Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast.
Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appocarplay.
And then Rouno with the Bloomberg Business app.
Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Welcome to the Thursday edition of Balance of Power. It's Little Friday, and we pick up in Washington right where we left off yesterday, with big questions about how this is all going to work in the US House when it comes to funding for Ukraine, for Israel and Taiwan. The fourth bill, by the way, did eventually drop. This is the divest Or band TikTok bill. It's got the REPO money and apparently some Iranian sanctions.
The question is will all of this pass?
And it looks like the answer maybe yes, but only with the help of Democrats. The headline on the terminal today Eric Wasson, reporting from Capitol Hill, Ukraine is reelaid on track to pass as Democrats back plan. That's not going to help his standing, most likely with the Freedom Caucus today, but it might get the job done. With questions about his potential to be fired in the middle of all this with a motion to vacate. Now two lawmakers on it. We can get into that as well
with Eric in a moment. But I will point you to another headline. The White House is not waiting US ready's Ukraine package that can be sent when aid bill passes. Bloomberg News also reporting the Biden administration preparing a military aid shipment the minute he signs the bill. So the gears are turning here. It's just a question exactly how all of this is going to end. And Eric Wasson has been in the halls of Congress all day, joins
us right now with the latest on this. Eric, We've got to pass a rule first, Right, this is the hard part for Mike Johnson.
What's the latest?
You know, I just I got to emphasize to the listeners this is really my base case. Is this Ukraine package is going out, is going to pass. I mean, this is really on track here. Democrats are lining up. Of course they're saying we want to see the rules, we want to see the details. But you know, the momentum is here. The die is cast. This fourth build up materialized, does not have poison pills. There's some question about liquid natural gas exports being put in there top
priority for the speaker. He did not put that in there knowing Democrats didn't like it. The stuff that is in there, the TikTok ban very popular in both parties. In fact, they even made it more popular by giving TikTok until after the election to be dealt with. So there's no real chance that, you know, you're gonna have young people streaming to the polls to House politicians for
banning their favorite social media app. I mean, this is really the glide path has really been set, you know, as you said, the real question is too Johnson, you know, face an ouster threat. I just came from extraordinary scrum with Matt Gates and Lauren Bobert, who are irate. There's, you know, some talk among Republicans of trying to defang this motion to vacate to make it more difficult, you know, make sure there's more people have to be on board
to raise this. And they basically told the speaker moments ago on the House floor, if you do that, we're going to pull the motion to vacate right now. We're going to fire this gun before you take it away, you know. So I just think that they're they're very angry with him about that. I think he's going to probably have to back off. But we'll see that's something going on behind the scenes. They might sert us into the rule of the Ukraine bill because it's going to need Democrats anyhow.
So that you just said a lot, Eric, just to unpack a little bit of that. The motion to vacate there was a movement that would require more than one lawmaker, right, that would make it more difficult to fire the speaker. It sounds like that movement might be going down in flames.
Will there be a.
Rule though, Eric, or does the speaker have to suspend rules and use Democrats to pass these?
Now that's going to be a rule vote, you know, It's it's an interesting combination of things. There's Democrats who you know, object to the Israel bill. This is all going to come up under a rule I just think what's going to happen. It's very extraordinary here Democrats and the Rules committee and on the floor are going to
have to vote for it. I know this sounds all very procedural, but basically this is usually shirts and skins type of vote, like the party in charge votes for the rules sets for debate and the plready out of power votes against it. But this has there is precedent for crossing the lines. In May, on the debt ceialing vote, when the US was facing a payment's default, Democrats fifty two of them crossed the line to make sure that
debate could start on that bill. So you know they've done this before, and I think that's where we're headed right now.
There was an attempt to move a border bill through the Rules Committee that.
Did not work out last night.
Eric chip Roy, of course, a Republican from Texas Freedom Caucus and thorn in the side of the speaker, wrote sorry not sorry for opposing a crappy rule that is a show vote cover vote for funding Ukraine instead of border security. Does that mean there will be no border component here or is it up in the air.
