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 Roudo with the Bloomberg Business app.
Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Thursday edition, It's Little Friday and the word at the White House's outrage following, of course, the killing of seven volunteers AID workers at the World Central Kitchen working for Jose Andres, it really seemed to be, if not a turning point, an inflection point here in the conversation about this administration's policy in Israel when it comes to Israel's war against Hamas and the conduct that we're seeing inside
of Gaza. The President today, of course, is going to be meeting with Benjaminett and Yahoo, which is our top story now. As I said earlier, to be a fly on the wall, or I guess a fly on the line. They will not be in the same room, but it is expected that Joe Biden is going to give Benjamin
Etia who a piece of his mind. The question is will it matter in the end as we continue to send weapons to Israel and we're hearing from quarters throughout the Democratic Party here, former Obama officials expressing outrage, allies of the president like Chris Coon's Senator Van Holland in Maryland,
typically those who are there to express support. And this is a big deal on the campaign trail, which is why we wanted to spend some time with Nia Malika Henderson, who's always writing about the Biden campaign and this race to the White House for Bloomberg Opinion. She's with us at the table now and it's great to see you. Thanks for coming in. This is tough when you're hearing from Jon Favreau, when you're hearing from allies on Capitol Hill. I can only imagine what Barack Obama tells Joe Biden
if they're talking behind closed doors. We're not going to see or hear this meeting today. So what's the job for Joe Biden listen.
I think it's to express what he's somewhat already expressed, which is outrage at what has happened here with these volunteer workers who are really doing the Lord's work right feeding these folks. Starvation is an issue in this area, and you have here a situation where seven are killed. About the IDF, they have said this was an accident. You've heard from jose and Andreas who has said he feels like these aid workers were targeted, which is quite
a big claim to make. And of course this will be the subject of this conversation that Joe Biden has with Bibi Netanyahu. You know, I think the real question is, as you said, is this sort of a turning point or is it sort of something more subtle, an inflection point. Does this change the conduct of the war from the point of view of the IDEF going after Hamas? Does it change America support? You've heard from the White House so far that it won't, that they will continue to
supply arms to Israel. And listening you've heard from people like Bernie Sanders, who you know, obviously a Jewish American, say, does this make Americans complicit?
Right?
This idea that we're funding this war with taxpayer dollars that is ending up killing so many not only Palasian civilians, but more recently of this terribly tragic accident where these aid workers were killed.
Yeah, and this is making it more difficult now to bring aid. The idea of a temporary peer appears to be if not on hold up in the air because the aid organizations don't have an agreement yet here and they don't want to put their people right at risk. Remember at one point, Joe Biden at the beginning was saying, you know, the way to deal with BB is to hug him, to hold him even closer at times like these. They've been estranged essentially for months. Now does he need to start hugging him again?
Well, listen, you know that sort of hugging of BB. That was their history, right, Biden and BB, we're close, and now you hear out of this White House real discontent from Biden in terms of BB's actions and in terms of some of his rhetoric, and some of it has been quite profane in terms of the way Biden has referred to BB Netanyahu. And we'll see. I'm sure we'll get a readout of this call at some point.
But listen, Democrats sanitized reading, right, No, no curse words, but listen, they may share some on this phone call.
So that's the kind of conversation we're talking about. Though the thing is politically speaking, like I said, we can't watch or listen, So Joe Biden can't reap the political benefits from that that he saw born out again in the polls in another primary night this week with a protest vote that won't go away. You've written about this, Is it getting worse?
You know?
Listen, I think it's certainly not getting any better.
Right.
You've had instances where the White House has tried to reach out to some of these leaders Palestinian Americans, Arab Americans who are sort of at the tip of the spear of this anti difety.
Director of National Security to Michigan for you right now, Yeah, that's serious.
Yeah, And he's had one on one meetings with some of these folks. And listen, some of these folks have walked out of meetings that they've had face to face with Joe Biden to express their displeasure, to go public with their displeasure, but also to try to get this White House to change course, right, to have a ceasefire, to have more skin in the game in terms of what BB is doing over there. We have been loyal allies the US has obviously of Israel throughout this whole thing,
and the elimination of Hamas is their stated goal. And as of now, the US is continuing to support that goal, which means providing arms and ammunition to the idea of.
As we spend time with Neia Malika Henderson writing for Bloomberg Opinion and the Headline today, Mitt Romney should campaign for Joe Biden. This all ties in together here. This is the time in which Joe Biden needs to start to start consolidating here, and it's taking a general campaign seriously, has been raising a lot of money. But your point is what happens to these never trumpers, a lot of whom turned out. Nikki Haley pulled ten percent in all
four of those states the other night. But you're looking at folks like Chris Christy, like Mitt Romney, even Liz Cheney. What world are we in when Liz Cheney could possibly endorse Ji.
I mean this is you know, she hasn't officially, but she has said she will do everything.
And you think he needs to start asking.
