Podcasts about near eastern affairs

In this episode of Taking the Edge off the Middle East, Brian Katulis sits down with Toni Verstandig, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs and current board member at the Middle East Institute. Three months into the second Trump administration, they assess how the White House is reshaping US policy in the Middle East—what's changed, what's stayed the same, and what risks lie ahead. Verstandig reflects on lessons from her years working on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process during the Clinton era, offering both poignant stories and policy insights from a time when diplomacy looked very different. They also discuss how think tanks like MEI are stepping up at a moment when institutions like USIP and the Wilson Center are under fire.  Don't forget to look out for new episodes of Taking the Edge off the Middle East on its own independent channel every other Tuesday, wherever you get your podcasts.   

How much do you really know about what shapes our national security? Is it just about military strategy, or is it something that affects all of us, every day? Tune in for an inspiring discussion with Asha Castleberry on her new book Why National Security Matters: A Memoir. Moments with Marianne airs in the Southern California area on KMET 1490AM & 98.1 FM, an ABC Talk News Radio Affiliate!Asha Castleberry is a national security and foreign policy expert, U.S. Army veteran,   author, and former U.S. Congressional candidate. With over a decade of experience in Middle East policy, she served as a Senior Official in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs under the Biden-Harris Administration and held key roles in Kuwait, Iraq, and Jordan. A sought-after speaker, Asha has participated in high-level forums, including the Erbil Security Forum and the Foreign Policy Institute Black Sea Conference. Asha served as a Cyrus Vance Visiting Professor at Mount Holyoke College, she has also taught at Fordham, George Washington, and Baruch College. A Military Officer in the Army Reserves, Asha is a Council on Foreign Relations , founder of the Diversity in National Security Network, and a recipient of numerous honors, including the Middle East Policy Council's 40 Under 40.  A graduate of Hampton University and Columbia University, with studies at Oxford and in China, she is frequently featured in many national and international outlets like CNN, MSNBC, CBS News, Fox News, BBC News, Voices of America, and The Washington Post.  https://www.ashacastleberry.comFor more show information visit: www.MariannePestana.com

In this week's episode, correspondent Christina Ruffini and co-host former Secretary of Defense and CIA Director Leon Panetta sit down with former United States Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, Barbara Leaf, who was also previously Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Arabian Peninsula in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq. They discuss Leaf's role in the ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas, President Donald Trump's plans for Gaza, and how the Arab world has reacted. Leaf also shares behind-the-scenes diplomatic stories from the dramatic fall of the Assad regime and recounts an afternoon spent with Syria's new interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, and his plans for a new Syria and relations with Israel. Plus, how the nation is battling emerging Assad supporters. Episode produced by Situation Room Studios. Original music composed and produced by Leo Sidran.

