← The President's Daily Brief
The President's Daily Brief
PDB Situation Report | December 14th, 2024: Inside The Collapse of Assad & China’s Massive Military Drills
01:01:21
Loading summary
Transcript74 lines
- [00:01]
Mike Baker
This episode is brought to you by Lifelock. The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, more time online, and more personal info in places that could expose you to identity theft. That's why LifeLock monitors millions of data points every second. If your identity is stolen, their US Based restoration specialist will fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Get more holiday fun and less holiday worry with Lifelock. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit lifelock.com podcast terms apply.
- [00:42]
Brian Carter
Welcome to the PDB Situation Report. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage this weekend, coming to you from the Middle East. Let's get briefed. We're starting things off in Syria, where the fall of President Assad has dramatically shifted power dynamics in the Middle East. We'll be joined by Brian Carter of the American Enterprise Institute for more on that. Plus we'll take a look at China's latest military exercises around Taiwan. And there have been a number of them which are among the largest in decades with nearly 100 vessels mobilized. That's a lot of vessels. Okay. Joining us to break down the implications is senior research fellow at the Heritage foundation and a good friend, Steve Yates. But first, today's Situation Report. Spotlight. Just last week we were discussing on this program the astonishing speed of the rebel advance in Syria. And then just one day after that episode aired, the Assad regime fell overnight. Rebel forces stormed Damascus, toppling Bashar Al Assad's government and ending over 50 years of authoritarian rule by the Assad family and might I add, brutal rule. The embattled leader fled to Moscow as his grip on power collapsed and is reportedly now shacking up with his best friend, Vladimir Putin. Now, with the Assad dynasty gone, Syria stands at a crossroads. Its fate in the hands of a motley coalition of rebels cementing their grip on power and credit where it's due. Our next guest predicted this outcome on last week's program. Joining me again is Brian Carter. He's the Middle east portfolio manager for the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute. Brian, welcome back. And, and thank you for showing up two weekends in a row. It's very impressive.
- [02:34]
Steve Yates
Thanks for having me. Good to be back.
- [02:36]
Brian Carter
Now, now, listen, we, we finished up last weekend's episode as the rebels were advancing. And, you know, we all, you know, saw what was happening, which was a very rapid advance. But then I think my last question for you last weekend was do you expect out of all of this activity, do you expect Assad to be toppled? And you said, yes, but did you expect it to happen in the Span of a few days? No, not at all.
- [03:02]
Steve Yates
I thought he had, you know, at least a couple more days beyond that. It all happened so fast. You know, I think one of the comparisons I've been drawing over the last couple of days is for those of us who watch the collapse of the US Mission in Afghanistan, it was very reminiscent of that, except even faster, which was, I think, very surprising for a lot of us who have watched this conflict for many years. And, you know, we haven't seen the front lines move at all in four or five years.
- [03:31]
Brian Carter
Why? The speed of the, of the regime's fall? I mean, what, what was it that led to? Look, he. He battled them into, almost into submission back in, what, 2015, 2016, obviously largely with the Russians help. But what was a major contributor to his downfall this time?
- [03:51]
Steve Yates
Yeah, I'm not quite sure on specifics, although it was very evident, just based on what we were seeing, that there was a bunch of institutional rot and demoralization within the Syrian Arab Army. I mean, if you watched what was happening and how these forces were just collapsing, you know, it was very clear that there was something very wrong with these forces we saw. For example, I think it was right before I came on your program last weekend, the rebels had advanced to this large bridge over a major river. And instead of blowing the bridge, the Syrian Arab army kept retreating and had an aircraft bomb the bridge, which is not very practical. It barely. It usually doesn't work to actually destroy a bridge. And so that was a big indicator for me that, you know, something is. Something is badly wrong within these military formations and they're collapsing very rapidly.
- [04:43]
Brian Carter
And to what degree was it a factor? The lack of support from either the Russians or the Iranians?
- [04:50]
Steve Yates
Yeah, I think that was a factor. But I think if the Syrian Arab army hadn't collapsed as quickly as it did, the Russians and the Iranians would have tried to get forces, get some resources in there to try to stem the bleeding a little bit. The reality is everything happened so fast that by the time the Iranians in particular can mobilize and deploy forces, it would have been all over anyways, even if Assad had tried to hang on for a couple more days.
- [05:17]
Brian Carter
Yeah, I mean, it is interesting. Look, the Russians have two very important bases there, right? One air base, one naval base. So they had resources there. Now they don't, because they've obviously moved them out of harm's way. They're not unsure what the rebels are going to do regarding the Russian assets. But it does seem like they could have Done more. Even with the fact that the Syrian army wasn't performing up the snow on.
- [05:43]
Steve Yates
The Russian side, they had a bunch of resource constraints related to Ukraine. Now, they did have aircraft in Syria, and those aircraft were conducting airstrikes, but again, I think, you know, those aircraft can't hold ground. And so they needed a ground force to be able to prevent this collapse from happening. That ground force probably would have had to come from the Iranians, but the speed at which the Syrians collapsed kind of made that plan go right out the window because the Iranians just couldn't move enough resources there in time to really do anything about the problem.