I think he well, listen, I think he could start asking at some point. You know, there was a there was a piece in Political that said, yes, he should start asking. My thing is, if these folks are saying that Donald Trump is a threat to democracy, then that should be enough to make them campaign for Joe Biden. I talked to Sarah Matthews, who was somebody who worked in the Trump White House. She was sort of up close and impersonal during the January sixth events and resigned
as a result. She is anti Trump, but she's also pro Biden. And she said, listen, she feels like she needs to come out and say she's going to endorse Joe Biden because it makes what she says about Trump more real.
And she pro bid protest.
It's sort of both, you know, it's it's anti Trump, but it ends up being pro Biden.
Right.
Well, yeah, she's no, that's the thing. She is going to vote for Joe Biden, and she's telling other people that they should.
Christ.
I mean, think of the time they spent dumping on Joe Biden. That be kind of crazy to term.
I think you're exactly right, you know, and almost you know, you think about the conventions in this summer, and typically you'll have somebody from the other party indoors whoever the Republican nominee or the Democratic nominee. Who will that be this go round? You know, if if I have to guess, either Liz Cheney or Chris Grissy. I imagine it could be Liz Cheney. That would be given the fact that she's out there.
You could almost see it happening.
I could.
I could see it happened with Liz Chaney. Not so much Chris Christy.
Wow.
Yeah, yeah, So that's the's Remember when Joe Lieberman came out at that would be the moment that would be this convention exactly.
And so last time for in twenty twenty, it was John Kaysik for for Joe Biden. You know, we sort of forget that convention because.
It was in a traditional almost like it didn't happen.
It was in a COVID era and so so I you know, if I had to put money on it, my mom doesn't like me to bet.
I would bet good stuff. Chaney, We play this back when it happens.
Yeah.
As for the rest of them, Mitt Romney is another one, another name out there that seems maybe pliable when it comes to a Biden.
Keem, I think that's right. You know, again, he has come out and said that he's not going to vote for Donald Trump. He voted twice to impeach him. He's a man of deep faith. Joe Biden also a man of deep faith, and I think in that way he could talk about Joe Biden's faith and suggests that he would make a better president than Donald Trump. Listen, these people need to have a spine, they need to have
some skin in the game. If they are in fact truly believing that they want to block Donald Trump from being president, then the only way to do that really is to I think bolster Joe Biden.
Well, so then you wonder where does the endorsement go. And you're talking about the anti Trump Republicans who could vote for Joe Biden, those who held Donald Trump to under eighty percent as you write in the Wisconsin primary this week. So okay, you got it, Chris Christy or a Mitt Romney. How does that translate to people, real voters on the ground.
You know, that's the big question. And I think the University of voters of anti Trump voters probably like ten percent, and those people were critical in that's the difference. That's the difference in these states right there are going to be you know, decided by a couple of thousand votes here and there, and so this is going to be
an all hands on deck election. If you think that Donald Trump should not be anywhere near the White House, as Liz Cheney has said, then if you're Chris Christy, if you're Mitt Romney, you need to get on board with Joe Biden and try to help him in some of these states Wisconsin, Pennsylvania. We're the sort of moderate Republicans, sort of a chamber of commerce. Republicans are Mitt Romney. I think Chris Christy, Liz Cheney can speak to those guys.
We still call them Lincoln Project Republicans. Maybe that was the last I got to ask you about this fundraiser that Trump is talking about.
Yeah, thirty million dollars.
Well supposedly, Yes, this is after Joe Biden, you know, pulled twenty five million. I think it was at Radio City's up there on the riser with Bill Clinton, I know, Brock Obama, and you know somebody was watching from mar A Lago totally and was so bothered by this that he had to top it. So there will be a fundraiser apparently this will be in Palm Beach for twenty three million, reportedly on Saturday. He's got all the billionaires
lined up. The criticism here from an actual campaign organizing standpoint is you just front loaded the whole thing, and we're peaking early. You mean for some fundraising for Donald Trump the case, Yeah, yeah, to throw this event, is he helping himself trying to one up Joe.
Listen, We'll see what the actual numbers are. You know, it literally came out the day that this this fundraiser with uh with Democrats came out. Then you know, Donald Trump says, oh, we're gonna have thirty million out and maybe up to forty three million. We'll see once the FEC reports come out how much they actually uh you know,
are able to raise. You know, I think a real problem for Donald Trump is he doesn't have those small dollar donors in the way that he used to that really powered his campaign, that really I think spoke to the grassroots energy of it. So he's he's got his hand out for these billionaires to really try to juice up his campaign, juice up his campaign. Coffers again, he's got all these legal problems. Some of that money that is he's quite frankly is going to go to some
of these legal issues that he has. But they need some money, they need a big headline, and they need to start spending there. They don't have the kind of offices and the sort of ad reach that the Democrats have had so far. But it's early, still is going. I don't think Listen is going to be I don't think she's Greenwood.