Back Home, One week later.By FinalStand. Listen to the Podcast at Explicit Novels.There is something worse than waking up and not knowing where you are: you could wake up and not know who you are.Note: World Events Stuff ~ aka Why things are happening in Cáel's lifeThe phone was from Iskender. His boss, Oyuun Tömörbaatar (OT), the former UN ambassador from Kazakhstan and now the informal and unrecognized UN representative and chief diplomat of the Khanate to the same august body, wanted to talk with me, immediately. OT wasn't being diplomatic at the moment, that would come later.{Now this is going to get convoluted}Any inquiries to the Khanate that didn't also include immediate official recognition of the Khanate currently were being steered my (and Hana's) way. For all the behind closed doors crap, he had me, his loyal ass-monkey mutton-head. I held faint hope that this latest meeting would work out to my benefit. For the meeting, I traveled light, only Naomi (the Amazon) and Chaz (British SRR) watched over me.Now fathers who know me, hide their daughters. I'd earned my 'scoundrel' reputation. T. Sarangerel, OT's daughter, was in the room when Iskender ushered me in. She gave me an uncertain look, I shrugged and she smiled. It took me 3 nano seconds to figure that out, OT was scoping me out as a potential son-in-law. I was in Temujin's Inner Circle and a man who he trusted (a rarity). Any union with me would strengthen OT's clan's standing in the new regime.The genetic footprint Temujin, and his immediate family collectively, had put down in the 13th and 14th centuries CE today was vast. He needed that to make his plans for the internal reorganization of the Khanate work. The old republics would go away, to be replaced by a system akin to the Byzantine 'themes, the re-organization of regions based on the recruitment of the Tumens.The Khanate was aiming for an 'Autocratic Republic' ~ a term invented in the 19th century. My use of this terminology was based on my gut instinct, Alal's host of memories involving every form of governance, and my experience with human nature. That clued me in to what Temujin was up to, his Greater Plan. He wasn't going to form a false-front government. He was going to retain the decision-making powers and do so openly, thus 'Autocratic'.He also planned to have a bicameral legislative branch. The Upper House would be based in Tumens and bureaucratic leadership, intellectual standing, religious sects, and tribal entities. This body would be based on merit, not primogeniture. The Lower, main chamber, would be a democratically-elected assembly (aka a democratic republic) that advised him on policy matters, thus 'Republic'.All the power would remain in the Great Khan's hands and would be exercised by his genetic descendants (which some geneticists estimated as being as high as 25% of the Central Asian population.) Marrying into that extended family would be easy, the 'family' itself would have a vested interesting in supporting a state that benefited them.Men and women could exercise power in the government through marriage alliances, identical to the manner Hana was working through me. Being surrounded by very populous countries in various states of belligerence, empowering women wouldn't be an issue since every willing mind and pair of hands mattered. Outsiders who shone through could be offered a spouse and brought into the ruling elite since polygamy was permissible.In the Khanate there would be universal compulsive suffrage (everyone 18+ was legally required to vote) to decide on the representatives in the new legislative body. Everyone was expected to fight, so everyone voted. It would be modeled on the Duma of early 20th century Imperial Russia. Unlike the ill-fated Tsar Nicholas II, Temujin would be much more attentive to the voice of the people, in the Information Age, he had to.Or so I hoped. I spewed forth my ideas to OT who didn't agree, or disagree with my vision. Perhaps Temujin and I did share a bond that went beyond obligation. OT then pulled a 'Pamela'."He told me he knew immediately you were his brother when you and I shared that vision," he commented out of nowhere."His words: You (Earth and Sky) are the old. He (meaning me) is the new. He (me again) will show us the way." My, that was nice, obtuse and not at all helpful. What did OT want? My good buddy, the Great Khan, wanted to cash in on Hana's and my sudden popularity. His most pressing need remained 'time'. He needed to have a cease-fire in the wings when his offensive resumed the next day.The Earth and Sky had moved, well, the Heaven and Earth to get the Tumens and their accompanying national armies up and running after only a two day respite. Thanks to me, Manchuria was a mess. The Russians had carried out my 'Operation: Funhouse' with mixed, mostly positive results.Dozens of smaller Chinese military police units along the border went, 'inactive' was the term most often used in the media. They didn't disarm, yet they didn't fight the Russians either. They sat back and let events unfold. The issue wasn't the Chinese's willingness to fight and die for their country. It was the schizophrenic government in Beijing.The PRC didn't want to wage a war with the Russian Federation at that moment. The Khanate was the priority. There were two fundamentally incompatible courses of action favored for dealing with the Russians:One large group advocated a passive Option A: let the Russians step in and shield the three remaining provinces making up Manchuria that were still in Chinese possession. Later, China would use military, economic and political means to edge the Russians out, once the Khanate was dealt with.A sizable faction favored a more aggressive Option B: play a game of chicken with Vladimir Putin. Tell the Bear not to come across the border while threatening him with a bloody and pointless (for him) guerilla war if he did intervene. Events on the ground were not providing a lot of support for that school of thought,However, this split at the highest levels of leadership left the local and regional commanders to try and muddle through as best they could. To the local commanders defending the Amur River side of the Chinese-Russian border, common sense dictated that they not oppose the Russian crossings, because the Russian 35th Army would kill them.All their military units had gone west to the Nen River line. With no heavy weapons and little air support, the People's Armed Police (PAP) (paramilitary) and the Public Security Bureau (regular police) units would be wiped out for little gain.Russia's GRU (Military Intelligence) sweetened the pot by allowing the police units to remain armed and in formation. It could be argued that they weren't even committing treason. At any time, they could throw themselves into the battle, or form the core of a resistance movement. 'Conserving your strength' had been a hallmark of the Communist Chinese struggle against the Imperial Japanese and Nationalists forces from the 1920's until 1945 and it had served them well.For the party officials, civil authorities and the People's Liberation Army (PLA), Army Air Force (PLAAF), and Army Navy (PLAN) who had gone with Option B, things weren't working out. In the north of Heilongjiang province at Morin Dawa/the Nen River line, the regional commander of the ad hoc forces facing the Khanate decided to duke it out with the Russian 36th Army as well. He was boned from the get-go.The PLAAF's overall command and control had been badly disrupted in the first few hours of The Unification War and had never fully recovered. Of the 22 air regiments that the PLAAF had started the war with in the Shenyang Military District (NE China), only 5 remained as effective formations flying, on average, a meager 20% of their original complement of advanced Shenyang J-16's, J-11's, Chengdu J-10's and Xian JH-7's aircraft.Replacing their aircraft losses meant sending up aged Shenyang J-8's (rolled out in 1980) and Nanchang Q-5's (in 1970) to fly and die in droves fighting their technologically superior Khanate foes. To add insult to injury, China's fleet of 97 Su-30MKK/MK2's (built in Russia) had suffered numerous suspicious mechanical and electronic failures, rendering them either flying coffins, or