Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just 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 Friday edition of Balance of Power. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington, d C. With a lot to cover this hour, and we begin with the death of Alexi NAVONNEI forty seven years old. The story that we're hearing from the Federal Prison Service is like something out of a bad movie. Out with a statement said, Navalney felt unwell after a walk on Friday. He lost consciousness and ambulance arrived. They tried to rehabilitate him, it says,
but he died. Now remembering back in December, friends and family lost track of him. He later emerged in a remote Arctic prison camp. As I said, it's like something out of a bad movie. We are waiting to hear now from President Biden. This is a late add to the schedule. He was set to begin speaking three minutes ago high noon from the White House. Knowing that President Biden has a trip to Ohio today. He's on his way to East Palestine, where we also expect remarks later on.
But when he speaks to this issue of Navalney will bring it to you live here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite and on YouTube, and with us here in studio to get things started is Nick Wahams, who of course runs our national security team here at Bloomberg.
It's good to see you.
I know you've been very busy on this and it's obviously a deeply troubling story. I just wonder the political ramifications here in the US. Joe Biden is about to seize on this. What do you think we hear from him?
Well, it'll be very interesting because you know, it was President Biden who had said some months ago that if Alexin have only died in Russian custody, the consequences for Vladimir Putin would be quote unquote devastating. So you know, who knows what that will mean if it's sanctions. Sanctions have not devastated Russia so far, so, but he's going to have to do something. The big question for me
is what does this do for Ukraine aid? I mean, this military AID has been tied up sixty billion dollars in Congress. Obviously, the condemnations from all sides coming fast and furious right now. So does this pry loose or add to pressure to House Republicans to unlock that aid?
Is it too early to answer that.
We saw a statement from a Speaker of the House who has said that this Ukraine and Israel Taiwan funding bill is doa We've been through this before, a very stern statement calling putin a dictator in his written statement. At least does this move the needle in the House?
You know, The question is whether it will really add to the pressure. I mean, the issue for Johnson is that he has stated so much of his reputation now on making sure this bill does not go through. I mean, we are seeing some other stuff that's going to be just as troubling. Russian forces making advances on some Ukrainian towns, one in particular, where essentially it's all come down to munitions.
The Russian dominance on artillery shells has meant that it really has the advantage and is able to press and take back some territory from Ukraine that it had previously seized, and then lost, so you know, you are starting to see a real impact on the ground as well as a result of the US not being able to send that funding. So pressure is mounting on Speaker Johnson.
Give us your view on Vladimir Putin right now. You just mentioned a couple of important points, and I'll add to them. We have this news of a hypersonic missile being used in Ukraine for the first time. This week, we spent a lot of time talking about space nukes, even though that's not really what they are. We had his sort of tongue in cheek endorsement of Joe Biden. Is he feeling emboldened by the lack of action here in the US?
Well, I mean certainly this plays right to his strength. So anytime there's division in the US, that's something he seeks to exploit. So the you know, quote unquote endorsement of Joe Biden just is just a perfect example of a way in which he's trying to sort of stir the pot in the US. I mean, there are a couple of things happening here that are really interesting, the
satellite thing, for example, the nukes. I mean, that was a leak from a member of Congress that was designed to put pressure on various people for all sorts of other reasons. So there is an element of a snowball where you have Putin doing certain things, but then the fervor in Washington gets to be particularly spikey, so then more comes in and it's just like Russia, Russia, Russia all the time. I mean, not to quote Donald Trumper.
Yeah, that's the way he operates, though to your point, he knows when to seize the moment. It's not a coincidence that Tucker Carlson showed up for a big interview to run on the US right right, you know.
I think what you're seeing too is he wants to be in the center of the I mean it's almost like there's no such thing as bad publicity for Vladimir Putin. The Navalni thing is really interesting. I mean, you can't say that this was not what Russia actually intended. He had been put in successively worse and worse and worse prison conditions. I mean, based on the dispatches we had heard from him and his lawyers, I mean, he was essentially, you know, in extremely poor health, in an awful situation.