Well, you know, there was not going to be a border component. There was going to be a separate vote, and that was really something to sort of like, you know, a distraction. Basically, I think Roy is correct if you're not going to put it in the package, just holding that vote. The House has already passed a border security bill that's dead in the Senate. If it's not attached
to Ukraine, this would be dead as well. So it's something kind of like God, you know, give me And they were like, we're not having any part of that. We're not going to allow to do that. It's interesting the Speaker puts out fact sheets on this Ukraine bill and he mentions border, but if you know what's going on, the border is not part of it.
Lastly, Eric, I just wonder the evolution of the speaker, if you can talk about this. This Ukraine funding has been very controversial. He's been talking about how we need to secure our own border first.
But as words yesterday were powerful.
As he talked to reporters and I think you were standing there, he said, I think he might go to the Balkans next. Referring to Vladimir Putin, he said, I really do believe the intel and the briefings that we've gotten. I believe she Putin and Iran really are an access of evil. I think they're in coordination on it. Did he get an intelligence briefing recently that changed his mind.
He's had a bunch of them, and I've talked to him for you know, several months over this. I think he's been supportive of Ukraine ad. He's just trying to find the right way to do it, to be respectful of his caucus. But at the end of the day, he is a man of principle, a man of strong faith. He's a devout Christian, but also does a man of you know, he's been a defense office as someone who's on the Arm Services Committee, and I think he's made the calculation. You know, he's going to stand by his
principles if he gets ousted. You know, as he said later in that in that press conference, you know, he can't live under the threat of being ousted. It'd be like any of us living on the thread of being fired, constantly panicking about it, worried. You can't really live life like that. So I think he's just decided, you know, he's going to try his bat and if they do ask him, you know, he's had a career, he'll find something else to do.
He's had a career. Eric.
Thank you, Eric Watson live on Capitol Hill. A great reporting. Eric has been a news machine, which is why you see his byline all over the terminal and the website.
When the news breaks, he'll have it for you.
He's been living outside the Speaker's office and great to have him with us here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite, and on YouTube.
I'm Joe Matthew in Washington.
There are questions, of course, about whether the speaker could get fired here, and based on what we just heard from Eric, it's not going to get any more difficult, at least to fire a Speaker of the House.
There was a.
Thought that they might increase the threshold required, but that doesn't appear based on what we just heard from Eric.
To be clearing the Rules committee.
We talked to Congressman Adam Smith about this yesterday, Democrat from Washington about the idea of Democrats coming to potentially save Mike Johnson to either leave the chamber or actually vote for him to be speaker.
He's ready to do that.
Into what he said, I for one will not vote to remove Speaker Johnson, and I know a number of other Democrats feel the same way that I do. There's kind of this KOI little thing back and forth as to whether or not we say that publicly. I tend to be more blunt and straightforward than most members, so
I'm not going to be KOI about it. It doesn't serve the interests of Congress or the country to remove the speaker at this point, and he's carried through with his pledge to not abandon Ukraine, to give us a vote on Ukraine. And as long as he's done that, I'm certainly not going to agree with Marjorie Taylor Green about who the Speaker of the.
House should be.
How about it?
So Democrats are not just lining up to help pass these bills, They're maybe lining up to save his job, which would answer one of the two big questions we have today. Is the Speaker going to get fired for this? And what will happen in the Senate when this legislation set to pass, we're told goes next door. That's what
we want to talk to Bill Holdman about. Senior Vice President of the Bipartisan Policies and worked a career in the Senate before his time across the street from us here in downtown Washington, Bill, it's great to have you back. Is the Senate just ready to pass this thing? Or is jd Vance, Is Rand Paul and others set to slow it down?
No?