space holders in bomb-proof shelters.Furthermore, of the forces arrayed in the far north, only two of the five air regiments were responding. Two of the other three had begun displacing south into the Beijing Military District and preparing to defend the capital city. The fifth formation had another problem, North Korea (, more on that later.)In opposition to those two Chinese air regiments (roughly 60 aircraft of mixed types) stood seven complete and fresh Russian air regiments (over 400 front-line aircraft) and that didn't include the regiment and elements of the Far East Naval Aviation which was ALSO watching North Korea (, again more on that later.) The latter was of small comfort to the forces trying to hold the already compromised Nen River line.Behind those valiant troops, along the much more defensible Amur River line, the commander of the key city of Heihe sided with the Option A group and let the Russian 35th Army cross the river unopposed. By the time the PLA commanding general of the 'Nen Force' (the 69th Motorized Division and the subordinate 7th Reserve Division) figured that out, he was already in a shooting war with the Russians. So his supply lines weren't in danger, they were lost.The final indignity took place at Zalantun. The commander of the 3rd Reserve Div. had died during the attempt to recapture Zalantun. His replacement died when his helicopter was shot down as he was coming to assume command. In the absence of these officers, the divisional chief of staff told his men, including two hastily hustled forward mechanized brigades, to put down their arms. That meant 'Nen Force' was completely cut-off and surrounded.One battalion of the 36th Russian Motorized Brigade (yes, too many 36's running around) disarmed the Chinese troops while the rest, plus the 74th Independent Motorized Brigade raced for the prize, the city of Qiqihar. The last major mechanized formation of the 36th Rus. Army, the 39th MB was following them. However, instead of manning Qiqihar's defenses, the Chinese garrison in that city was waging war on its own populace.It wasn't only in Qiqihar; chaos reigned throughout Heilongjiang province. The Provincial Head of the Communist Party, Wang Xiankui, supported Option A. The Provincial Governor, Lu Hao, went with Option B. Both figures were rising stars in the PRC. Wang had ordered the still forming Reserve Divisions and the PAP units to disperse, thus avoiding any untimely confrontations with the Russians.Lu, without consulting Wang, ordered the same forces to launch a violent crackdown on all dissident forces, specifically all racial minorities. (It turned out that Lu was also a member of the Seven Pillars and his witch-hunt was aimed at getting the Earth and Sky organization operating in Heilongjiang).For the men and women on the other end of those phone conversations, there was no 'right' answer. Lest we forget, their organizations were already degraded by the Anthrax outbreak. Both men were powerful and represented China's future leadership, so if the person in charge at the ground level obeyed the wrong one, they could be assured of being roasted by the other.Some did try to do both, repress and disband at the same time. That meant that in the process of making mass arrests among an already war-fearful and plague-fearful populace, the law enforcement infrastructure began disintegrating.The problem with Lu's/7P's plan was that there was no 'revolutionary' organization to round up. That wasn't how the Earth and Sky operated in North-East China. They remained in tiny sabotage and reconnaissance cells. While they were scurrying for cover from the police crackdown, an opportunity presented itself.The afflicted minorities were getting furious with their treatment. These minorities saw themselves as loyal Chinese, yet they were being dragged out into the streets, put in detentions centers and (in a few cases) summarily executed. Being less than 10% of the overall population, resistance had never crossed their minds. It seemed all that those defenseless people could do was pray for Russian intervention forces to arrive.Within that mix of fear, betrayal and rage, the E and S discovered a way to start the dominos falling. The small, well-armed and well-trained E and S cells began ambushing police detachments. Weapons from those dead men and women were turned over to the pissed off locals before the cell went off to stalk the next police unit.Wash, rinse and repeat. It became a perverse and bloody case of wish fulfillment. Lu and the 7P's had been looking for an insurrection and they started one. Even though a miniscule portion of the population was involved, from the outside looking in, it reinforced the Putin Public Affairs initiative that portrayed Putin (and his army) as coming in to restore order to a collapsing civil system, which he was helping disrupt.From Moscow, the PRC's indecisiveness looked like Manna from Heaven. For the massive numbers of Russian soldiers riding through the Manchurian countryside, it felt like they were rolling into Arkham Asylum. Unlike the NATO countries' professional armies, Russia remained a largely conscript force whose normal term of service was only one year. These unseasoned troops could never tell if the local military, military police and police would attack until they rolled up on the Chinese units.At the start of that Day One of Operation: Funhouse, the Russian ROE (Rules of Engagement) was 'Ask and Verify'. It was tactically advantageous for the belligerent Chinese forces to lie about their intentions, then begin shooting at the Russians when they got close enough to hurt them. By Day Two, the standard front-line Russian soldier had adjusted that ROE to 'if they look at us wrong, light their asses up'. By Day Three, the officers had stopped trying to enforce Moscow's ROE orders.That was fine for the combat and rear echelon support troops because both the Chinese and Russian governments had another series of problems and they all centered around Pyongyang and Kim Jong-un's declaration that North Korea would intervene as well, without letting anyone know who he was 'intervening' against. To keep everyone guessing, the North Korean' People's Army was massing on all three borders, facing off with the PRC, Russia and South Korea. To prove his diplomatic intentions, Kim pledged to only mobilize half of his reserves, merely 4,250,000 extra men and women to go with his 950,000 strong standing army.It didn't take a military, or economic genius to realize the North Korean's chronically 'near death' economy was stampeding off a cliff. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) was in the middle of an oil crisis and Kim was increasing their fuel consumption by 400% while decreasing his workforce by 10%. To put it in perspective, the US unemployment was around 6%. Now imagine that in one week's time it would become 26%. One week, no severance packages. Would the population become unsettled?But wait, it gets better. The Secret War was colliding with the Real World in more places than Manchuria. Setting aside the assassination attempt (Grrr) of Hana Sulkanen, my fiancée, six Nipponese elders (two women and four men) appeared in the personal quarters of the Japanese Prime Minister on the first full night of 'Funhouse' and relayed their urgent requests.Those six were the Head of the Six (formerly Seven) Ninja Families and they were there at, my urging. Cause I'm an idiot and requiring the deaths of Romanians in my personal crusade obviously wasn't enough. Now I was asking the Japanese Defense Forces (JDF) to pony up as well. So take a deep breath and put on the hip-waders.You might be wondering why I would want the JDF, see, there was part of Operation: Funhouse that was hitting a predictable snag, namely the Korea People's Navy Force (KPNF) and the uncertain determination of the PLAN:The KPNF's vessels were rather old, small and crappy. They also had a love affair with anything that could launch a torpedo and they listed over 700 of these floating deathtraps (only 13 of which could be classified as surface warships) and the fanatical crews to take them into battle.The PLAN's numbers were far more realistic and the fleet generally more modern. Only their North (18 surface