And obviously President Biden had thought this might be coming, saying, you know, the consequences would be devastating. So again, all eyes on the president right now.
Well, we'll be of course listening closely when he speaks, and we'll bring as I mentioned, President Biden's remarks to you here on a Bloomberg radio and on YouTube. Nick Wadham's great to see you. Thank you so much as always for jumping on breaking news and helping us understand what's happening in many cases on the other side of the world. I want to add the voice of Terry Haynes, who was out with some interesting thoughts on this earlier today,
of course, the founder of Pangea Policy. You've got a lot to talk about today with Terry. It's good to see you, sir. Uh This, based on what I'm reading from your note to clients earlier today, does not do much for the debate surrounding Ukraine funding here in Washington.
What's your take, Oh, I think it was that those notes were to you. By the way, Number one, you're my client. I haven't written the clients today about this, and a good thing because as you pointed out, the world's very fast moving right now. Uh So, anything I would say is probably out of date. An hour later, I don't think Navalni has much much of anything to do with the debate, sadly, and you know, as Nick pointed out, Uh, you know, you could almost assume a
Navalni demise. I'm very sorry to say, but you know, the and the United States gets into trouble when it starts, uh moving foreign policy chips around based on the death or murder of one person in particular, whether it's Navalny or Jamal Kashogi for another example. You know, where all of a sudden, study Arabia was a pariah, and then then we were fist bumping, and now then we were working on Middle East peaks and now I'm not entirely sure what we're doing. But you know, but it goes
back and forth and sideways. I don't think it has much of an effect. I think the Russian space nuke thing, I'll call it may well, but there are too many variables right now, so we really don't know.
Well we don't, although there is I guess a new bill, a Plan D as they're calling it in the House right now, that does take a slightly different approach to funding through the eyes at least of House Republicans more palatable terry. Does it give you the sense when you see something immerged like this, that there, in fact will be a debate and an eventual compromise.
Yeah, I think so. Let me just put it this way. You know, Washington, you know, particularly where you're sitting right now, in the restaurants in the immediate area, are full of people all talking about process, why process is so difficult, why process is not going to make this happen. While process is, you know, is the friend of those who
want to stop Ukraine Aid. My response is simply, you've got a situation where three quarters of the House wants Ukraine Aid in addition to the Senate, in addition to the President. So there's that number one. Number two, what you see in the in the bipartisan problem solvers bill that's out today is really what the House should have been doing anyway last week, which is saying, okay, well we don't you know, we're not completely in favor of your bill, but you know, let's go to conference and
you know, get more of what we want. You know, there's an awful lot of political and policy cowardice going on on both sides of the Island in both houses, where people just don't want to stand up and say, Okay, we're going to work this process through and we're going to get most of what we want. They'd rather not get anything or be purer than get most of what
they want. What Brian Fitzpatrick and the others are saying is no, we're going to move forward here and we're going to try to put our shoulders to the wheel and try to make this happen. I think there's an awful lot of pressure even though you've got Republicans against Ukraine Eate on the right, you've got left Democrats against
certain parts of the Israeli aid package. I think there's going to be an awful lot of pressure from the rank and file and the centrists here to make something happen, which is fundamentally why I think something does.
Fascinating.
A couple of things I want to ask you about this, including how the President seizes on the moment he's going to try to leverage this news I assume to move Ukraine funding. Are we in for another dangerous world speech? What's coming from the White House today?
Oh?
I imagine? So, yeah, We're in for a dangerous world speech, and we're in we're in UH, and I'm sorry to say, for another I call on the Congress to do their jobs UH speech. What's left out of that, of course, is UH is Biden's willingness to actually jump out there and do whatever he can to make that happen.
Uh.
He's got very little ability to do that, by and large because he doesn't really have any political capital to use. You know, a president that has shown himself I say this not in a partisan sense, just in a keen political observer sense. A president has shown himself an octor his progressive wing for the last three years.
You know.
One of the things that tells you is he doesn't have the ability to move his Democrats very much.
UH.