I think first of all, if it does pass out of the House, it will be the three bills that will be bundled into one under the rule as we speak. The Rules Committee, as course, is meeting right now to
deliberate the rule for consideration of the three bills. Interestingly enough, normally the Democrats don't vote for the rule, the Democrats on the Rules Committee, but it's my understanding that the census has been worked out on a bipartisan basis, something very unusual these days, of course, but to that extent that the Democrats on the Rules Committee will overcome the
Freedom Caucus votes against reporting it out. Long story short, then that those three bills will be debated individually, and then the rule will allow for those three bills to be bundled up into one and sent to the Senate. And I believe at that particular point there will be more than sixty votes in the United States Senate to pass the bill, whether that's on Sunday night or Monday morning. Literally the House and Senates to be out next week.
But I think the Majority Leader Schumer will keep amensasion to pass this bill. It should have been passed a long time ago.
So we have a working weekend bill.
We've been talking about this for months, with your help, what do you think it is that actually got the gears turning so quickly. Here was just the beginning of this week we were told, hey, this might not be done until June. It's just too complicated. But here we are with the President who's pulling out the pen getting ready to sign this.
Well, I think obviously the rounds missile attack on Israel was a issue that created the impetus to move forward quickly. I also think, to be honest with you, that well, the new Speaker has kind of grown into his job and realizes that the only way in a very divided and very narrow United States House, the only way that we can get anything done and move forward on some of these critical issues is in a biparisan way. And
I think this is real credit to his leadership. Is growing into his leadership that he has moved forward with this approach, which I find an interesting approach. It clearly does have some a small piece of this It is the top It is the same top line ninety five point three billion dollars that was out of the Senate. But there is a small element of that ninety five
point three which is a loane, non recourse loan. In the end of the day and I think that's enough to get it, to get it over the hurdle in the House and over to the Senate quickly.
Well, this is pretty remarkable if Mike Johnson survives this, even if there is or is not a a privileged motion to vacate, If he gets through this, and if he gets this done, is he a made man? Does this actually get him into the woodwork in a way create support a galvanizing moment that he might not have had otherwise, or are we just going to have motion to vacates every week for the rest of this Congress.
Well, as you know, I'm a Senate staffer, a former Senate staffer, not a house I don't know. I think that the clock is clicking down here. We're moving into clearly into the fall elections. I don't think most Republicans want to go through another vacate of the speakers and all that. So I think that he can get over this hurdle. He shows that he has dship capability, that he can negotiate and work it out. I wish that we had moved faster on it, and I think he
probably does too. He's always been a supporter at the end of the day for Ukraine funding. So I think he's had to work with a very difficult caucus, obviously the Freedom Caucus. But I think he's showed him some real smril gumption here in terms of moving forward and standing up and saying the only thing that we can do in this very divided Congress is to have bipartisanship.
And of course, coming from the Bi Parson Policy Center, I respect and admire him for finally getting to that position that that's the only way to govern in a very divided House of Representatives.
I hate pulling you into the lower chamber bill. I know you're better than that.
But I'll ask you lastly, with the Senate in mind, they've been hemming and hawing about this TikTok divestor band bill, and apparently it's going to be on its way to the Senate here, tied to this fourth piece of legislation. Will senators have to just swallow it?
Listen.
I'll be honest with you. I'm not clear that that fourth bill that includes the TikTok and imposing sanctions on Russia, I may be Eric. I missed Eric's comment so and he is great. I comment on Eric Watson. I thought it was a separate I thought that the only three bills that would be buddled into one would be the Foreign Aid of bills. But you may be right. I did not realize that the TikTok bill, if it passes the House, that it would be buddled with the other three.
I thought it was separate apart. But I apologize I don't.
That's quite all right.