warships) and East Fleets (22 plus 5 'elsewhere') could play any role in an upcoming FUBAR, and both fleets were heading out to sea, mainly to avoid the sporadic, but increasingly effective Khanate air strikes.The FU to be BAR'ed was the Russian Far East Fleet (RFEF) (6 warships strong, ) that had seized on this crazy idea (per my suggestion) to sail south, around the Korean peninsula so they could land elements of the 55th Guards Red Banner Marine Brigade (the 165th Marine Regiment and the 180th Marine Tank Battalion).Theoretically they were going to be the 'Southern Shielding Force' that would interpose itself between the Khanate and Beijing. It should surprise no one that the RFEF's flotilla was unequal to the task of taking their destination, the port of Qinhuangdao, by amphibious assault. Fortunately for the Gods of War (which did not include me), there were five other navies involved.Meanwhile, South Korea was having kittens because their always crazy northern kin were slathering on the insanity. (In how many Buddhist countries do people flock to the temples and pray that their neighbor attacks someone, anyone else, but them? That wasn't a religious conundrum I wanted to deal with.) N.Korea mobilizing meant S.Korea had to mobilize, which sucked down on their GNP as well.Besides, N.Korean dams and coal-powered plants kept the lights on in Seoul. Erring on the side of caution, the S. Korea (aka Republic of Korea, ROK) Army suggested calling up only one million of their three million person reserve force in order to assure Cousin Kim that this was a purely defensive gesture. It didn't work. Kim Jong-un castigated the ROK for antagonizing him, despite his declaration that he 'might' feel like invading the South in the immediate future.Into the emerging crisis, the ROK Navy could sortie nineteen small surface ships. Japan's Navy wasn't up to its old imperial standards, but could still deploy 45 surface warships. The 800 lb. gorilla in the room was the core of the 7th Fleet stationed at Yokosuka, Japan, the USS carrier George Washington and her 14 escort vessels.If the George Washington was the gorilla, RIMPAC 2014 was King Kong. 22 nations, 50 ships, including the USS carrier Ronald Reagan were engaged in war games in the Central Pacific. With them were 5 vessels of the PLAN, had Kim Jong-un just kept his mouth shut, this wouldn't have been an issue. Hell, if the Khanate had not come into existence and launched its Unification War, but he had and they did,To show the US was taking this escalation seriously (without tipping their hand that they knew about Funhouse, Carrier Strike Group One (CSG 1) (the Carl Vinson +10) was rushing across the Pacific from San Diego. CSG 3 (the John C. Stennis +2) was being assembled hastily so that they could rendezvous with CSG 1 ASAP. So many brave souls running toward the danger, sometimes I hate myself.So now does it make sense that I found myself in a room with a US Senator tasked with riding herd on me?Anyway, there were the other three navies still unaccounted for, Taiwan / the Republic of China (ROC) (22 surface ships), Vietnam (7) and the Philippines (3). Taiwanese involvement was easy to explain, the PRC refused to acknowledge them as an independent country and probably never would.The Vietnam People's Navy was tiny in both numbers and tonnage. Five of the vessels were 1960's Soviet frigates. What Vietnam did have was a huge grudge against the PRC. The PLA invaded Vietnam in 1979 and devastated the northernmost provinces, killing as many as 100,000 civilians.The PLAN had walloped the VPN in 1974 (technically South Vietnam) and again in 1988. Out in the South China Sea were two island archipelagos; the Paracel (occupied by a small PLA garrison and claimed by the PRC, Vietnam and the ROC) and Spratlys Islands (disputed by Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines, the PRC, the ROC, and Vietnam).The Philippines had a grand total of three frigates (all between 50 and 70 years old). 99% of the time, they faced a hopeless struggle enforcing Philippines' South China Sea claims, except they were now experiencing that 1% where the PRC found itself in a life and death struggle. Even then, the PLAN's South Sea Fleet was hands-down the biggest player with 26 surface warships centered on the Carrier Liaoning.Except (and there always seems to be an 'except') virtually all the PLAN's naval aviation had gone off to fight the Khanate and it wasn't coming back, ever. In the air, the Philippines was next to useless. What did they have of offer in the struggle for the South China Sea? Bases. The ROC and Vietnam had much more to bring to the table.The Vietnamese People's Liberation Air Force (VPLAR) had about 50 front-line aircraft and 175 nearly obsolete models ~ the same models the PLAAF was now piloting. The ROC Air Force could put up 325 almost-new fighters that were now superior to their opponents on the mainland. Why would I give a shit?Things cascade. The Khanate Air Force took a two-day long deep breath as Putin's 'Policeman that only looks like an invading army' started their intervention. Forty-eight hours later, the Khanate started the fourth stage (the first lunge, defeat the PLA's counter-attack then the second lunge) of the campaign.Their initial air power was still skating on thin ice where maintenance was concerned. They need more time to thoroughly rest their pilots and bring all their top-flight equipment to 100% working condition. Against them, in two days the PLAAF's assets increased by over 250 fighters.In turn, the Khanate had added their constituent state air forces plus nearly 80 new cutting edge air planes and 25 drones. Phase Four saw rolling airstrikes all along the forces massing in front of the northern and central Tumens. For a few hours, the PLA thought they knew what was going on.They were wrong and this was where my meeting with OT came in. Jab with the right, cut them down with the left. The left in my case was Tibet. Yeah, Tibet. Economic value = not nearly enough. From the very start of the war, a small number of seemingly inconsequential air strikes had seriously eroded the PLA and PLAAFs combat power in the Tibetan Plateau while leaving the roads, bridges and towns intact.Common military logic dictated that the Khanate had to punch their way further east into Qinghai (to the south) and Gansu (to the north) provinces. That was where the population and industry where. Farther east were even greater numbers of people and factories and the Khanate forces in the North hadn't been strong enough to threaten to cut off the Qinghai-Gansu front. Then the Russians showed up and the Khanate forces threatening that flank doubled overnight.The PLA hastily reinforced their northern flank, using troops from their strategic reserves. The move resulted in incredible attrition by airpower to the freshly equipped formations. The PLA was about to get flanked, but not from the north. Southwest of Qinghai was Tibet. A third of the Khanate's mobile forces now swept around in a huge left haymaker to the south.My job? I needed the 'Free Tibet' forces in the US and UK to provide public and moral support to the Khanate move. As Khanate Special Forces seized crucial bottlenecks in Tibet, they needed the locals to keep their 'liberators' informed of PLA presences and undermine any attempt to create a guerilla movement.The five Tumens dedicated to being the Schwerpunkt (point of maximum effort) of this flanking maneuver were going to be on a tight timetable if they were going to surround the PLA forces in Central China.My plan was to convince the Tibetans that the PRC's 55 years of occupation was coming to an end and the Great Khan wanted to sign a 'Treaty of Mutual Respect' (my invention). This would require both the Khanate and Tibet to recognize each other's right to exist the moment a cease-fire was reached. That was it. No 'armed presence', or 'mutual defense' agreements.The treaty would be formally signed in Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, when the city was safe ~ as determined by the Central Tibetan Administration (the Tibetan Government in Exile, CTA). Riki came up with an additional sweetener and proved she was quickly adjusting to our group's extra-governmental capabilities.