- [06:18]
Brian Carter
Yeah. To what degree do you know about what they did move in? I mean, were they moving in militia from Iraq? Were they moving in fighters from Hezbollah? I mean, what were they attempting to do?
- [06:28]
Steve Yates
At least we saw some Hezbollah, but mainly to secure Hezbollah objectives in Syria. And we did see some Iraqi groups reportedly moving earlier in the week to support Syrian forces around the city of Hama. I think that those forces either got blocked or stopped short of engaging in Hama. One of the things the rebels did was actually cut the roads east of Hama to prevent any reinforcements from getting towards Hama, which I thought was very smart operationally in military terms, but probably prevented these reinforcements from arriving. In terms of Hezbollah, they tried to secure a key town called Closer, which is close to Homs, which fell, I think, on Friday. It all happened so fast, they kind of lose track of when everything fell. But Closer is one of the conduits through which Hezbollah would get Iranian weapons. So Hezbollah pushed 2,000 fighters across the border to secure the area, but as the regime fell apart, they just withdrew back into Lebanon.
- [07:38]
Brian Carter
Well, I mean, it does sound. I mean, it's clear from what you're saying that, I mean, you believe that the primary contributing factor to all of this was just the failure of the Syrian army, and that then influenced the Soviet and Iranian decisions, in part because, again, of the speed of the deadline. So to what degree do you think that Syrian army is going to be completely disbanded? I mean, is there any sense that the incoming new government is going to do essentially the same thing that happened in Iraq when we just decimated the ranks of the Iraqi army after the fall of Saddam?
- [08:15]
Steve Yates
Yeah, they're going to have to rebuild some sort of fighting force because the Syrian Arab army does not exist anymore. The rebels in the south captured a lot of the tanks and that sort of equipment. I'm assuming the HTS led rebels coming from the north also captured a Lot of equipment. But I mean, I haven't even seen serious reports of large remnants of the Syrian Arab army out anywhere. Whether that's in the desert or, you know, even in the kind of Assad heartland in the far west. I've seen reports of, you know, maybe five or six guys who are saying we'll fight to the very end. But other than that, I mean, there are no real remnants of the army existing.
- [08:59]
Brian Carter
So not even up in sort of that northeast area where Assad is from where he sort of had his home base.
- [09:06]
Steve Yates
Yeah, in the kind of northwest area. Yeah. There's not even one lives out there. And in fact. Yeah, in fact we're seeing that, you know, the rebels have control in a lot of these areas now.
- [09:17]
Brian Carter
I suppose the big question now is what next? And I realize that, you know, most people are just speculating on this because nobody really knows at this early stage. But what do you think?
- [09:27]
Steve Yates
Yeah, so I think that there are a couple of different ways that this can go. Obviously the most concerning direction it can go is if there are widespread revenge killings and you know, extremist groups taking advantage of the incomplete Syrian government control to kind of spin up sectarian hatred and those sorts of things. We haven't seen too many indicators of that, but given it's so concerning, we are on, you know, sharp lookout for any indicators that, you know, that that's we might be on that sort of trajectory. I think in the immediate term one of the biggest things I'm watching is in northeastern Syria with the US backed forces and what's going to happen there. The US backed Syria Democratic Forces are Kurdish majority Kurdish dominated and they have to control a lot of Arab areas and they have a lot of tension with those Arab communities. And we're seeing these Arab communities trying to throw off the SDF and say, no, you know, we're part of Arab Syria and we want to no longer be under SDF control. That is a big flash point in whether we will see continued fighting up there.
- [10:42]
Brian Carter
Yeah, that's, that's a really important point which I'm glad brought up. But you have to imagine there was some uncomfortable conversation there over the fact that the Turks and certainly Erdogan view the Kurds as a terrorist organization and would very much prefer that the US not be supporting their efforts.
- [11:01]
Steve Yates
Exactly. And some of the areas that the Turkish backed rebels have been fighting with the US backed SDF over are areas that Turkey has long sought to capture from the sdf. They've made repeated threats to capture these areas and it seems like they finally made their move. So now today we're seeing, you know, this week we've seen reports of the Turkish backed rebels capturing the Manbij area which is one of those important areas for Turkey to take control of.
- [11:33]
Brian Carter
And now, Brian, if you could stay right there. As you know here at the situation report, we've got some terrific sponsors. We're going to take a break to hear from them and then we'll come back with Brian Carter and we'll be talking about Israel and their involvement in Syria to date as well as the rebel groups and who and what they represent. We've got a quick break and we'll be right back. Hey, Mike Baker here. Look, if you're tired of the same old coffee from those mega corporations and you know the ones I'm talking about pushing their woke agendas, which they do well, then listen up. It's time to take a stand and support a brand that truly embodies American values. And here, of course, you know, I'm talking about blackout coffee. Now they stand with hardworking Americans who believe in family, faith and freedom. They roast some of the most incredible coffee you'll ever taste using only premium grade beans roasted and shipped to you within 48 hours. Think about that. One minute they're in the roaster, the next they're in your mug. Bob's your uncle. For the cold brew fans, Blackout Coffee is not now also excited to announce the launch of their two new ready to drink cold brew coffee latte options. And that is not easy to say. Don't settle for less. Make the switch to Blackout Coffee. Head over to blackout coffee.com PDP and use the code. And this won't surprise you. The code is PDP for 20% off your first order. That's blackout coffee.com PDB and the code again is PDB. Join the movement and taste the difference. Remember, with every sip you're supporting a brand that stands for America. And as we say around these parts, be awake, not woke. Welcome back to the PDB situation report. Now let me bring back our guest, Brian Carter of the American Enterprise Institute. Brian, one interesting aspect of all this with Syria is Israel's activities since Assad was toppled. Talk to me about that if you could.