Might that might be different, Yes, I fact, I would expect that the Bible here you go exactly. Don't be a stranger. Neia Malika Henderson speaking of Lord's work. Find her column on the terminal and online. It's always a pleasure to see you, uh with us here in the Washington Bureau at Bloomberg. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Balance of Power on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite and on YouTube, where you can find us right now by searching Bloomberg
Global News. Of course, we've been hearing a lot about the border this week. Is well, Israel and the border are following Joe Biden everywhere he goes. Just a couple of days ago, Donald Trump talking about this remember the border bloodbath, and refer to prisoners, murderers, drug dealers, mental payas,
and terrorists crossing the border on the daily. And we wanted to talk about some of the rhetoric that we're hearing on both sides of this whole story with an expert who has been with us before on the program, David Leopold Immigration charit you B. Greensfelder spent time as general counsel at the American Immigration Lawyers Association. David, it's good to see you. Welcome back. We understand that the fact is, according to our at least government agencies, most
people crossing the border are poor families. So we're trying to escape either poverty or violence. How does that jive with what we're hearing from the former president when it comes to prisoners, murderers, drug dealers, and mental patients.
Well, the former president doesn't base anything he says in fact reality. He based it in terms of how we can red up his base with hatred and vitriol and all that sort of thing. Look, number one, you're right,
these are families coming to seek a better life. I'm not judging either way, whether we're doing it the right way, but these are families coming to seek a better life in this country for they themselves and their children, like so many of our parents and grandparents and great grandparents did. So they're they're they're fulfilling what America is all about, the promise of a land of op opportunity. Sadly, the Republicans donald Trump who basically that is the Republican Party,
have made this into their their issue. We're talking throwing out all kinds of incendiar statements. They're ginning up a lot of hatred. They're talking about great replacement theories, which is an anti Semitic trope. It's ugly. What's going on, Replican?
So what's going to happen between now and the election? David? I wish I had more time with you, but our next minute or so, I would love for you to describe to me what the border will look like when people are making up their minds this fall. Because the borders security compromise that was put together, of course on Capitol Hill is apparently never going to see the light of day until after the election.
Right right. Most remember why, and that's because Donald Trump wanted to use it as a campaign issue. He didn't want to solve the problem, wanted to yell about the problem. So that's why he ordered the people who wrote the bill, the senators who work closely with the Republican senators who work on a bipartisan basis, who wrote the border bill, an immigration which we have gone a long way towards the solving a lot of this. Donald Trump said, no,
don't do it. I want to use that as a campaign issue so I can spread all my vitrail and hatred. So what's going to happen. What's going to happen, sadly, is you're going to see Donald Trump and the Republican enablers use immigration as a way to get there the base thirty percent that supports them in this country upset and angry and full of hatred.
On the other side, you'll see Joe Biden talk about.
It, accomplishments, and Morgon's done for the country.
David Leopold with you. B Greensfelder. Thank you David for coming back to see us. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Ken just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play 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.
Joe and I are wishing we could have an ear to the door in the White House right now as President Biden speaks by phone with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyaho. As you mentioned, Joe, it may be some time before we actually get a readout or at least lines from the White House on what exactly it is Biden and Nenyaho discussed today, but we know probably the general gist of what the messaging from the US President to the Prime Minister will be.
That's for sure. You made a great point. Following what happened on Monday. The story just changed, the opbed from Jose andres the outcry that we've heard, the outrage that we've heard from progressive Democrats. This was not supposed to be an easy call, and I suspect that it is not. As we recall, and I mentioned this earlier today, that line from Joe Biden that when you're having trouble with
Benjamin and Yaho, you hug him closer. And I wonder how much hugging is going on right now for two men who have been largely estranged for the past couple of months. That's why we bring in Ian Marlow for his take on this. Bloomberg Senior reporter covering diplomacy. Ian is waiting just like we are for a readout on this meeting. I wonder ian your thoughts on what might happen next and whether it leads to a change in policy.
That's the big question everyone is asking right now. There's no question that what happened with the World Central Kitchen that aid workers, the seven of them who were killed in that awful strike earlier this week, has changed the sort of tone and dynamic, and I think you've seen that from the Israeli side, apologies from the very highest levels of Israeli government and the Israeli military apparatus, Biden coming out saying is outraged, Secretary of Defense Austin saying
much the same. The question, though, is does this move the needle really when it comes to conditioning US military support to Israel. And at the moment, you know, everything that we see and hear from the administration seems to be that they're sort of continuing.
The line here.
They've called for a swift and transparent investigation in the past. In the last few months, when we've seen incidents where the US has expressed concern or even something getting close to condemnation of strikes that have killed too many civilians, or AID not getting in. We've generally heard, you know, we're concerned, we trust the Israelis to investigate, and we're
sort of staying the course. What we saw the other week with the US not using their veto at the UN to knock down a United Nations resolution of the Security Council calling for an immediate ceasefire. That was sort of a sign of how strain things have gotten between
the US and Israel. But doing something in at the UN, which the US immediately came out and said was non binding and stressed that it didn't really change much and actually changing you know, the hard you know impact of military support, which is you know, been.
Going on for decades and a.
Cornerstone of the relationship. That's a very big and different change that we're talking about.
Yeah, well, Ian, we had a similar conversation yesterday on this program with Jonathan Panakoff of the Atlantic Council, and what he told us was essentially the only leverage the US has over Israel is really big ticket items. It's intelligence sharing, it's F fifteen's, it's major bombs. That is what foundationally this relationship has historically been built on. And if you were to start conditioning that kind of supply that would fundamentally change the nature of the US Israel relationship.