Middle East Focus Presents: 'Taking the Edge Off the Middle East' with Brian Katulis. A series of casual conversations with leading policy professionals on the most important happenings in the Middle East today - hosted by MEI's Senior Fellow Brian Katulis.  Barbara A. Leaf is a seasoned diplomat and expert on the Middle East, having served as the US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs and held key positions in US embassies across the region. In this episode, Barbara joins Brian to discuss the array of “black swan” events currently unfolding in the Middle East, and how the second Trump administration may respond to these challenges. They discuss the broader implications of these developments for US foreign policy, national security, and regional stability.

#LEBANON: Hezbollah must be moved back. David Schenker is the Taube Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute and director of the Linda and Tony Rubin Program on Arab Politics. Confirmed by the Senate on June 5, 2019, he served as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs through January 2021. In that capacity, he was the principal Middle East advisor to the secretary of state and the senior official overseeing the conduct of U.S. policy and diplomacy in a region stretching from Morocco to Iran to Yemen, with responsibility for eighteen countries, the Palestinian Authority, and Western Sahara. Malcolm Hoenlein @Conf_of_pres @mhoenlein1 1900 BEIRUT

In this episode of BioTalk with Rich Bendis, we have the honor of speaking with the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tunisia, Joey R. Hood. With an impressive diplomacy and international relations background, Ambassador Hood sheds light on the vital collaboration between the U.S. and Tunisia in scientific research, innovation, and technology transfer. Host Rich Bendis is the President and CEO of BioHealth Innovation, Inc., dedicated to accelerating biohealth opportunities and fostering innovation across the BioHealth Capital Region of Maryland, Washington D.C., and Virginia….and the world.   Ambassador Hood discusses the current status of U.S.-Tunisia cooperation in scientific research and technology transfer, emphasizing these areas' critical role in Tunisia's development. He highlights the importance of scientific research, innovation, and technology transfer in Tunisia and explains how the U.S. can support and enhance these efforts.   We explore the Department of State-US funded CURES project in Tunisia, examining its goals, progress, and future objectives. Ambassador Hood elaborates on the significance of U.S. funding for projects like CURES and the broader impact on both nations. BioHealth Innovation, Inc. (BHI) is a contractor to FHI 360, supporting the CURES project to assist Tunisia in building its life science research, technology transfer, and commercialization capabilities.   The conversation also covers other key partnerships and projects that the U.S. supports in Tunisia, aimed at fostering research and technology transfer. Ambassador Hood shares insights into these collaborations and his vision for the future of U.S.-Tunisia relations in science and technology.   "The collaborative efforts between the U.S. and Tunisia in scientific research and technology transfer are crucial for advancing innovation and fostering economic growth. The programs we discuss on BioTalk are a testament to the great work happening in this field. I want to thank Ambassador Hood for joining us and sharing his invaluable insights on these important initiatives," says Rich Bendis.   About Joey R. Hood: Joey Hood was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on December 22, 2022. He has held several leadership positions in the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, including Acting Assistant Secretary. His extensive diplomatic career includes assignments in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Qatar. Prior to the Foreign Service, Mr. Hood was a Fulbright scholar in Burkina Faso and worked at a bank in Vermont. He earned a Master's degree from the Fletcher School at Tufts University and a Bachelor's degree from Dartmouth College.   Tune in to BioTalk for an insightful conversation with Ambassador Joey R. Hood as we explore the dynamics of U.S.-Tunisia cooperation in science and technology, and its potential to drive innovation and progress.