- [13:30]
Steve Yates
Israel has conducted an air campaign into Syria to destroy a lot of these strategic assets that Assad held. Stuff like chemical weapons, missiles, those sorts of things. They've also gone after Assad military bases and that sort of stuff. In addition to all that, they have created a, what they're calling a buffer zone in southwestern Syria just outside of the Golan Heights. They're moving in there to prevent any sort of situation from emerging out of the kind of chaotic situation in Syria that could threaten the Israeli state. Israel, as you know, after the October 7th attacks, has really had a very different security mindset, and they're really not willing to take any risk with their national security right now, which is why I think you see this very assertive policy developing as it relates to Syria.
- [14:24]
Brian Carter
Yeah, I think that's a really important point because I was going to ask you about, you know, the sort of this more emboldened attitude towards a very proactive, you know, preemptive strikes. And I don't know that before 7October, if this situation in Syria had happened, that Israel would have considered the same moves.
- [14:44]
Steve Yates
They probably would have gone after the chemical weapons and the missiles. But, you know, I don't think they would have gone so far as to go into, you know, the disengagement zone and go into Syria. I thought that was a pretty big step. And, you know, it really drives into focus again, like I mentioned, the changes in Israel after October 7th. I mean, to kind of put it into comparison, the October 7 attacks per capita, had they occurred in America, would have killed like 50,000 US 50,000Americans, which is just an unfathomable number.
- [15:18]
Brian Carter
Where does all this leave the Iranian regime?
- [15:21]
Steve Yates
It leaves them in a very, very bad, invulnerable position. So obviously, since October 7th, they have, for all intents and purposes, lost Hamas as a military organization in the Gaza Strip. Hezbollah is badly weakened. Now you have the fall of Assad. So prior to the fall of Assad, the theory from the Iranian side was, well, you know, Hezbollah is badly weakened, but we can ship more weapons trainers through Syria. They'll get to Lebanon, they'll rebuild Hezbollah pretty fast, and we'll be in pretty good shape. Now they've lost that. So they're going to need to rebuild some way to reconstitute some of Hezbollah's forces, providing them with weapons and those sorts of things. So I think in the coming months, you're going to see Iran try to think about how to do that. But I think you're also liable to see in the coming years, Iran really rethink its overall security strategy in the Middle east in a way that it hasn't in decades. I think that's going to be a really important thing to watch, especially as we go in to a new U.S. administration.
- [16:27]
Brian Carter
Well, and the supreme leader is, what, 85 years old and reportedly not in the best of health. And they've been talking already about the succession plans and the irgc, I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the IRGC is angling to play more of a role in who that will be at the end of the day. So with the Iranian regime, is there a sense that they're done in Syria or is there a sense that perhaps they'll come to some accommodation with the new government, whatever that new government looks like? What do you think about that?
- [17:02]
Steve Yates
I don't know. I think there's a sense that they're going to try. I don't know how successful they will be. Obviously, HTS and the rebels writ large have been fighting the Iranians for years at this point, so there's no love lost there. And I think that's a really important piece of context to keep in mind. But at the same time, I don't think Iran necessarily sees itself as bounded by this government in power. I think that it will try to work with this government, but I also think it will try to Iran will try to get its hooks into other organizations in Syria, try to rebuild some sort of resistance network in Syria. In fact, they've talked a little bit about this. The Supreme Leader said just the other day in a speech about Syria, he said, well, the Syrian youth will rise up again just like the Iraqi youth rised up against the US occupation of Iraq between 2003 and 2011. Clearly alluding that there is some idea in his mind that hey, maybe we can build some sort of resistance organizations in Syria to fight this so called occupying government.
- [18:09]
Brian Carter
I mean, in the short term, the rebels that I think that the citizens of Damascus, you know, they took to the streets and they ransacked Iranian facilities, certainly the embassy and other offices. But you look at the Russian side and it seems like the Russian government has been able to somehow orchestrate an accommodation because it doesn't appear as if there's been any movement towards those Russian facilities or even the embassy in Damascus.
- [18:38]
Steve Yates
I'm not exactly sure what is going on behind the scenes. I will say that the Russians have been slowly kind of withdrawing their forces over the last couple of days. We're seeing indications now of Russians moving west to east towards Tartus and towards Khmeimim where they have their naval base and air base respect. You know, honestly from the rebel perspective, I'm sure it's a little bit of, hey, we, we've got Damascus. Let's try not to bite too much off more than we can chew here. And try to consolidate what we've got rather than, you know, trying to break into the Russian base and fight the Russians. It's similar in a sense, to how the Taliban perhaps had a little bit of a disengagement system with the US Forces at Haman Karzai International Airport during the Afghanistan evacuation.