Is the fact the matter here that there's just not really any low hanging fruit for the US to be using to influence the actions of Israel at this point.
Yeah, you know, I think and Pedacov has made the point that you can't go from zero to twenty five here with this kind of military aid stuff that goes straight to zero to sixty, do you know what I mean? There's not many things left that the US can tinker with. I think US officials, you know, you know, believe that they have condition and influenced Israel over the course of the conflict.
You know, they point to.
Things like humanitarian aid getting through in the first place, which was never really a priority for Israel in the early days of the war. I was actually on Secretary Blincoln's trip to Israel where they engaged in something like nine hours of negotiations that went until the middle of the night, you know, trying to get the Israelis to let in or agree to let in humanitarian aid and like the early weeks of the war. So, you know, the US does believe that they have had some influence
over Israel since the beginning. But if you're a critic of the administration, if you're a critic of Israel, if you're one of the protesters outside you know, some of the embassies, or you know, down in front of the State Department or the White House, you know, looking at what's happened since the war began, you know, it's kind
of cold comfort. I mean, the US says that there's that helped with humanitarian aid, but then you see that there's a looming sort of man made famine, as the UN says, you know, there's now more than thirty thousand civilians killed according to the officials in the Hamas run Gaza strip, and it just kind of looks still that things have gotten worse, and so a lot of people
think conditioning military aid is the only thing left. But it does really seem to be a little bit too far for this administration, and they have argued, you know, privately and publicly, that that would send a message to Hamas that the US is really sort of on the brink of abandoning Israel entirely because without US military support, you know, Israel is going to be you know, iron dome missiles to munitions they're using in Gaza. A lot of that stuff would start to fall off and suffer
sort of, you know, in the New York term. And then there's the longer term threats you know, from Hasbela nanon the other Iranian proxies around the region.
So there's a lot to think about there, absolutely. Ian Marlow Bloomberg, senior reporter covering Diplomacy and National Security, thank you so much, as always for joining us. He of course, has been following this story so closely, including, as he mentioned, traveling with the Secretary of State Anthony Blincoln to the region. It's worth noting Joe that it's not just the Middle East where Secretary Blincoln has been going or could very
well go again in the future. He is expected to make his own trip to China a few weeks from now after Treasury Secretary Jenney Yellen.
Ian was with him on the list. What is a matter of fact, and this is you know, fascinating Jennet Yellen touching down there this morning. Are we getting into this sort of good cop bad cop mode with Yellen and Blincoln? And then you know, in every quarterly call maybe with Joe Biden. I'm kind of trying to understand the roles that everyone in this administration are playing.
Yeah, it's an excellent point. I would certainly expect that Janet Yellen, in her position as the Secretary of the Treasury and also as a former Federal Reserve chair, will be far more focused on economic issues than maybe some of the geopolitical issues around Taiwan or something else that the Secretary of State would probably bring. But this is part of just a rotation of cabinet secretaries talking about all of their different issues that retain to their departments
as they make these visits to China. And on that note, we want to speak with someone who knows China incredibly well. Gary Locke is joining us now. He's former US Ambassador to China, also former US Secretary of Commerce. Mister Locke, thank you so much for being with us. This is, as we've mentioned, Secretary Yellen's second trip in nine months. What tangible could come out of this second visit? How much tangible ever comes out of things like this.
Well, first of all, it's a pleasure to be with you, Joe and Kayley. And let me just say that this trip by Secretary Yellen is very important in continuing the progress and the momentum of talks between President Biden and President She many many months ago. We're seeing a thaw
in the relationship. And it's critical because we have issues of great contention between the United States and China, but also issues and opportunities of great cooperation, whether it's working against North Korea to stop them from developing a nuclear weapon, to finding a cure for cancer or trying to address climate change. There are so many areas in which the world is expecting partnership and leadership from both the United
States and China. But at the same time, we have some very difficult, very hot issues, economic issues, geopolitical issues between the United States and China. So the more dialogue there is between the top leaders, top officials of both countries, the greater the progress will be in these areas.
Ambassador, we heard from Secretary Yellen on her stopover her layover in Alaska on the way to China, speaking specifically to our economic relationship, which has been evolving. Listen to what she said and we'll have you respond here.
She is it's agreed that it's important to both of us that we don't want to decouple our economies. We want to continue when we think we both benefit from trade and investment, but that it needs to be in the level playing field.
If that was hard to hear, Ambassador, she's talking about not decoupling as we've heard before, but that it needs to be on a level playing field. And we're hearing that this administration is carving out space to protect additional new industries like we've seen with high tech chips for instance, And I wonder to what extent you see that in fact leading to a decoupling.