FDD Senior Fellow David Daoud delivers timely situational updates and analyses on Israel, Lebanon, Hezbollah, and the war in the Middle East, followed by a conversation with David Schenker, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.Learn more at: fdd.org/fddmorningbrief/

A conversation with David Schenker - Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy and former United States Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. Covering ongoing Hezbollah-Israel attacks, diplomacy and deescalation efforts, difficulties surrounding UNSCR 1701's implementation, opposition capabilities and the likelihood of expanded war into Lebanon. Read his recent piece 'Changing the Israel-Lebanon Status Quo: U.S. Options': https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/changing-israel-lebanon-status-quo-us-options Help support The Beirut Banyan by contributing via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/walkbeirut Or donating through our Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/thebeirutbanyan Subscribe to our podcast from your preferred platform. Follow us on Facebook, Instagram & Twitter: @thebeirutbanyan And check out our website: www.beirutbanyan.com 0:00 Intro 0:39 An asset for Iran 2:27 Vis-a-vis Lebanese authorities 7:15 Gains to the South 10:38 On Lebanon's behalf 14:38 UNSCR 1701 18:35 Stalling at best 22:21 July 2006 vs October 2023 27:01 Missed opportunities 30:19 Syrian refugees 33:35 Absent from diplomacy 34:58 Through my father

U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Michael Ratney joins The 966 to talk diplomacy and U.S.-Saudi relations. In recent years, he was the Acting Deputy Director of the U.S. Department of State's training center, the Foreign Service Institute, where he had also been Dean of the State Department's School of Language Studies.  He was Chargé d'Affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem in 2021, and earlier served on the faculty of the National Defense University.Ambassador Ratney was the U.S. Special Envoy for Syria from 2015 to 2018, and also served as acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Levant and Israel and Palestinian Affairs.  He was the U.S. Consul General in Jerusalem from 2012 to 2015, where he was responsible for U.S. relations with Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem.  He has been Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Media, overseeing a network of State Department media hubs throughout the world, and was Spokesman for the State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Ed Djerejian says Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin once told him “There is no military solution to this conflict, only a political one.” Rabin was assassinated a few years later and today bullets are flying, bombs are falling, and 1,200 Israelis are dead after the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7 and nearly 30,000 Gazans have been killed in the Israeli response. Yet Djerejain still believes that a breakthrough is possible even in the current moment, as horrible as it is. Djerejian, a senior fellow at Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Relations, says the crisis has shaken the regional status quo to the point where—if the United States pursues diplomacy that includes principled pragmatism, coalition-building, and good old- fashioned backbone—a breakthrough may finally be possible. But in a recent paper he argues that any breakthrough will have to be built around a two-state solution, which he says is the only path to peace and stability not only in Israel and Palestine, but the wider Middle East. Djerejian's career as a diplomat spanned eight U.S. presidential administrations beginning with John F. Kennedy's, and he also served as U.S. Ambassador to Syria and Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. Ed Djerejian's Policy Recommendations:The U.S. should stake out a strong, principled position on a two-state solution based on land for peace.The U.S. should build a broad multinational coalition around its diplomacy in the region.U.S. leaders and diplomats should make American national security interests clear, both globally and in the region.Ambassador (Ret.) Edward P. Djerejian is a residential Senior Fellow at the Middle East Initiative in Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Relations. Djerejian joined the U.S. Foreign Service in 1962 and his 32-year diplomatic career spanned eight presidential administrations from John F. Kennedy to William J. Clinton. Djerejian is a leading expert on national security, foreign policy, public diplomacy, and the complex political, security, economic, religious, and ethnic issues of the broader Middle East. He is the author of “Danger and Opportunity: An American Ambassador's Journey Through the Middle East.” He recently completed a nearly 30-year tenure as founding director of Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. Ambassador Djerejian graduated with a Bachelor of Science from the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University in 1960. He received an Honorary Doctorate in the Humanities from his alma mater in 1992 and a Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, from Middlebury College. He speaks Arabic, Russian, French, and Armenian. His many awards and honors include the Presidential Distinguished Service Award, the Department of State's Distinguished Honor Award, the Ellis Island Medal of Honor, the Anti-Defamation League's Moral Statesman Award, the Award for Humanitarian Diplomacy from Netanya Academic College in Israel, the National Order of the Cedar. Ralph Ranalli of the HKS Office of Communications and Public Affairs is the host, producer, and editor of HKS PolicyCast. A former journalist, public television producer, and entrepreneur, he holds an AB in Political Science from UCLA and an MS in Journalism from Columbia University.Editorial support is provided by Nora Delaney and Robert O'Neill. Design and graphics support is provided by Laura King, Delane Meadows and the OCPA Design Team. Social media promotion and support is provided by Natalie Montaner and the OCPA Digital Team. 

Last we spoke with Joey Hood, he was between assignments with the State Department, waiting for word on where he and his family would go next. It seemed everything from his language study to early career experiences were setting him up for the ultimate big league position. In this Roads Taken Revisited, Joey talks about being nominated as U.S. Ambassador to Tunisia, the confirmation process, and what he sees as the potential in growing our bilateral relationship.In this episode, find out from Joey how taking everything as it comes can sometimes lead you to where you're meant to be…on Roads Taken with Leslie Jennings Rowley. About This Episode's GuestJoey Hood was confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Tunisia by the U.S. Senate in December 2022.  He served in leadership positions in the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, including as Acting Assistant Secretary. He has served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Iraq and in Kuwait, as well as Consul General and Principal Officer in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Prior to these assignments, Mr. Hood was Acting Director of the State Department's Office of Iranian Affairs. For Joey's first appearance on Roads Taken, listen to The Generalist Diplomat. Find more episodes at https://roadstakenshow.com Executive Producer/Host: Leslie Jennings RowleyMusic: Brian BurrowsEmail the show at RoadsTakenShow@gmail.com

In this episode of Goldman Sachs Exchanges, Edward P. Djerejian, former US Ambassador to Israel and Syria, and former US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, and Emile Hokayem, Director of Regional Security and Senior Fellow for Middle East Security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, break down the risks of the Middle East conflict and explain how it could erupt into a wider regional or even broader war. This episode is based on Goldman Sachs Research's latest Top of Mind report, Middle East Risks.