The fact of the matter is, we're not exactly sure how that's going to work here, Bill, but it sounds like the Senate has a problem with that legislation. We'll just have to see where the narrative goes from here. It's great to have you back, Bill Hoagland at the Bipartisan Policy Center. Thank you, sir for being with us.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Ken just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Rodo with a Bloomberg business ad.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
I'm Joe Matthew in Washington with an eye on Pennsylvania for a third day. Right, We're on day three. Joe Biden back again. Today's stumping in Pennsylvania, Philadelphia to be exact, and the gosh the tire Kennedy family is with him. Former Congressman Joe Kennedy the third is going to be introducing him today. Of course, he is Joe Biden's special envoy to Northern Ireland, as we told you here on the program when we spoke a couple of weeks ago
in advance of Saint Patrick's day. Today, the President having a pair of campaign events. This is the big one though is the administration. The campaign, i should say, tries to delineate between the Kennedys and RFK Junior Donald Trump. Meanwhile, in court today, jury selection continues and it has been an apps wild series of stories that we'll talk about a little bit later on this hour. It brings me
to the latest research from the Harvard Kennedy School. Remarkable, the Institute of Politics out with its latest poll of young voters. We spend so much time talking about this, specifically with regard to Joe Biden, but we're going to tackle both candidates in this case. In a conversation with John Della Volpi, Harvard Kennedy School, Institute of Politics, director of Polling, John, It's wonderful to have you on Bloomberg. I appreciate your time today and thank you for joining
us today as part of our conversation. You actually found reasons to worry for both candidates, which I'd love to hear about here. But the fact of the matter is Donald Trump. When you look at voters eighteen to twenty nine, which I thought was the sweet spot for a Democrat, Donald Trump is actually eating into Joe Biden's lead.
What did you learn, Well, yes, Joe, I think the lesson from this survey for me is there's a significant mood shift from the beginning to the end of this survey, seismic. I think, you know, for example, there's a real concern that young people have about the state of the nation. Only nine percent say it's on the right track. You know, President Biden's approval ratings are not what he would like
them to be. Let's say it this way. There's concerns about the economy, inflation, costs of living, of course, the wars overseas. Despite that, Despite that, on a two person race between Biden and Trump, when I look at the likeliest of likely voters, we see that Joe Biden has a nineteen point lead, so that nineteen poll lead was larger four years ago, So there is some degree of appealing away some of that lead. But we haven't seen
what a lot of other polls have been producing. We haven't seen a wholesale shift from Democrats, Republicans, or from Biden to Trump in this poll.
I just wonder if this is a conversation for you and I to have right now and for the campaign to sweat over, knowing that young people, assuming they show up, are going to vote for Joe Biden because he is aligned in many cases with their priorities. When he's talking about forgiving student loan debt, when he's talking about bottom up, middle out housing initiatives, and so forth.
What happens in the.
Polls in November can frequently be a disconnected exercise.
What do you think, Well, I think that's right. We need to be listening better in the polling. As I just said it, right, his approval rating, his right track, wrong truck. You could look at those numbers in a vacuum, Joe and say there's no way someone like that could be reelected. Okay, but he is because, as you said, it's about values. And I think as the campaign moves forward, there will be kind of a direct comparison between life, what life was like under Trump, what life was like
under Biden, and what the future looks like. The good news in this poll for all of us, in my opinion, is that there's been a significate shift of attitudes. Young people can see the difference that engagement makes. They can they're more today than there were a couple years. I've seeing the differences between the parties and are as likely to vote at this time as they were in twenty twenty, And as we know, in twenty twenty there was record
turnout among younger people. So I'm cautious optimistic we'll see significant turnout again in November.
Well, that's remarkable and contrarian because I keep hearing that, you know, young people are going to stay in betteror something. The cause for worry for Donald Trump. Here, John, as he sits in the courtroom today, this could get a lot worse if he's convicted. What did you learn about that in your research?
That's right, So you know, and I've said for quite some time that for Democrats to feel good about winning this electoral college, they need they should be around sixty percent with younger people. The way that he gets there very the quickest route actually for Biden to get to sixty percent in our poll is if Trump gets convicted on any in one of these trials. There was roughly an eight to ten point swing based upon that information, so that could be a game changer. This isn't just
about guilty or not guilty for Trump. This is about president or not president for Trump.