Well, there will be some natural decoupling from with countries all around the world and involving many different sectors, because, as the pandemic demonstrated, no country wants to be overly reliant on supplies, whether it's consumer goods, manufactured goods, or medical supplies from another country, because if there's another pandemic or even a natural disaster, a huge earthquake or political upheaval in another country, we don't want, For instance, companies
in America suddenly cut off from so much of what they receive from China, which is why you're seeing a lot of companies, multinational companies, US companies, foreign companies diversifying their supply chain so that they're not so reliant on China. So much of what American consumers use every day and purchase every day in their daily lives comes from China. Whether it's microwaves, whether it's the tools that they use, clothes and shoes, barbecue sets, you name it. Much of
that comes from China. So that creates jobs for the Chinese people. At the same time, China depends very much on American made goods, including our farm goods, our agricultural goods. China is America's largest agricultural export destination outside of Canada or outside of North America, and so our farmers depend on selling their soybeans and their wheat, and their apples and their cherries to China. Along with Boeing. Boeing's number one most of Boeing airplanes are sold to carriers around
the world, including China. So our economies are intertwined, and which is why Secretary of Yellen is saying we don't want to complete decoupling. But companies, whether Chinese companies or American companies, are beginning to diversifly diversify their supply chain to include other parts of the world.
Well.
As we talk about the supply that comes from China. Ambassador, one of the things we know that the Treasury Secretary is going to be talking about specifically is industrial over capacity in the way that can be manipulated in terms of subsign demand to affect pricing or access to certain things that China is producing. When she goes and airs those concerns, how likely is it that China is going to receive those and say, Okay, yes, you're right, we
will be changing our behavior on that front. Isn't it to China's advantage to continue that kind of over capacity in production.
Well, China is trying to jumpstart their economy coming out of the pandemic by offering subsidies and government incentives for industrial output. Certainly, they are leading the world in terms of the manufacturing of electric automobiles and the battery technology that goes with electric automobiles and buses, and also in
the solar area. But if they do so by stimulating or having too much capacity, dumping their products into the world, letting the world with their products and driving prices down, that's going to actually destabilize the economies and sectors in many other countries, including here in the United States. With some of the Infrastructure and Inflation Reduction Act incentives to bring manufacturing back to America, especially in the clean energy area.
That will disrupt and undercut many of the efforts that America and other countries have embarked upon, which will lead to perhaps retaliatory measures against Chinese companies or dumping, unfair subsidies, etc.
Etc.
And therefore that will upset the world trade relationship and they cause problems for China itself. So I think the message from Secretary Yellen is, yes, you want to be the world's leading supplier of electric automobiles and battery technology and solar equipment, but you have to do it on a level playing field, and I think that's the key
message there. Otherwise there will be repercussions not just by the United States, but by other countries around the world, and that can also in the long term hurt China.
Spending time here on Bloomberg TV and Radio with Gary Locke, the former US Ambassador to China, we want to let our audience know that we've just received word from the White House that President Biden's meeting with Benjamin Nettan Yahoo has come to a close. Ambassador, I know it's not what you're here to talk about today, but in our last moment. And I don't want to set you up to cut you off here, but what is China think about America's involvement in the Middle East.
Well, China is watching very carefully to see how the United States responds, along with how the United States responds to Russia's invasion and military action in the Ukraine, and what the West does. Does the West really back up its allies, will it live up to its word of guarantee, because otherwise there are many countries in the South Pacific, in the Pacific Reas where the United States has pledged protection and defense, and.
Beijing is watching. Ambassador, Thank you, I wish we had more time with you. Come back and talk to us again. Gary Locke of course, as well the former governor of Washington, former US Secretary of Commerce. I'm Joe Matthew with Kaylee Lines in Washington. This is Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on AMO car Play and then roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Welcome back to Balance and Power on Bloomberg TV and
Radio and Joe. The fact that it is Thursday puts us now three days out since the death of seven humanitarian aid workers working for World Central Kitchen in Gaza, killed by Israeli strikes, and just a day so we're two days out now from a primary in which voters expressed their displeasure protest voted against President Biden in a number of states, chosing uncommitted or uninstructed, as the case may be, because they are dissatisfied with the way that
he has handled this conflict and perhaps his relationship with the Israeli government. And of course, speaking of the Israeli government, the President was just speaking with the Prime Minister Benjamin net Nyahu, and sources the White House say that call has now wrapped up.
We just don't know what exactly was said.
It's probably going to take him in it for us to figure that out. But the political stakes are not new for this president. And now that we're hearing from Biden allies, from members of the Obama administration all criticizing the policy that this administration has taken, it does make you wonder what happens from here. If this is an inflection point, what does it lead to? So we assemble
our panel. Genie Shanzana was with this Democratic analyst and Bloomberg Politics contributor today, joined by Chape and Fay, Republican strategist at Actum. Great to have you both back with us, Genie. Joe Biden has an opportunity here with this meeting. How does he use it to leverage this to his advantage?
Yeah, I mean I think we got a preview of that last night with Austin call with the Israeli Defense minister. It was apparently heated. I think Biden is going to say exactly the same thing, outrage at what happened, need to investigate, need to protect rather aid workers and civilians, need to wait to go into rafa. Politically here, I think the White House is thinking this readout will show how angry Joe Biden is by what has happened and
how he is expressing that to the Prime minister. I'm not sure it is going to be effective though, and I worry about a very very mixed message that Joe Biden is sending, and I don't think it is helping him politically at home.