(Recorded September 2023). Kevin Roland is a Managing Director in New York-based global CEO advisory firm Teneo. He was a member of the Foreign Service of the U.S. State Department, serving in front-line diplomatic roles in Northern Ireland (from 2009-2012), as well as Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, South Africa, Jordan, and the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs in Washington, D.C. Despite working around the world, Kevin and his family reside at their home in New Quay, County Clare, Ireland. In today's episode we talk about: Why his family decided to call Ireland home Watching his dad loading planes as a kid Colin Powell racing around in a supercar with the King of Jordan Being mentored by the current head of the CIA Playing basketball in the Middle East Becoming fluent in arabic How he got into the private sector (and why it matters) And his advice to 18-year-olds…. “don't hug the shore!” Check it out. https://bestofbelfast.org/stories/kevin-roland-teneo

EPISODE 1793: In this KEEN ON show, Andrew talks to Alexander Hall Hall, the co-host of the Global Disorder podcast, about Israel, Gaza, the Ukraine, Brexit and her long career as a British diplomatAmbassador Alexandra Hall Hall is a former British diplomat with over 30 years' experience, including as the British Ambassador to Georgia from 2013 to 2016, and as Brexit Counsellor at the British Embassy in Washington, before resigning from the Foreign Service in December 2016 due to a conflict of principle. Previous roles included postings to Bangkok, Washington, Bogotá, and New Delhi. In London, Ambassador Hall Hall also served as Head of the Middle East Peace process unit, as head of Humanitarian Affairs within the United Nations department, as head of the Human Rights and Democracy Department, and as an advisor on the European Union in the Cabinet Office. From 2004 to 2006, she was detailed on exchange to the U.S. Department of State, first as a Special Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Rights, and Labor; and then with the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs working on the Middle East Partnership Initiative. She has taught human rights at George Washington University and was a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council from 2016 to 2018.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.

#NorthAfrica: David Schenker: David Schenker is the Taube Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute and director of the Linda and Tony Rubin Program on Arab Politics. Confirmed by the Senate on June 5, 2019, he served as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs through January 2021. In that capacity, he was the principal Middle East advisor to the secretary of state and the senior official overseeing the conduct of U.S. policy and diplomacy in a region stretching from Morocco to Iran to Yemen, with responsibility for eighteen countries, the Palestinian Authority, and Western Sahara.  Malcolm Hoenlein https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4194217-us-support-for-morocco-is-no-mistake-biden-should-reaffirm-it/ https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/algeria-morocco-relations-western-sahara/?one-time-read-code=234552169469322088229 https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/13/africa/morocco-earthquake-aid-intl/index.html 1849 Egypt