- [19:31]
Brian Carter
To what degree do you understand the various elements? Obviously, HTS is the lead dog in this pack of rebels who engaged in the offensive, but what do you know about the other groups? And to what degree do you believe HTS is going to be successful in cobbling all of them together and holding them together, rather than having some disastrous chaotic fracturing, as we saw, in a way, in Iraq?
- [19:58]
Steve Yates
Yeah, so I think that's a really important question that not enough people are asking right now. We're trying to keep a good track of the different constituent elements of hts. We're still working on that problem right now. But I think one of the things to watch here is that hts, while its leader, is kind of putting forward this moderate face and saying, hey, you know, we're not going to go to Sharia law. We're not going to do this, and that he isn't all of us. And within hts, there are a bunch of, you know, jihadist organizations that have a much more extreme line. And so the open question in my eyes is, is Jelani, the leader of HTS and kind of the leader of all the rebels at this point, going to be able to keep those extremist factions in line, all of these? Are these extremist factions going to start kind of going off on their own and doing their own thing, and what will that look like? Will they begin to say, you know, Jelani is not implementing the Sharia, and therefore, we have a huge problem with this, and, you know, we're not going to be a part of this anymore. And so I think Jelani is going to have to do a lot of work within his coalition, but also those coalition members can just go off on their own and do things. Like, for instance, if they started spurring sectarian violence or widespread revenge killing, that could put us on a very scary trajectory. Like I talked about, you know, just a little ago.
- [21:29]
Brian Carter
Yeah, I was. I was in a walk. In the early days. There was this euphoria, much like we see on the streets of Damascus and elsewhere in. In Syria, you know, and rightly so. People are excited, they're happy. You also see a sense of nervousness, I think, among. Amongst the crowds. They're a little unsure as to what comes next. But for right now, they're just enjoying the moment. I think that moment doesn't last long. And so I think whether it's Al Jelani or some coalition, he's named a bureaucrat basically to run an interim government, Muhammad Al Bashir. But I look at what happened in Iraq as sort of a case study of what not to do because that went from euphoria to chaos and brutality very quickly.
- [22:17]
Steve Yates
That's exactly right. And that's one of the pieces that I kind of have in my own mind right now too is the Iraq, the Iraq case. And I actually think one of the interesting elements of the Syria case is whereas in Iraq, Saddam is toppled by a US Led military invasion, this is led by a internal uprising, which is important because there's even more euphoria both in the international community and within Syria because people say, hey, the Syrians have overthrown the Assad regime. And everybody, like you said, is rightfully super happy about that. But we do need to keep an eye out for what comes next and be tracking any indicators that this is going to go on a, you know, a scary trajectory just like Iraq did and kind of fall into chaos.
- [23:07]
Brian Carter
Well, listen, last weekend when you were on the Situation Report, you predicted accurately that Assad would topple again. We had no idea with the speed that was going to happen. But look, you know, since you turned out to be the amazing Kreskin, do you have any predictions about Syria and what's going to happen in the short term for this weekend's show?
- [23:27]
Steve Yates
Yeah, I'll try to go 2 for 2 here, but I think 8 and Northeast, that's the area that I'm really looking at. And so one of my predictions would have to be, you know, I think that this, this pattern of Arab defection from the Syrian Democratic Forces, the US Backed group up there, is going to continue regardless of whether or not the Turkish offensive continues. And so I think that will cause significant problems for the US Presence going forward. And so that's, that's kind of my, my prediction of the week.
- [24:00]
Brian Carter
Yeah, let's hope you're right again, man. Listen, Brian, thank you very, very much for coming back. Brian Carter, the Middle East Portfolio manager for the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute. I look forward to the next time you're on the show. Maybe it's next weekend, depending on what happens. Listen, thank you very much for your time, man.
- [24:20]
Steve Yates
Thank you. Always a fun time. Appreciate it. Have a good one.
- [24:22]
Brian Carter
All right, coming up next, China's military, what are they doing well, they're flexing muscles near Taiwan. That's not shocking. I suppose they've been doing that for a little while now, sparking global concern. Rightly so. Senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, Steve Yates, good friend, joins us to analyze what this means for the region and the US Response. Hey, Mike Baker here. Now look, maybe you heard about this, but America just got done with that historical election. Yeah, it was, it was rather historical and I'm sure you have heard about it. Now sure there's going to be some change in the White House. There always is when there's a change in administrations. But the fundamentals haven't changed. And the problem is the dollar is in decline with the US adding. You won't believe this, $100,000 in debt every second. $100,000 in new debt every second. Meanwhile, BRICS nations right have introduced what they call the unit, a new Global currency pegged 40% to gold and 60% to BRICS currencies which could mark the beginning of a global monetary reset. Now what do we do about that? Well, I would suggest you give the proud Americans of the Patriot Gold Group today a call before it's too late. Mention PDP and you'll always get best in class service from Patriots Protecting patriots. Now Patriot Gold Group has the no fee for life IRA where your IRA or 401k can be in physical gold and silver and you may be eligible for the no fee for life IRA on qualifying rollovers. Here's what you do. Call 1-888-870-5457 for a free investor guide. And this is important. Patriot Gold Group is consumer affairs top rated gold IRA dealer for seven years in a row. And I'm here to tell you that's a lot of years IN A. Call 1-888-870-5457 ET.