Well, we did just get a statement from the White House. Officially, it just says President Biden spoke with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel today to discuss the latest developments in Israel and Gaza. A readout of the call will be issued soon, so of course we'll provide you the details when we have them. That statement in and of itself doesn't really hint it much that went on in this conversation.
But when we talk about the political difficulty of this for Biden, knowing that many in the Democratic Party chapin are unhappy with his handling of it, it's worth noting that we are starting to see really a divide in which Republicans are incredibly pro Israel, not to say that President Biden is not, but have been much more vocal about it, critical of potentially any criticisms that the Biden
administration is providing to Israel. Could that also play in politically to some of these more vulnerable Republicans in places like New York and districts that Biden won. Could the Israel policy be weighing on them as well, just as we're seeing it weigh on the incumbent president.
It could. And while you know, I can't speak for every district around the country. There are certain marginal districts here in New York where there are very high Jewish populations and also very high Araba Muslim populations, so it could cut both ways. I think there are probably larger Jewish populations the way Regishi team has worked out in some of these districts, uh, you know, particularly on Long Island I'm thinking about. So it certainly could have an effect.
And and while I did say earlier, it it it doesn't cleanly divide on partisan lines. You're you're, you're right. Support for Israel in general has always been you know, uh more Republican issue, if you will, than Democrats, you know. And you know what what I'd like to say about this meeting is, I don't know why we're holding Israel to a standard higher than we hold ourselves and the
rest of the world. Right, it was an absolute tragedy what happened, But I think it's important to remember that every tragedy that happened subsequent to October seventh, uh is because of October seventh, Right, And we've heard people talk about, you know, Israel's reaction and what you know, the president wants them to do. They have already admitted the mistake, they have apologized, they have said they would do with their own inquiry, and they've already said that they're going
to adjust tactics. I don't even remember when a mayor has said that.
Right.
Meanwhile, there are still hostages in Gaza, children, women, women being sexually assaulted, senior citizens. This was a terrorist attack where people parachuted in and killed and raped kids having fun at a rave. So I think it's important to remember that. And you know, the question of why are we holding Israel to a higher standard, I think we know the answer, but I'm you know, I very strongly believe that Israel has a right to defend itself just
like everyone does. And one side is following, you know, trying to follow the rules of engagement in Geneva conventions, and the other side is allowed to do whatever it wants, and Israel gets criticized for it. So sorry for the little aside, but I think it's important to have that voice here in this conversation.
I'm glad you said that, Chapin, and let's talk about it a little bit more, Genie. Is the US holding Israel to a higher standard when it continues to supply two thousand pound bombs.
Yeah, this is the problem for Joe Biden right, just politically, is that we are hearing on the ground a mixed message from Joe Biden, and it is a problem for him because what is he saying. On the one hand, he is saying by one side of his mouth that Joe Biden, Chris Coons, Van holland others are telling him to stop the war. He has yet to take on Jose Andre's you know, suggestion that Israel deliberately targeted these seven aid workers. And on the other hand, to your point,
we are still supplying arms. So just politically speaking at home, that message is ringing very hollow. We had a primary in New York yesterday. I just talked to a few people. We don't have an uncommitted option on our line, but you can leave a blank ballot, and many people I've talked to did. I'm not sure it's anywhere near what we saw in Wisconsin. But this is the political problem
for Joe Biden. So even setting A's side the question of whether we are holding Israel to a higher he can't have it both ways, and this is going to be a problem for him at.
Home well, and we know shape in the net and Yaho also is facing some difficulty at home. It was just this past weekend where there were thousands of protesters on the streets calling for new elections, and now Benny Ganz in the Israeli government is also calling for an early election in September. We tend to just talk about Israel here and what perhaps Israel is seen doing wrong
or not doing wrong in defending itself. Is this Israel or should we really be talking about net and Yahou and this this specific Israeli government.
Well, that is a phenomenal point, and I wish I had brought it up earlier. You're one hundred percent right. This is not about Palestinian people and Israeli people. This is about their two governments or whatever you want to call Hamas. Right, that's what this is about. Those are the two actors making these decisions. So I do think, you know, while I am a firm you know, support of Israel's right to defend itself, I am all for protests.
I'm all for people voicing their opinions. And if niitt and I who loses, you know, that's for the Israeli people to decide. In their elections and the way they're you know, parliamentary system works. You know, if they lose confidence and there's a new election, you know, so be it. That's politics, that's democracy, and that's the way it's supposed to work. Right. And if a you know, a pro ceasefire politician is elected to lead them, then that's what
they've decided. And you know, all support that decision too, right, because it's you know, it's a democratically elected government. So I do think we do need to distinguish, right, you know, I just sort of went in on defense of Israel. But that's not to say the Palistinian people are not suffering. They are certainly suffering under Hamas. And it's really Hamas
is really where the eye are should be going. And I think one of the problems in this country, especially on the protests, is it's the Jewish people or Israeli people versus you know, palistin and people and their supporters. And that's really not what it should be about. It should be about the leadership and and and their government. And that happens too, right. People disparage Trump supporters, and people disparage Biden supporters. It really shouldn't be like that.