Fifty one percent support a permanent cease fire in Gaza. Ten percent of pose at some point between now and November. I think most people agree this conflict in Gaza will end. If Joe Biden can have his fingerprints on a ceasefire or some sort of construct going forward that would invoke peace, does that help him immediately with these voters.
Yeah, more than anything. More than anything, young people want peace. They want peace and security, stability in their lives, and for those people more vulnerable than even themselves around the world. This poll clearly shows that young people sympathize not just with one side, but with both sides. With a sympathy lies with the Palestinian people, and sympathy also lies with the Israeli people, not necessarily where their leaders or were
their governments. If Joe Biden can help architect an end to this war, create a pathway to a state solution, that could be one of those moments again, Joe, right when we're talking about going from the mid fifties to sixty percent, that easily could do that.
John, it's great to have you back.
I'd love to stay in touch with you over the course of this campaign on your youth poll, but your other research as well. Your insights are important to us. John Delavolfi, Harvard Kennedy School, Institute of Politics, Director of Polling. Great to see you here on Balance of Power. Want to hear some insights on the research here from Bloomberg Politics contributor Rick Davis. Of course, no stranger to polling and bringing us a slightly different view here as our Republican strategist.
Rick, how do you interpret the.
Numbers here because it looks like there are causes for concern on both sides.
Yeah, there's no question that in this you know poll at Harvard, it shows what some of the other surveys, including the Bloomberg survey of swing states, have shown, which is, you know, byen underperforming his twenty twenty levels with young people, and you know, presso Volpi nailed it. He needs another ten percent to be able to build off of the same winning coalition that he had before, and there are ways in this survey.
To do that.
Although I would say the sort of blinking yellow light is on intensity, and this survey and others that I've seen indicate that there is just a you know, slightly less intense vote, especially in certain demographics, and in this case in the Harvard Pole may actually hurt Trump. He is much more popular with those who say they're least likely to turn.
Out to vote.
But at the end of the day, Democrats have going to have their hands full to try and turn out the voters that are for Biden who might have issues with any list of many things that they were talking about. I mean the student debt relief I thought was fascinating. There are fewer people who think of Joe Biden as
being positive on debt relief. I think, like thirty three percent in this poll, and then he had a higher job approval than that, So like, people aren't giving him as high a positive on his job approval related to student debt as they are overall, which I was stunned by.
Only nine percent trick of young Americans think that our country is headed in the right direction.
Yeah. That's pretty terrible, isn't it? Out number?
Yeah? I agree, I mean about the normal fifty eight percent in that poll indicated that they thought it was on the wrong track. But nine percent is less than half of that number from the same period of time in twenty and twenty twenty two. And so one of the things that I think is a major theme of this survey is how these young people, especially the eighteen to twenty four year olds, think about their institutions of government.
And it's less positive than it's ever been. And so I do think this is a more generic issue, less to do with the horse race of Biden versus Trump.
Yeah, honestly, I mentioned it for that very reason. I don't even know how that breaks. I suppose it doesn't health the incumbent. But to think that people eighteen to twenty nine in this country think that overwhelmingly that we are going in the wrong direction really says a lot to us right now, Rick, and I wonder how much it has to do with just the noise we talk so much today every day on this program of about division, about chaos or is it their their own lifestyle, their feeling of security.
What do you chalk it up to?
You know, I think you got it. Also can consider the historical perspective. I mean, think about these people. They have come to age politically, you know, with massive economic dislocation, you know, global pandemics that such shut down governments and private sector for years at a time, education systems where they didn't attend their own graduations from college because of COVID.
I mean, like you think about their perspective, and and they have to be wary, right, they have not gotten a particularly fair shake, you know, through their teenage years and now they're you know, in their voting age level, and they have a lot of skepticism. They've been disappointed time and time again, probably more so than any generation outside of the you know, World War two generation that had to you know, deal with a world war and
a depression all at the same time. This group is not far off from that.
This is why I wanted to talk to Rick Davis about the poll. Thank you, Rick.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast.
Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on EPO, car Play and then Frounoto with the Bloomberg Business app, listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Welcome back, or we're taking you live inside the happenings in Washington on Bloomberg Television and Radio. Certainly, Joe, it has been a doozy of the last couple of days. We've gone from not being sure whether or not Ukraine ad whatever reached the House floor to knowing that it's going to come in tandem with a B eight for Israel Taiwan and a so called sidecar bill that will include the TikTok divestit shirts, issue repo, frozen Russian assets,
also with Ron sanctions. All of this then going to get mashed together and sent over to the Senate.
That was all off the top of her head.
That's very good, I think introducing more jargon sidecar Come on, stop, guys, everyone's having a hard enough time. I'm following along with Senator Tom Tillis who said I don't care how the sausage is made.
Some people do care how it's made.
And the Republican conference in the House included the Freedom Caucus specifically not happy about this, and that's why it's been jammed up in the rules making process. This is how it goes in Washington, where you want to talk about the sausage being made. We probably won't see an actual vote on the real bill until Saturday. Jonathan Tamari from Bloomberg Government joins us now after an attempt to pass a rule on the so called sidecar failed last night.
Jonathan the line from the sorry not sorry statement from Chip Roy, Republican on the Rules committee. He said, sorry for opposing a crappy rule that is a show vote cover vote for funding Ukraine instead of border security. There was an attempt to fold the border into this. I don't know if that's going to survive the process here, Jonathan, we don't know if there even will be a rule.
What can you tell us?
Yeah, it seems very unlikely at this moment at the border policies are going to survive or are going to be part of anything that can actually pass the House because this is going to require Democratic votes. They're strongly opposed to what Republicans want to do on the border.
And remember in their mind, the Democrats reached out and made compromises back in February to do a deal that would include foreign aid and border security, and Speaker Johnson rejected that they're looking for a clean foreign aid bill here with some of these sidecar provisions that you mentioned, but nothing that goes as far as the border does.
So obviously, those like Chip Roy are not all too pleased with this. It's just a question of how many are not pleased enough that they could potentially move to oust the speaker. Jonathan Joe and I were just talking about the idea that you may have Democrats coming to save the day. But we also woke up this morning to murmurs around this idea that they may actually just change the rules so that it's no longer one individual
member who can bring a motion to vacate. That seems though, that it died a very very quick death right.
It appears to be. There's been it's been very murky. It's been back and forth all morning. But Speaker Johnson was in a heated discussion with some of the more far right members of his conference on the House floor this morning. They seem to think that the idea has been dropped. Some of them said that listen, if you change the rules for the motion to vacate, it will trigger a motion to vacate, So it's almost like a you know, heads, we win, tails, you lose situation. There.
It does seem like that's falling by the wayside. But as if you could tell from my discussions, your discussions, it's been a very fluid and fast moving situation and it's still evolving right now.
Well, it sure sounds like it if we cut to the chase.
Though it's sometimes so hard to cut through the noise, Jonathan, you're very good at doing that. Our analysts on this broadcast have said that these bills, the three spending bills specifically, could attract three hundred or more votes that they will pass. I know there are concerns about the way things get stick together in this Frankenstein strategy, but do you see that being the case when we get to Saturday, we're going to talk about bills passing the House of Representatives.
I think, so, you know, it's sure these are issues that have support from the vast majority of Democrats and probably a significant majority of Republicans as well. It's only the process and the procedures that have allowed a small faction of Republicans to really jam up the works until now. And Speaker Johnson's own reluctance to actually go ahead and put these things on the floor. But once the Speaker decides to put it up for a vote, there is
a significant majority in the House. I believe that we'll support these things. There might be different coalitions. You might see some people defect on Ukraine, more Republicans defect on Ukraine, some more Democrats defect on Israel. But I think taken together, you'll see a significant majority of the House get this done by the end of the week.