- [26:16]
Ryan Seacrest
Is Ryan Seacrest here? People always say it's good to unwind, but that's easier said than done. The exception, Cumba Casino. They actually make it easier done than said or at least the same. Cumba Casino is an online social casino with hundreds of casino style games like slots and blackjack. Play for fun, Play for free. For your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Sign up now. Collect your free welcome bonus@chumbacasino.com sponsored by Chumba Casino. No purchase necessary VGW Group void where prohibited by law 18 + terms and conditions apply.
- [26:47]
Brian Carter
Welcome back to the PDP Situation Report. Now in response to Taiwanese President Lighting does recent visits to Hawaii and Guam, China has launched extensive military exercises Around Taiwan, that's fairly standard. Anything, anytime lighting does something that the Chinese regime doesn't like, Xi Jinping throws his teddy out of the crib. These maneuvers involved nearly 100 naval and coast guard vessels, marking one of the largest displays of forces in the last three decades. Now the drill span the Taiwan Strait and extend into the western Pacific, with China imposing temporary airspace restrictions along its southeast coast until December 11. Taiwan's defense ministry has heightened its alert status, establishing an emergency response center and conducting its own combat readiness exercises. The United States has expressed concern. Well, that's good. Urging China to avoid actions that could destabilize regional peace. For more on this, let me bring in senior research fellow for China and National security at the Heritage Foundation's Asia Study Center. And that would be the insightful Steve Yates. Steve, thanks very much for joining us here on THE SITUATION report.
- [27:58]
Steve Yates
Pleasure, Mike. Thanks for having me on.
- [28:00]
Brian Carter
So let's start with a 30,000 foot view on this thing. What is up with the Chinese military and their recent military exercises involving Taiwan?
- [28:11]
Steve Yates
Well, the most recent one involved what we're told is about 90 vessels, which is a pretty significant uptick in total numbers. There's been an uptick in number of kind of encroachments of Taiwan that all seem to fit a pattern of encirclement, trying to demonstrate an ability to have a blockade, whether that is a short term shock or something they'd like to try to do long term. This is a little bit of what people tend to talk about, a gray zone operation that isn't full on attack, destruction of Taiwan and also not just sitting back behind the middle line of the Taiwan Strait and counting their ships. So it's pressure, it's intimidation. It also touches our allies. And you can't have a blockade against Taiwan without encroaching on Japan or the Philippines. And Xi Jinping in his infinite wisdom in recent years has been kind of picking fights with them. So there's a lot in all of this. We often just think of it as it's just China and Taiwan or it's something of the United States. I think whatever's going on with Xi Jinping right now is kind of bigger and in some ways it's harder to try to counter because a lot of our policy habits, we just look at this and say, okay, well, can't the president talk to Xi Jinping or is there something going on in Taiwan we have to address? China's got a lot of capabilities now. We've given them a lot of money, they've Taken a lot of technology and we've been really distracted. So this is not a great set of circumstances coming together in these headlines.
- [29:48]
Brian Carter
Is this working towards an actual takeover in whatever form that is of Taiwan, or is this all about messaging at this point?
- [29:57]
Steve Yates
Well, that's the money question, and we don't really get the luxury of knowing the answer. They're kind of able to go pursue both at the same time. They get a lot of what they would really want, we think, by just pressuring Taiwan and allies in the United States to sort of back off and make a deal and just concede that this area of responsibility is China's jurisdiction. And they push allies and the United States out beyond the first island chain to the Pacific. It impacts an immense amount of global trade, the likes of which I don't think people are really digested. But you don't have a tech juggernaut out of South Korea and a huge amount of economic exchange with Japan without encroaching on the territorial sea and airlines communication around Taiwan. So a lot's at stake. But I think it's really ultimately a pressure campaign and a messaging campaign. But when you're playing with big ticket items like aircraft carriers and things that can go out into deep blue water areas, you have to take it at face value. You can't bank on it just being a comms exercise.
- [31:07]
Brian Carter
You think part of it is the fact that the Chinese military really hasn't been tested for a very long time, and that part of this is an effort to kind of see what their current status is, what their capabilities are.
- [31:22]
Steve Yates
Yeah, I don't think a lot of the world stage has really paid as close attention to China's military modernization as our intelligence community and a lot of specialists in policy areas have. And so it might be news to a lot of people how many big ship platforms they have now. This is kind of one of the dilemmas we've faced. This is a big new material navy that they have. It's untested in combat. China's had a perfect record under the Communist Party of killing other Chinese people. They don't really have much of a track record in modern warfare. I don't think we can afford to be overly hubristic about that. This is a tough challenge, but they should also be a little bit cautious. We've come up across some big navies. When you look at order of battle or armies, when it comes up to order of battle, that doesn't mean they stand up in combat. But I don't think we really want to try to find that out anytime soon.
- [32:27]
Brian Carter
Yeah. Is it true that their ship building capabilities kind of dwarf those of the US?