But that's where sort of the world is headed.
A great conversation today with our panel Chapin Fay and Genie Shanzano GENI following this call, progressive Democrats on Capitol Hill are going to listen very closely and they're going to parse the words of the readout that is forthcoming from the White House. Should conditions be attached to future weapons shipments to Israel?
That's what I think we are hearing more and more. I mentioned Chris van Holland as an example of that. I think things are getting shaky in the Democratic side
and the Senate on this issue. There is widespread concern, and so I do think that is what we are going to be hearing as next week rolls around, because again, you are hearing this on the ground, and I know we like to describe it as sort of a progressive left is where this is started from, and that is true, but I can tell you that it is spread like wildfire through the Democratic base. That's why Joe Biden is rightly so concerned about the politics of this and saying
things like the First Lady supports a ceasefire. That is a message to tell you how he is hearing this. But again I think his messaging on this is leaving him open to some real challenges as we move into this convention this summer. If we don't see a ceasefire beforehand.
Ultimately he's in an a possible position, you know, selling weapons, supporting Israel but also trying to get the worst UF. He's in a possible position.
Wow, Yep, tough, indeed cheap. And Fay and Jeanie Shanzo our political panel today. Thank you both so much for joining us political discourse at its best. Joe, It's important to consider all sides of this issue, but yes, both saying that President Biden isn't a tough spot here for sure.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo car Play and then Rodoo with the Bloomberg Business Ad. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
We have the latest from the White House.
Yeah, this is the readout we were waiting for. Kayley on the meeting between Joe Biden and Benjaminett and Yahoo I'm kind of amazed to come out this quickly, knowing how long it has taken in the past, with meetings with President she and others for instance. Look, let's cut
to the chase here. This is a longer readout. The President calling for specific, as I read directly from the readout here, specific concrete and measurable steps to address civilian harm, humanitarian suffering, and the safety of aid workers, remembering, of course, the killing of those volunteers with World Central Kitchen. It goes on to write, the President made clear US policy with respect to Gaza will be determined by our assessment
of Israel's immediate action on these steps. So we've set up the next chapter here ka, but it has yet to be written.
Yeah, and we also understand per this readout that Biden underscored that an immediate ceasefire is essential to stabilize and improve the humanitarian situation and protect innocent civilians. President Biden, it goes on to say, made clear that the United States strongly supports Israel in the face of threats, including from Iran and the Israeli Iranians threatening the Israeli people.
So still there expressing support for israel Is even as we are seeing fascinating directive essentially from the President to take the steps that the US thinks are necessary in this moment. So we want to turn now to Hadar Suskan, and he is Americans for Peace President and CEO. He also was a sergeant first class in the Israeli Defense Forces. That are great to have you with us as we're just understanding what exactly it is President Biden and Benjamin
Nyahu talked about today. Will net Yahoo heed the words that Biden spoke to him when he's talking about the idea that Israel needs to make changes here? Do you have faith that those changes will happen?
Well, that is the big question, And first of all, again thank you both for having me on with you today. You know, what we've been seeing in this back and forth between Natanyahu and his government and the Biden administration for months now is Biden and colleagues speaking out, pushing, urging for more restraint, calling for ceasefires, taking various steps pushing in that direction. And we've seen Nata Yahu and
his government absolutely failed to heed that. And so the question at the moment is what is that next unwritten chapter that you were referencing you know, Biden and the American administration. We have leverage. It is not a theoretical it's not just asking uh, pretty please, or asking for a favor. The United States supports Israel not only politically and theoretically, but concretely. We continue as of yesterday to send arms to Israel that are being used directly in Gaza.
And so the question is going to become when is President by And going to move from saying what he thinks needs to happen to taking the steps that he can take to make it.
So, I wonder as we talk about this, you actually have been there in the IDF, which is known for its ability to strike with precision. We can talk to the Iranians about that. After what happened in Damascus this week, Are we to believe that the IDF is simply incapable of controlling the outcome of its strikes, or that in fact net and Yahoo and his military leaders have been indiscriminate. Can in fact we see a more responsible handling of the weapons that we're providing.
There's no doubt that you could see that, and what we've seen are a range of things. So what happened with the World Central kitchen workers. You know that tragedy was three missiles fired, you know, fired at three different vehicles. Nitinano and the IDF have claimed it was a mistake, not an accident, right. They are claiming that a commander in the field did so without authorization. There's no question that he did so intentionally because he thought there was
a Hamas operative there and made that decision. And we've seen that there was a report in nine to seven to two magazine about the AI software that they call Lavender, which has been used to target Hamas operatives, and the way in which Israel has for this war changed the rules of engagement, broadening them from what the Israeli military it self referred to as targeted assassinations of only senior Hamas leaders to include more junior leaders and include more
leeway and leniency in what they consider the acceptable number of civilian casualties to go along with targeting Hamas targets. So there isn't a question that this is some sort of accident or something out of their control that's happened that they just don't have the capacity. This is a political policy decision about how to you know, how to make the rules and take the actions of this war, and it rests with Nitaanna.