All right, going to be a working weekend in all likelihood. For Jonathan Tomari, who covers Congress, Bloomberg Government, thank you so much for working hard today as well in joining us here on Bloomberg Television and Radio. And Joe like we've spoken into existence almost just by raising the question of changing the rules on the motion to vacate. Congressman Dusty Johnson, a Republican, just posted a video on x the platform formerly known as Twitter. Enough is enough, The
motion to vacate is a waste of time. We need to change the rules. He says. He's working with a group to change those rules on the motion to boot out a speaker, So maybe the effort isn't all too dead. It's just coming from outside the leadership ranks.
Well, and of course that's chair of the main Street Republican Caucus, right, so he's going to have that establishment view that might not be shared by folks like Marjorie Taylor Green and Tom Massey and some others who were the instigators here, but pretty remarkable. I think that we're our mission today is to cut through the drama because there's a lot. We could write tabloids all day to day.
We could tmz this thing for the rest of the afternoon, but there does seem to be a prize at the end of the road here come Saturday, whether you're talking about allies in Ukraine or in Israel, Kyley, Which is why this next conversation is so important.
Yeah, against the domestic political backdrop is a very real and potentially dangerous geopolitical one. Is there a hot conflicts all around the world, on the continent of Europe and of course in the Middle East. And that is where we begin our conversation now with retired General Ken mackenzie. He is executive director of the University of South Florida's Global and National Security Institute, but also former US Central Command Commander General, thank you so much for joining us
here on Bloomberg Television and Radio. You recently penned an op ed in the Wall Street Journal about how you viewed the attack we saw last weekend, Aron sending hundreds of drones and missiles in Israel's direction. You say that was a show of weakness. What does Israel need to do to not show weakness in return in its response that is still calibrated to not escalate this conflict any further.
Well, first of all, thanks for having me on today. I believe that one of the hardest things you can do is translate an operational victory into strategic success, and that's the challenge ahead of Israel. Look, Iran is weakened in every way by this attack. They're more cut off from people in the region, more cut off internationally, and they have reason to now look at their own offensive capabilities with some concern. So they face their own set
of problems. Israel's set of problems, though, is really not so much the technical military aspect of it, which worked quite well over the weekend, but rather how to maintain this alliance structure, this collective security approach that was so profitable for them and they need to do that while still considering whether they or not they're going to strike back at Iran. And I think that's the big question.
How where in the scope of that potential attack. That's the big question that lies ahead of Israel right now, and they need to think strategically as they come to a conclusion.
Where the US support comes into play.
General is what I'd love to hear you speak to We're talking about sixty billion dollars plus being invested in hardware for Ukraine. We know that Ukraine has ammunition shortages. You know that every shell at this point matters. Israel is in a very different situation. What does it need that this fourteen billion dollars can buy?
Well, I think the main thing Israel is going to need is continued supply of interceptors, all the systems, the defensive systems that we saw employed over the weekend, because I'll tell you we fired a lot of air to air missiles shooting down those drones, and we and our partners fired a lot of surface to air missiles and anti ballistic missiles bringing down those other platforms that were inbound.
So they're going to need constant replenishment of that you know, the good side of the weekend's attack is we successfully defended Israel. The bad side is, frankly, you're on the wrong side of the cost and position curve. It's easier to build the drones, missiles and land attack cruise missiles than cheaper, I should say, than it is to build the systems that are the Israel So you're on the wrong side of that, but we're going to need to continue it into the future.
I think, well, okay, so you're saying basically that what all Iron needs to do is do the cheaper thing were is. It's much more costly for Israel to do what they need to do defensively. So I guess it raises the wider question general of how we may need
to rethink what it is that deters Iran. Is Iran likely to change its behavior as a result of this attack that sure they called successful, but as we know, largely was not, as most of this incoming missile and drone to Israel was intercepted, as you've been talking about. So is Iran likely to be more dangerous now or less dangerous now? I guess is the question? And then how do you deter that level of danger?
Sure.