- [32:33]
Steve Yates
Yeah, but that's one of those areas that's extremely frustrating where I think we've gotten in our own way. I don't understand whether it's overregulation on environmental issues or if it was sort of globalization of supply chains, but America really pulled back from refining of energy and building proper support ports. And when it came to submarines and big vessels, we really pulled back. China jumped way ahead. South Korea's still got some significant capabilities in this area, but we have to figure out how we're going to work with our allies to rejuvenate these supply chains. We should do more in America. Not quite on, off switch. And maybe we ought to consider a novel idea about not transferring immense wealth and technology to a country like China so they can put it into jumping ahead in these kind of areas.
- [33:23]
Brian Carter
Well, I mean, part of that is also, I think, in a way beyond our control, because I would argue that a lot of that transfer has been through economic espionage and theft of intellectual property and research and development, and it's done.
- [33:37]
Steve Yates
So they've, they've, they've, they've received the data, the input, the plans.
- [33:42]
Brian Carter
Yeah. Elvis has left the building. I think so, yeah. This is a tough question. I, it's probably not a fair question even. But if you had to look at a time frame for Taiwan, what would that timeframe look like in terms of a Chinese takeover? Again, no matter what the scenario is, how they do it, whether it's a kinetic war, whether it's a soft takeover. But what do you think that timeline looks like?
- [34:05]
Steve Yates
Part of the answer is just the tough reality that we've lived with this kind of a threat for decades and just the tools for Beijing being able to test us or impose its will or try to do things with Taiwan, their range of options have expanded, their capabilities have gotten bigger and stronger. But really, even going back from the missile exchanges in the 50s and the threat from the Taiwan election in the mid-90s where they had tests and splashdowns, we've lived with this all along. I think that really the main factors are are we doing anything when I say we, anybody that is on the receiving end of the ccp, are we doing anything to increase doubt with inside China? Are we doing anything to increase concern that should they behave irresponsibly, they pay a price that's too high? I mean, when they look at what's happened with Russia relative to the Ukraine conflict. Do they think that they would fare better or worse than Russia has with the threat of sanctions or cut off from the wider West? In certain ways, I think, unfortunately, Beijing probably is more optimistic that they would fare better than Russia has. But if we do better at sowing that doubt and that credible pain to be imposed, I think that we buy more time and deterrence improves. Second variable is Japan. Japan is a much more powerful country.
- [35:36]
Brian Carter
But how do you do that, though, Steve?
- [35:38]
Steve Yates
Well, some of that is a lot of what we have by way of capabilities in cyber and a lot of other operational areas. We have kind of fought with one hand tied behind our back because we only talk about executing things that are defensive. China has no such restriction. It's kind of why they've been able to run roughshod over some of the areas of our critical infrastructure. They've gamed all that out with Taiwan and Japan and others, too. But they don't distinguish between offensive and defensive. They don't distinguish between foreign and domestic. For them, the world is their oyster. They go wherever they can go. And we've basically been an open door on that front and they've closed us off. There hasn't been reciprocity on that, but there is a wide range of things we've never even made them believe we would be willing at able to do in their own country. I think there's some fun tests we could conduct that might send that kind of a message. But really getting our allies more prepared for these kinds of realities and having greater independent capabilities where they don't wait for Uncle Sam, they act on their own, I think that complicates things for Beijing. It doesn't make the world scared that they'll have to live without the US.
- [36:49]
Brian Carter
From a foreign policy perspective, though, national security and strategic intelligence perspective, what do you think? What's your assessment of the incoming administration, the Trump administration?
- [37:03]
Steve Yates
Well, I mean, John Ratcliffe is a friend and he's someone who's been in the intelligence world in multiple ways, but most recently at the office of the Director of National Intelligence, now going to be director of CIA. I think there's some big questions that are sort of a side issue. But just 911 was a long time ago. We lived in different circumstances. I think we put some of these structures in place and priorities in place at a time of crisis. I think it's worth looking at what makes most sense about how to organize the intelligence community resource, the intelligence community all these many years later. I don't think that it has been reformed to look at a world where we say the Communist Party of China is the largest existential external threat to America's way of life. I believe that. I think John Ratcliffe believes that. I think President Trump believes that. Frankly, I think a lot of Americans do and don't think that the topics of recent years of climate change or other kinds of things are the top threat. Leave aside how those should be addressed. But I think people tend to see this this way. If this is a transformational moment for looking at reform and whether Doge is a real thing that's looking at how to find efficiencies and reorder things, then, you know, aside from being Republican, Democrat, blue, red, whatever appears to me from what's being talked about, we're at one of those moments. I think the CIA has frankly been right for something like that for a time. I don't know whether the Office of the Director of National Intelligence plays a forever role or maybe things get reordered there, too. But what are we doing to make sure that we have the technology, personnel, language capabilities and collaborations out in the world that reflect the priority that I articulated? A lot of members of Congress will echo that priority, too. I think that's the heavy burden for the incoming team. I think it's worthy. The time is now, but that's where I think the work is. And I would just emphasize there are many Democrats that I've known over the years that will think this way. It's sort of been the hot politics of recent past where they sort of pulled back from where that emphasis was, was. But the Select Committee on Strategic Competition with the CCP and the House of Representatives was bipartisan. And there are a lot of Democrats who signed up with the thinking that I just articulated. And so I hope that's where it's going. I wish I knew, with the exception.