And in fact, one thing I always point out is, UH successes in Congress have existed, particularly with the Inflation Reduction Act, have existed in particular because Biden's been told to stay away from it by Democratic Leader Schumer. That happened with the IRA, it happened with infrastructure. You notice the lack of white House in direct involvement in what the Senate did on the Ukraine Bill. As part of that, they white House was informed of Schumer's course of action
wasn't asked for it. So what you have here is a situation where you know Biden's going to urge the Congress to do something and then go back in and do whatever else is next on his schedule. But you know, if they want this, they need to pull out all the stops to make it happen. If they don't, the conclusion that Congress draws the people that have the votes is that Biden doesn't really care about it very much.
So he's going to have to start to care if he's going to if he's going to actually make something happen.
I want to talk to you about government funding, specifically defense spending at terry, But first, what should be done about this the Valney story. I know you're not a military analyst or specializing in national security necessarily with this President did promise I believe devastating consequences if this happened for Vladimir Putin or could we be in for another announcement today?
I don't see what Thanks for the frame there, but I don't see what they can do that will change the narrative. In particular, you know, the you know the best thing he could do is put a shoulder the
wheel and get Ukraine aid done. The best thing he could do is to figure out some aggressive course on you know what again we'll call the Russian space nuke issue, although you accurately point out it's not really that, but you know, do some do something about that, because that's going to be another issue where if he doesn't do something and show that he's doing something, you know that the passivity on that issue might well trap him.
So think about everything that we've talked about so far, Terry Haynes. You connect the dots on all of this stuff, and I wonder what it means for the argument over funding the government, specifically the Pentagon. This is going to make a cr or a minibus even less palatable to hawks in the House want it. What's going to happen when lawmakers come back? Do you think we're shutting down in March?
Well, firstly, I give great credit to Bloomberg hosts, particularly you for not laughing when you were interviewing a member of the House Republican leadership yesterday. That was good of you your profession, but.
It is it is so you're laughing, is what you're saying?
Well, it's you know it is la it's laughable. I'm sorry to say. You know, Emmer was doing the best he could but at this but you know, when you're going away and you've got three days to come back and finalize some sort of a deal for all the all the funding priorities, and what you've seen in the last six months is every time they go away, exactly nothing happens. What that adds up to this time is
another nothing's going to happen. So Johnston's going to be caught again with a situation where you know, Emmer can say what he likes, but a situation where there's going
to be another extension of funding. Firstly, Secondly, I would say underneath that there's probably going to be a revision of and a relook at what the defense funding is going to be because you'll recall Congress already in the last fiscal year basically told Biden know that however much money you want for defense isn't enough, and they added
on another three percent. You're likely to see that between Ukraine Ofney, the Russian space nuke issue, you know, you're likely to see all that go on to really pump it up even more.
Well, March is going to be interesting. I just want you to know, Terry, we officially have the countdown clock up. While you were speaking, the countdown to the show Down as officially underway. I've been looking forward to seeing you, Terry. Thanks for joining. He's the founder of Pangaea Policy with the Insider's View today in Washington, an important one for us.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then.
Roud Oro with the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa Play. Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are with us Bloomberg Politics contributors. This is a late addition to the schedule here did Joe Biden say enough? Having promised devastating consequences if this were to happen.
You know, I think we do need to know. Obviously, we just got the news that he passed away earlier today, and they're still waiting to confirm it. As the President said, if it's to be believed, he has no reason not to believe it. But they do need confirmation, and then I think they need to be very clear on how they are going to respond, considering he did promise to
respond forcefully. I was a little bit surprised that he did not take the opportunity to call out by name those people in the House who are holding up this funding and to make clear that there is a way in which he is going to be active in pushing for this and you know, to make those stakes very clear.
That said, I think you know the idea that he took questions after his last go around with the press, I was also surprised, and he seemed to handle those very well, and they were on a variety of topics.
He had a couple of stumbles there when he was trying to check himself Rick, But how did he perform and did he say enough about how to handle Vladimir Putin?
Yeah, hey, fine.