Well, when you talk about the calculation of just how many civilians they're willing to see die if it helps them accomplish their objectives, it raises the question of RAFA when we have heard from that Yahoo that they plan for the Israeli army to move more than a million Palestinians who have sought refuge in that city in southern Gaza out get them made before going in to attack
the remaining Hamas battalions. There is that credible. Do you really believe the IDF can do that or are they going to do so knowing that there's a certain amount of losses that they're willing to tolerate.
Well, it's very hard to imagine that they can do so in any way that we in the United States or most of the world would consider acceptable. And I will say, by the way, you know you talked about the IDF, The IDF is the arm they are the implementers of this. These are all political decisions again rest with Nintayaho, rest with the government. And you know, I think it's very hard to imagine where and how they
could move those people. Nano has of course not been clear and he's intentionally not been clear about where they're going to move those people. There are people in his government, people like Smotridge and Ben Goverro, who are calling for those people to be moved to the Sinai to Egypt, which, again, moving people out of an occupied territory forcefully is a war crime. Obviously, going through and indiscriminately bombing them is
a war crime as well. So it's very hard to imagine any way in which Israel could initiate a large scale invasion of Rapach that would not be disastrous. Frankly, what about.
Cease fire talks? Should I even be asking you about that right now?
Look, you should because we need to get there. We have to get to that. This war has gone on longer than it should have in the first place. If you look at polling among the Israeli public, remarks from most Israeli political leaders, people there believe very deeply, and I share that belief that Prime Minister in Nataannahu is continuing this war for his personal purposes, for his political viability,
for the continuation of his government. He's announced that, yes, of course, there will be investigations into what happened on October seventh, into the response of the military, the response of the government. But he keeps claiming that none of that can happen during wartime, of course, so we have to wait until after the war to do that. And
everyone is waiting for after the war. They're waiting for that for elections, they're waiting for that for accountability, and so he has every incentive in the world to keep this going, even when his stated war aims are clearly unachievable. The idea that one can militarily eliminate Hamas is not based in reality. Whatever damage could possibly be done, it has been done to their military capacity, has happened in six months of intense bombing, in six months of intense invasions.
It is certainly not giving Israel any greater security right now to continue this. And look, the vast majority of people in Israel, and I think many people here you believe that a military response, unfortunately was necessary following Hamas's horrific attacks on October seventh. Hamas cannot be allowed to do that again. Israel has not only the right, but the fundamental responsibility of any government is to protect its people,
and so they should be doing that. But they failed in that responsibility on October seventh, and they continue to fail by prosecuting a war that is not based in protecting the security of its people. It's based in the ongoing political survival of Nitaenyahu.
Well to that exact point, had Aar And you make up an excellent point about how you can take out the military capacity of AMAS, But how do you defeat an ideology in and of self if this is a designated terrorist organization by many countries. But to the point
about the kind of political calculation here for NETANYAHUO. We have seen just in the last twenty four hours Beni Gantz calling for early elections in September, we saw the thousands of protesters taking the streets to call for the same, or just days ago over this past weekend, How should we be thinking about how net NYAHUU is likely to respond to those kind of domestic pressures that does that only double make him double down more rather than listening perhaps to the voices of those dissenters.
But you know, those protests started last year, of course, before the war with the judicial or four right, and there were hundreds of thousands of people out on the streets. They were stopped by the war, mostly because people were in the war, they were in reserve duty. It was also impossible to gather safely in large numbers. They've come back.
The numbers have not quite reached the pre October levels yet, but they're getting there, and the intensity is frankly much higher because now you have dual movements of people calling for the government to prioritize the release of the hostages, which many many many people feel they have not done, and people calling for new elections, and a group that is smaller but growing also calling for the end of the war. And so those are very important the challenges.
Even if you had a million people two million people out in the streets, the only way to bring down the government literally technically before its term is up is for a vote of no confidence by those in the government. So Gance and Eisenkotd his colleague, personally, I believe they shouldn't be in this government anymore. They went in under a national unity idea saying we have to help, we
want to impact how this war is being waged. I don't know what they think, but I certainly don't think they've had a lot of impact on that I think they should leave the government. That's not sufficient to bring it down. They would still have sixty four members. And the challenges that those members in the government know that the likelihood is they're going to get wiped out in
the next election. They're not going to be in the next government, So there's a disincentive for them to go to new elections, not only Nitayahu but all of his partners. But there are a variety of forces, some related to the war, some related to the issue of the draft of the ultra Orthodox who are currently exempt from military service, that have the potential to crack this government. And so the public pressure is very important. The international pressure is
even more important. People in Israel are very finely attuned to what President Biden is saying, what Senator Schumer said, what other American political leaders here have had to say, and they understand that Nitayahu has done something or no Israeli leader has ever done before, which is really truly deeply lose the confidence of American political leadership, and that's very damaging for him.
And are we were looking forward to talking with you. He's the CEO of Americans for Peace, former Sergeant first class than the idea of the Darsuskan. Many thanks 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, d C. At noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.