- [39:38]
Brian Carter
Of perhaps the differences about the utility of tariffs, I think in terms of China as a concern, as a threat, that does seem to be one of those few bipartisan issues. And you'd like to think, like you've said, that we're going to get some forward progress here with the incoming administration on something that's important. Look, Steve, if you'll stay right where you are, don't move, take a quick break, and then we'll be right back. Welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. I'm joined again by senior research fellow at the Heritage foundation and good friend Steve Yates. Steve, we're talking about the perhaps change in view towards China with the incoming Trump administration. And I'd like to kind of keep on that subject a little bit more. You know, obviously, there's been a lot of talk about tariffs. Setting that aside, I'm wondering what you can. What you could say about the level of communication that the Biden administration has had with China, with the Chinese regime's leadership, because you got to keep that channel of communication open in some fashion and how you think that will go with the incoming administration.
- [40:51]
Steve Yates
Oh, Mike. I mean, it's really been an interesting contrast where, if you look at the Biden administration, he had a war breaking out with Russia's re invasion of Ukraine. And President Biden, best I can tell, never talked to Vladimir Putin from the time of the RE invasion forward. And yet there was this other challenge looming on the other side of the world in Asia. And President Biden did have conversations back and forth with Xi Jinping a time or two. There was some in person, some by video conference, et cetera. And so in some ways, this idea that you should keep a channel of communication open wasn't held consistently and wasn't really kind of explained very well through that time, in my estimation. Now, I also think that the content and the quality of the conversation matters much more than how did they talk and how often did they talk. President Trump has his own style of doing these kinds of things, Steve.
- [41:58]
Brian Carter
That's a very diplomatic way to put it.
- [41:59]
Steve Yates
In my lifetime, I can't think of a president elect throwing out there, hey, how about the leader of China come and attend the inauguration? It's a kind of a form of communication that really hasn't existed. And I don't think in a million years that Xi Jinping is going to show up and listen to the brilliant oratory, the best words coming from the Capitol on Inauguration Day. But clearly, Donald Trump is a kind of leader that is going to talk to adversaries and others. I mean, he talked to little rocket man after insulting him for a long time, and then they met and had their conversations. He's clearly, I think, said that his objective is to open these channels of communication to try to lessen tensions and to explore alternative paths to peace and prosperity without necessarily opening with concessions. I can understand that logic. I can also see some things like that playing out. It goes against the grain of what sort of the dominant views had been in past Republican and Democrat administrations. But when you look at a situation like this, does he want to pull Xi Jinping into a conversation and say, you know, you really did a number on me on that Covid business. You lied to my face. And it cost a lot of people a lot of money. And the thanks you're going to get for that are some tariffs for a time. And you know, something near and dear to me, I hope he goes and looks them in the eye and says, hey, you know, we know that you have subsidized the chemical precursors for fentanyl and you've trans shipped these things in a number of ways and hundreds of thousands of Americans have been killed by this. You're going to pay for that. So how are we going to talk about how you're going to pay for that? There's going to be some tariffs, but you know, I lost my own daughter to the fentanyl plague. I want him to make them pay. But is he going to do it in his own way with these tariffs or negotiations? Is he going to invite him in for a talk? It sounds all good. And you get the quiet punch in the private meeting. That does seem to be some of what they have in mind to do. But we're just going to have to see how the results shake out. But I think they have to demand accountability on Covid and fentanyl. I think they're going to have to press on not having the Phase one trade agreement honored. And then once you got them at the table, what are you going to do? What's your offer, Mr. Xi?
- [44:33]
Brian Carter
Yeah, I think those conversations definitely need to be had. Cynical over whether you can have those conversations and in any real fashion change the behavior of the ccp. Certainly with Xi Jinping in charge, it hasn't been the case. But I think you have to have those conversations. And I think the value add with Trump look like his style or not, is that he keeps other leaders on their back foot. Right. He's, he's just unpredictable. Right. In a way that their most leaders aren't comfortable with, including, I would argue, Xi. So I just think that there's, there's a real value there that I don't know whether it's intended or not, whether he's doing it as a psychological ploy to keep other leaders off balance, but doesn't matter because I do believe it works.
- [45:28]
Steve Yates
I've lived and shared that experience that you expressed on the skepticism. And I also can't say whether this is four dimensional chess, which I don't understand, or whether this is one dimensional chess, which I also don't play. But this is, it's clearly something has to be tried differently. And one of the redeeming qualities I've seen in the Trump approach is that he is clearly comfortable in the most uncomfortable situations. And part of what he does to set up negotiations is he's blunt and direct about things that the counterpart might be uncomfortable being raised. Raised. I've worked for presidents before who were not comfortable making those kinds of conversations happen and we didn't necessarily get the movement we wanted. So I kind of support trying this other way and just sit back and measure those results. But we've kind of glided along a path where the economic trends have to change. I think Xi Jinping is forcing some of those changes. He began a process of strategic decoupling before Americans even understood what those words were. And I think that Covid and economics and if you look at investment, some of this changing of supply chains is moving of its own inertia, whether our leaders want it to or not. I want it to, but so, you know, she has to see some of this writing on the wall. I hope Trump's style in opening salvos will move things forward. Every administration comes in with high hopes and people sort of try to feel out where the progress can be had.