I mean for an eighty two year old president, he knocked it out of the park, you know what I mean. The bottom line is he should have announced some kind of sanctions against the Russian leadership for their complicity in the death of Alexei Navalny. It's outrageous after all that's been said and done, that we're still quote taking under consideration. We know what the different things are that we can
do with Russia. We've been talking about for years and years and years, literally almost since Vladimir Putin got in to office. We've been planning sanctions. It doesn't take ten seconds to put a bunch on a list and say this is what we're going to do as of today because of the murder of Alexi Navalny. And so another sort of weak response that's not actually going to get any momentum in Congress because the people who care about this are already outraged, and probably more outraged than President
Biden just discussed. I think it's great that he made the statement, but it was another weak attempt at trying to sable rattle rather than drive a saber into the Russian leap. I would also say just one point of outrage. You know, we've all been talking about Tucker Carlson's trip to Moscow, his very placid interview with Putin, But like today, he was in Dubai at a conference and said, in relationship to the death of Alexi Navalni that leadership requires killing people.
Well, if this is not the most.
Outrageous thing for American to say in a public forum, I can't imagine why, and anybody who would give a forum to this person who has these kinds of views should be condemned at first.
Blush.
So sorry to rattle on on this, but pretty emotional day for those of us who care about freedom.
Yeah, well, you know that would be Elon Musk of course, harboring and hosting that program on X and I did see that remark Rick. It was incredible, particularly Genie, when you consider the way that Tucker Carlson appear to him been used by Vladimir Putin to spread a message to the West.
Absolutely right, you know, unconscionable that he would say that. I do have to say I do support the president coming out forcefully on sanctions or other actions, but I also think the United States government, the president has got to wait until they are confirmed, and they have confirmed that he is in fact dead, and as you hear the President saying, if then that means they shouldn't announce
what they're gonna do. But on Tucker Carlson, absolutely we heard the EU come back even prior to those statements, given his interview with Vlatimir Putin, and say that they may institute a travel ban. You know, obviously he has free speech rights to say what he wants. But private organizations and organizations sponsoring this type of talk, they should take action.
You know.
Boycotts and other things by the you know, by people are absolutely acceptable, you know. An the other thing I think that we need to be very clear on is the President I believe should have taken more forcefully and said everybody wishing you know, good wishes for Navoni's widow
and his family, and you know, condemning his death. They have got to follow that, specifically the members of the House, with action on supporting Ukraine, which is why he went back in twenty twenty to change his government, and he really was very forceful on the incursion into Ukraine. And so that type of talk should be followed by action.
Otherwise it's hip critical President speaking to the need to fund Ukraine, Rick saying the clock is ticking. We expected that he would use this as an opportunity to kind of underscore the urgency of the matter. But I find it interesting here we've got a new bill in the House. This is the Plan D Bill, as some are calling it, forty eight billion in in new aid for Ukraine billions
more for Israel and Indo pack. It comes out though, to sixty six billion dollars in defense only support as opposed to more than one hundred billion passed in the Senate. Is this maybe something that could get traction in the House or are we turning away from this.
Now?
I mean, I don't think it's going to get any more traction than anything else has.
The reality is, you've got three.
Hundred votes for the Senate bill, at least in the House of Representatives, and it's all about leadership and whether or not the Speaker is going to go forward, you know, with giving Congress a chance to vote on this, or whether or not the Democrats are going to be able to post.
Their own bill.
The reality is anything else is just a distraction, you know, from this, and the idea that at this late stage that now someone is going to stick a border proposal on top of a defense only bill is just, you know, sort of a.
Flash in the pan.
The Stay in Mexico treaty requires Mexico to say yes to that, and I doubt if the Congressman has made any phone calls to Mexico City to line up their support. So I mean again, just one more example of incompetent leadership in the house.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on.
Apple car Play and then Proud with the Bloomberg Business app.
Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Joe Matthew and Kayley Lines live in Washington, but a lot of the attention has instead been across the Atlantic today, Joe, after we woke up to news this morning reports of the death of Russian dissident most vocal opponent to Vladimir Putin in Russia, Alexi Navolney. And it's news that just happened to coincide with the Munich Security Conference, in which a number of Western leaders are gathered to discuss threats from Russia. On the issue of it for Ukraine.