So let me back up a step and say why did I Ran launch this attack. They launched this attack because over the past many months they've been consistently out fought by Israel in this shadow war, this dialogue of targets that's gone on, culminating in the one April attack on Iranian leaders in Damascus. So I think what Iran felt, they were in a corner. They were on the wrong
side of this equation. And so what they try to do take a page out of the Russian playbook what we call escalate to de escalate, do something profoundly aggressive that makes your opponents rock back on their heels and realize that maybe the game getting too rich for them. Here's the problem, though, Russia uses this because Russia has vast resources, including nuclear capabilities. Iran tried it, but their
attempt was found to be hollow. It was unsuccessful. So Iran is in a markedly weaker strategic position today than they were last week. Because at the bottom line, the most important priority for Iran is preservation of the theocratic regime that runs the country, and they have viewed their ballistic missiles, drones and land attack cruise missiles as the principal thing that deters others from attacking them. So that capability now been tested and it has failed. So Iran's
in a very difficult position. Even as Israel phases difficult choices, the harder choices are Iran's because something they viewed as very powerful has been exposed.
General, we'd like to ask you about a couple of things beyond Israel, including your time as commander of US Central Command, in which you helped to oversee the withdrawal from Afghanistan. You testified recently on Capitol Hill about this. I would love for our viewers and listeners to get a sense of what you said, and we'll have you respond on the other side. Let's go back to that hearing on Capitol Hill.
Here's the General.
Having a plan is one thing.
Preparing the plan, vetting the plan, coordinating the plan with the people that are going to actually carry you out the Department of Defense, that's another set of tasks completely.
And that was too little, too late.
Was my judgment that it was far too little, far too late.
Speaking with Chairman McCall there just a couple of weeks ago on Capitol Hill. General, I'm bringing this up because this is going to be an issue on the campaign trail, something that we're covering very closely here as we enter the general election cycle. And I wonder if you agree that Joe Biden should be judged by this.
Well, the presidence of the Commander in chief, he makes ultimate decisions for the military of the United States. He made the ultimate decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, and that decision was executed by US. I believe that part of the decision called for trying to keep an embassy platform en Kabo after we've withdrawn our military forces, and we also chose not to bring out our citizens and at
risk Afghans as we pulled our military forces out. So you get to the middle of August, we predicted the government of Afghanistan's falling. You've got the embassy at risk, you've got our citizens at risk, and you've got these tens of thousands of Afghans that you want to bring out. Unfortunately, you're not positioned to do that, so you have to react. You have to go back in, establish a very tenuous but ultimately effective defense of Harmed Karzi International Airfield and
get people out. And that was a difficult, dangerous operation and it involved that large element of tragedy. Thirteen brave Americans died trying to conduct that operation. That weighs very heavily on me, and it will weigh heavily on me for the rest of my life.
Well, I understand that, General, and I appreciate your sharing that did you give the president advice that he did not take?
So, as you know, we prefer not to actually talk directly about that. I think my opinion at the time was leaving completely was a mistake. Uh And I've been pretty open about that ever since my views were heard. Present made a decision, and he is actually decision maker. He gets to make that call, and my opinion then my opinion now remains the same. We would have been wiser to keep a small residual force in Afghanistan. Uh and I stand by that.
Today, General, we just have a minute left with you. But Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor today that the political reality is, if you think the fall off Afghanistan was bad, the fall of a European capital city like Kiev to Russian troops will be unimaginably worse. And I wonder if you agree with that characterization, Sir, Given what you've already seen.
Well. My position would be that I think the fall of Kiev would be disastrous for NATO, It would be disastrous for our credibility and the credibility of the North Atlantic Treaty organization, and it would probably prompt further aggressive moves from Vladimir put.
General, we thank you for the time. We would love to have you back.
Retired General Ken McKenzie, retired four star, also former commander US Central Command. We also want to note his forthcoming book, The Melting Point, High Command and War in the twenty first Century.
Congratulations on the book. General, come and talk to us again on Balancing Power.
Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.