- [47:01]
Brian Carter
Another good friend, Steve Fell, Gordon Chang, he's talked with me about this idea that, and he firmly believes it and I, I don't disagree with him at all, is that China is on a war footing with the U.S. the West, and that the U.S. just chooses either to ignore that or doesn't understand it or is naive. What do you think?
- [47:24]
Steve Yates
I agree a lot with Gordon's general analysis of these things. The, the only sort of twist I would put on is it just reminds me of how we saw and talked about the war on terror after 9, 11. It's this idea that a war is declared on us and we can choose whether we saw it or not, but really our only choice is whether and how we're going to respond. I think that basically the Communist Party of China never was planning to be our friend, but it certainly was happy to receive advantage over many years. I think it's been in a low grade economic and political war with us for some time and it's acquired the capability to be in a hot war with us. Whether and how that plays out, I think that whether you look at what happened with COVID whether you look at what's gone on with weird efforts to compromise parts of the United States or so division through psychological apps like TikTok and other kinds of things, you know, they clearly are engaged in what the Communist Party is built around, which is political warfare, ideological warfare above all else, so that you get your opponents to divide and sort of get conquered by themselves. So you don't have to rise up as high to be the top dog. That I think is has been tried and true for them. It's playing out more. And so are they on a war footing? I'd say they always have been to a degree. It's just these different lanes where it's accelerating or getting emphasized more. I think it's a little more shocking to see the military part space, AI and technology really reaching farther and faster now. But the fundamentals really were us deluding ourselves that they thought otherwise during a reform and opening period. And Xi Jinping, I think, is a different leader that way.
- [49:18]
Brian Carter
What can you tell us in the remaining time that we've got? Steve, what can you tell us about the state, the strength of the Chinese economy?
- [49:27]
Steve Yates
Yeah, well, there are more questions than answers when it comes to China's economy. It's always been thus. When I was a very, very young intelligence officer and my job was to kind of assess what was going on in the Chinese economy, some of our sources in government were better than what the private sector had. Now I'd say it's absolutely the reverse. The private sector has a better view into what's happening inside of China in terms of data, but that's still very, very incomplete when it comes to their statistics. I think we fall back on the truism they lie, but we still can sort of see trends. Their property sector has been weak for some time. Their people have significant restrictions on moving capital out of their country. They have significant lack of trust in the viability of their banks. And so they put a lot of their life savings into real estate. And so when people pictures of real estate, high rises crumbling or largely vacant, that's the hopes and dreams of a generation of Chinese workers who haven't been living a lavish lifestyle but were trying to save for retirement or their children's better life, etc. They have some really bad fundamentals inside, but they're at scale very big. And these authoritarian totalitarian regimes like North Korea and, and in some ways we'd rather not admit China, they can stick around a lot longer than we would expect. And in some ways that's more troubling to me. I see a weak and at risk China as maybe even more likely to risk conflict than one that is on the gravy train rocketing up in performance. And so I think in an odd way that's why we're seeing some of what we are with picking fights they didn't need to around their periphery.
- [51:22]
Brian Carter
Yeah, I Think that's really interesting. I mean, you could argue Putin has been sort of a master of that. Whenever he feels in a threatened position, he finds an outside agitator, he finds some boogeyman out there that he can hopefully draw the support of the population and get their minds off of other things. And I think your point is absolutely spot on. That potentially a weak economy, which I think Xi probably fears more than anything, you know, sort of a downward spiral and its impact on the population. I think that could impact the timeline on a potential move to Taiwan.
- [51:59]
Steve Yates
Absolutely. I mean, he's, he basically has said that his, he, he doesn't believe in the reform and opening policies of Deng Xiaoping. He wants the ideology of socialism and the ideological struggle to be first priority because he wants control as the way towards toward stability. He doesn't see openness and growth as a way towards stability. And I think that is really in conflict with what our policy has been, what our assumptions have been. And I think it's leading to a lot of risk around China.
- [52:33]
Brian Carter
Well, Steve, I got a lot more questions. Unfortunately, I don't have any more time, which all that means is you've got to pick up the phone and agree to come back on the show when we call you.
- [52:43]
Steve Yates
You got an open book, Mike? Of course.
- [52:46]
Brian Carter
Fantastic. Listen, thank you, Steve, very much for being here on the Situation Report. Steve Yates, senior research fellow at the Heritage foundation, thank you again joining us today and sharing your insights. Very much appreciated. That right there is all the time that we have for the PDB Situation Report for this weekend. Now, if you have any questions or comments, you know what to do. Reach out to me at PDB at the first tv. The entire PDB production team loves hearing from you, and I mean that sincerely. In fact, what they do is a PDB team. They love to hear from you so much that every month they take a pile of your questions and comments and they smush them together. That's a technical term in TV production. They smush them together into an episode that we call Ask Me Anything. And we've got another one of those coming up very shortly. And of course, to listen to the podcast of this show ad free. Well, that's easy. Easy. Become a premium member of the President's Daily Brief simply by visiting pdpp premium.com. see, I told you it was very easy. I'm Mike Baker, and until next time. Well, you know the drill. Stay informed, stay safe, stay co.