Yeah, we caught up with Senor Ben Cardon and we're going to speak soon with an important voice, Jeremy Bash at the conference. The timing here is peculiar and important, frankly, Kayley, because lawmakers including Hakim Jeffreys, Republicans like Michael McCall are hearing from European leaders about the lack of funding.
For Ukraine, including as well Senator Ben Cardin's Democrat Democrat from Maryland who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Senate. He joined Bloomberg earlier today. Take a listen to what he said.
Well, this is a tragic event. Mister Putin is fully responsible for Miss Novulti's apparent death. It is absolutely tragic. The Vice President spoke here at the Munich Security Conference, Vice President Harris and repeated that there will be consequences. Mister Putin's actions are just against all humanity.
Ben Cardon with us earlier today on Bloomberg as we bring you back to the Munich Security Conference right now. As I mentioned, Jeremy bash is with us now at Beacon Global Strategies. That spent a career in national security with two very important roles, chief of staff for the Director of the CIA and chief of staff for the Secretary of Defense. They were both Leon Panetta, who we're going to be speaking with later on today in the late edition of Balance of Power. It's great to have
you with us, sir. I'm curious to hear what you're hearing in Munich on this news of Alexi Navolney's death.
Well, great to be with you.
It's a somber day here because at this gathering of Western allies, where America's principal partners for global security gather annually here at the historic Byershoff Hotel, Normally it's a moment where the allies can stand shoulder to shoulder and feel resolute against the threats coming from Russia, coming from China, coming from other autocrats. But today, of course, the conference was rocked by the news that Alexi Navalni was murdered.
Putin murdered by the Kremlin. Of course, Navalni was the most prominent outspoken critic of Putin and Putinism, and it really, I think, put the spotlight right back on the US Congress, which at this hour is considering whether to fund defensive systems for Ukraine, and the world is watching. The world is watching whether or not the United States will act in defense of Ukraine. You know who else is watching.
China's watching. They want to see and understand whether or not Washington can stand by its allies and partners as they think about their next moves in the Indo Pacific. So this is a very consequential moment. I think the Vice President Vice President Harris and President Biden today delivered a very strong and effective rebuke to the Kremlin and warned our adversaries that their will be consequences.
And as you say, Jeremy, I'm sure adversaries are paying close attention to the way the US moves forward here, but our allies surely are as well, especially in light of remarks from former President and Donald Trump within the last week suggesting that if he were president again, he may not come to the defense of NATO allies who
he doesn't think are paying enough into the alliance. How much concern or fear do you sense among European partners that are gathered there about what may happen under a future Trump administration.
There is a tremendous amount of concern here among our allies, those allies who have fought, those allies who have died with us on the battlefield, that if Trump is elected, he will pull the rug out from under NATO. He will give a green light to putin and autocrats from around the world will think that they have a green light to run over borders, invade our allies, and that
American power will be significantly weakened. The statements from Donald Trump last week evidenced themes that were frankly weak, that were an American that have shocked our allies and partners. And I think Vice President Harris here today and President Biden back in Washington may clear with the United States as long as they're in control, they will stand by our allies and partners. And that's incredibly important for international security.
It's incredibly important for the American people. We benefit from having America at the center of this very important alliance structure, and if Trump has its way, that alliance structure could very well crumble.
I want to ask you about this further, about this debate over Ukraine funding, Jeremy, It's not going well here in Washington. Some don't think it will ever happen. The bill that passed the Senate doa in the House, and there's just no path right now as we consider so many other matters from Pfizer renewal to actually funding our government. Are European leaders starting to think this money may never arrive or do they think that Washington just takes a long time to get around to it.
Oh.
I think they're very concerned that this money may not arrive, and they come to that conclusion reluctantly because they see the inaction by House. Republicans principally large by party. Artisan majorities in both the Senate and the House support funding defensive systems for Ukraine. And by the way, most of that money is invested in the United States in our own weapons production, so that we can backfill the older systems that we've given to Ukraine. Large bipartisan majorities support this.
