the, the Nasser hospital, you know, strike, and it just compounds the problem. David, we got a lot more to talk about, but we have no more time.

A (54:43)

So I'm hoping that you, you'll continue.

B (54:45)

To come on back because there's a lot to unpack here in this region. That would be great. David Daoud of the foundation for Defense of Democracies, once again, thank you very much for joining us here on THE SITUATION report. Man, I'll see you next time. Well, that's all the time we have for this week's PDB Situation Report. Look, if you have any questions or you have any comments or even if you have humorous anecdotes or a limerick.

C (55:07)

Do people still do limericks?

B (55:08)

I don't know. Please reach out to me at bdb@the first tv.com you know what I'm about to say. The highlight of every week, and I'm serious about this, at the PDP headquarters, which is located in a secret compound underneath a dormant volcano. And I'm giving you too many details as it is, is when Carl the mailman somehow finds us and drops off another sack filled to the brim with your postcards and your emails and your faxes and your telegrams and your Western Union wires. And every month, our amazing team, and that includes the above average interns, select a bunch of your questions and we produce one of our critically acclaimed Ask Me Anything episodes. So please keep those cards and letters coming. Finally, to listen to the podcast of the show ad free. You can do that. Just become a premium member of the President's Daily brief by visiting PDB premium.com I'm Mike Baker. And until next time, you know the drill. Stay informed, stay safe, stay co.