Republicans two dozen Republicans in the Senate support this. This is really up to Speaker Johnson to bring this vote to the floor of the House. If he does that, I am confident it will pass and it will assuage concerns from our allies here gathered in Germany. If we don't do that, then the world will look at us and say, why cannot Washington act in the face of this obvious aggression from Putin and the Kremlin.
Well, of course, there's many branches to the government, to the Washington machine, and in the absence of action from the legislative branch, and this was a question post to President Biden when he spoke in the last hour, is there anything realistically that the executive branch or the DoD specifically could do I know you understand the deal quite well. Is there really no options here for the Pentagon if Congress doesn't give them to say so?
Well, the Defense Department will use every ability that has, every authority, it has, every weapons platform it can provide to help Ukraine as much as it can. But fundamentally, at the end of the day, the Defense Department cannot spend money unless Congress approves it, and so this is really up to the Congress to authorize and appropriate the money so that the Defense Department can turn around and
support Ukraine. It's a very small percentage of our defense budget and it really redounds to the benefit of the American people, to our defense industry. But again, for I guess political reasons, maybe listening to the signals sent by Donald Trump about how he would want to destroy NATO and cave to Putin. I don't exactly know why, but for some reason, Republicans in Congress don't want to bring this bill up for a vote. I think if they did, it would pass with bipartisan majorities.
Jeremy Bash you spent time as part of the CIA's senior management team overseeing the team that killed Osama bin Laden We're in a dangerous world right now as we talk about a number of fronts here, and I'm curious your thoughts on the strikes that we've seen by the US in the Middle East going after Iranian backed proxy groups that have been causing quite a bit of trouble in the Red Sea in Iraq and Syria. Are we doing enough to make a difference? What else should be done?
Well, we are definitively in a proxy you were with Iran. I mean these attacks that have unfolded against our allies, against our bases, against our troops, against American citizens. Don't forget six American citizens are still being held hostage by Hamas in Gaza at this hour. So this is a fight not just against Israel. It's a fight, frankly against the United Dates and all of Western democracies. And Iran has unleashed this wave of terrorism because fundamentally, it did
not want to see regional integration. It did not want to see Arab Israeli peace, which the nice was brokeering between Israel and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This was in play before October seventh, and as a result of that, Iran and As proxies and surrogates and terrorist organizations have unleashed horrific violence against the United States, our allies, our bases, and our troops. It's fired on ships, it's fired on
international ships. And so I think the United States and President Biden were absolutely correct in conducting air strikes against Iranian targets inside Iraq and Syria against those surrogates and proxies. We're going to have to continue to do that to keep deterrens high during this very very dangerous time.
Well, and of course, Jeremy, there continues to be a lot of conversations about what happens the day after this conflict is ultimately resolved, if indeed that day comes. Is there a feeling in Munich today that a two state solution in the future really is possible.
Look, Hamas could surrender today, they could give up the hostages, and they could essentially say, you know, we're not going to fight this war. Fundamentally, if you care about a two state solution, if you care about Palestinian statehood alongside Israel, you want to see Hamas degraded, if not outright destroyed, Because Hamas opposes a Palestinian state. Any compromise with Israel. So you know, I wouldn't call it the I don't
want to say there's any optimism here. I would call there's a resolute feeling here among allies and partners that it's important to destroy terrorist organizations. If we can bring the war to an end by having hostages released and a cease fire, obviously that's the optimal.
It's optimal for Israel.
But I don't see any scenario in which Hamas can be left standing. You wouldn't want a serial killer living next door to you, even if you degrade their capability. If a serial killer was living next door to you, you would not sleep very well at night.
All right, Jeremy Bash, former chief of staff at the DD and CI, I thank you very much for your time joining us live in what is now evening at the Munich Security Conference, where, of course there are many geopolitical matters that are on the agenda, Joe, and probably a conversation they didn't expect to be having today about what impact the death of Alexi Navonney will have, whether it actually provides something of a galvanizing force to Western allies to do more to help Ukraine.
Really fascinating peak inside the conference. It's going to be lasting the weekend. It's an annual event. To your point, Kayley, the timing is quite remarkable this time around. 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.