Tonight: The show begins in Siberia at the Vostochny Cosmodrome for the wartime meeting of the dictator Kim and the autocrat Putin. From Poland to London, from the G20 at Delhi to the earthquake of Morroco and the flood of Libya; from the Eu struggles with the Ukraine war to the impeachment inquiry in DC. Attention to the troubled transition in Guatemala, the violence threat in Quito, the runaway inflation in Argentina and the rallying rage in Santiago at the 50th anniversary of the Pinochet coup against Salvador Allende. 1913 Dayton Flood CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR FIRST HOUR 9-915 #Ukraine: Kim to Vostochny; Poland for nukes. Anatol Lieven, Quincy Institute https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/putin-and-kim-meet-in-russia-but-what-are-the-main-takeaways/ar-AA1gGWX2 915-930 #Ukraine: Third winter of war is coming. Anatol Lieven, Quincy Institute https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/putin-and-kim-meet-in-russia-but-what-are-the-main-takeaways/ar-AA1gGWX2 930-945 #ScalaReport: #PRC slowdown in panic. Chris Riegel, Scala.com #Strtacache https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/china-2023-gdp-growth-forecast-cut-50-45-2024-economists-2023-09-12/ 945-1000 #MrMarket: Middle Class disappearing into prosperity. Veronique de Rugy, Mercatus Center https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-middle-class-is-prospering/ SECOND HOUR 10-1015 #Israel: Jonathan Schanzer: Dr. Jonathan Schanzer is senior vice president for research at FDD, where he oversees the work of the organization's experts and scholars. He is also on the leadership team of FDD's Center on Economic and Financial Power, a project on the use of financial and economic power as a tool of statecraft. Malcolm Hoenlein   https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/11/middleeast/us-india-gulf-europe-corridor-mime-intl/index.html https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-why-the-g20-refused-to-condemn-russian-aggression-and-how-that-might-change-213384 https://www.maritimegateway.com/the-significance-of-imec-for-israel-us-india-and-west-asian-nations/   1015-1030 #Venezuela: #Argentina: Joseph Humire: Joseph M. Humire is the Executive Director of the Center for a Secure Free Society. A global security expert specializing on transnational threats in the Western Hemisphere, he provides regular briefings on international terrorism, transnational organized crime, Islamism and Iran's influence Latin America to various entities within the U.S. Department of Defense and intelligence community, as well as prominent think tanks and universities around the world. Malcolm Hoenlein   https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2023/09/13/u-s-treasury-sanctions-latin-america-based-hezbollah-financial-network/ https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1726 https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/the-maduro-hezbollah-nexus-how-iran-backed-networks-prop-up-the-venezuelan-regime/ https://apnews.com/article/china-venezuela-relationship-all-weather-0c9122e6e69c29ebe1a99356d1a4560a https://euro.eseuro.com/world/992717.html   1030-1045 #USA:  Patrick Daly: Pat Daly is the Principal Deputy Director/COO of SCN, the Secure Community Network.  Malcolm Hoenlein. https://www.timesofisrael.com/2-more-us-synagogues-targeted-by-fake-bomb-threats-ahead-of-high-holidays/   1045-1100 #NorthAfrica: David Schenker: David Schenker is the Taube Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute and director of the Linda and Tony Rubin Program on Arab Politics. Confirmed by the Senate on June 5, 2019, he served as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs through January 2021. In that capacity, he was the principal Middle East advisor to the secretary of state and the senior official overseeing the conduct of U.S. policy and diplomacy in a region stretching from Morocco to Iran to Yemen, with responsibility for eighteen countries, the Palestinian Authority, and Western Sahara.  Malcolm Hoenlein https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4194217-us-support-for-morocco-is-no-mistake-biden-should-reaffirm-it/ https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/algeria-morocco-relations-western-sahara/?one-time-read-code=234552169469322088229 https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/13/africa/morocco-earthquake-aid-intl/index.html     THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 1/2: #EU: G20 ducks the Ukraine War & What is to be done? Judy Dempsie, Carnegie https://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/90495 1115-1130 1/2: #EU: G20 ducks the Ukraine War & What is to be done? Judy Dempsie, Carnegie https://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/90495 1130-1145 1/2: #POTUS; The futile impeachment dama & What is to be done. Andrew McCarthy, NRO. Thaddeus McCotter, American Greatness https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/speaker-mccarthy-decides-an-impeachment-inquiry-doesnt-require-a-vote-of-the-full-house-after-all/     1145-1200 2/2: #POTUS; The futile impeachment dama & What is to be done. Andrew McCarthy, NRO. Thaddeus McCotter, American Greatness https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/speaker-mccarthy-decides-an-impeachment-inquiry-doesnt-require-a-vote-of-the-full-house-after-all/   FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 #NewWorldReport: Chile remembers Allende.  Latin American Research Professor Evan Ellis, U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute. @revanellis #NewWorldReportEllis https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/chilean-mexican-presidents-call-democracy-before-50th-anniversary-chilean-coup-2023-09-10/ 1215-1230 #NewWorldReport: Guatemala delecition transition disorder.  Latin American Research Professor Evan Ellis, U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute. @revanellis #NewWorldReportEllis https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/guatemala-president-elect-arevalo-suspends-participation-transition-2023-09-13/ 1230-1245 #NewWorldReport: Libertarian for Argentina Latin American Research Professor Evan Ellis, U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute. @revanellis #NewWorldReportEllis https://www.reuters.com/markets/argentine-shoppers-face-daily-race-deals-inflation-soars-above-100-2023-09-13/ 1245-100 AM #NewWorldReport: AMLO chooses. Sheinbaum. Latin American Research Professor Evan Ellis, U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute. @revanellis #NewWorldReportEllis https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexican-president-backs-ruling-party-candidate-after-disputed-selection-process-2023-09-07/

The annual war authorization (NDAA) is an excellent opportunity to examine our military's roles and goals in the world. In this episode, learn about how much of our tax money Congress provided the Defense Department, including how much of that money is classified, how much more money was dedicated to war than was requested, and what they are authorized to use the money for. This episode also examines our Foreign Military Financing programs with a deep dive into a new partner country: Ecuador. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal Support Congressional Dish via Patreon (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536. Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! View the shownotes on our website at https://congressionaldish.com/cd269-ndaa-2023-plan-ecuador Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD244: Keeping Ukraine CD243: Target Nicaragua CD230: Pacific Deterrence Initiative CD229: Target Belarus CD218: Minerals are the New Oil CD191: The “Democracies” Of Elliott Abrams CD187: Combating China CD176: Target Venezuela: Regime Change in Progress CD172: The Illegal Bombing of Syria CD147: Controlling Puerto Rico CD128: Crisis in Puerto Rico CD108: Regime Change CD102: The World Trade Organization: COOL? World Trade System “IMF vs. WTO vs. World Bank: What's the Difference?” James McWhinney. Oct 10, 2021. Investopedia. The Profiteers: Bechtel and the Men Who Built the World. Sally Denton. Simon and Schuster: 2017. Littoral Combat Ships “The Pentagon Saw a Warship Boondoggle. Congress Saw Jobs.” Eric Lipton. Feb 4, 2023. The New York Times. “BAE Systems: Summary.” Open Secrets. Foreign Military Sales Program “Written Testimony of Assistant Secretary of State Jessica Lewis before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at a hearing on the ‘Future of Security Sector Assistance.'” March 10, 2022. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Ecuador “Ecuador - Modern history.” Encyclopedia Britannica. “Ecuador Tried to Curb Drilling and Protect the Amazon. The Opposite Happened.” Catrin Einhorn and Manuela Andreoni. Updated Jan 20, 2023. The New York Times. “Ecuador: An Overview,” [IF11218]. June S. Beittel and Rachel L. Martin. Sep 9, 2022. Congressional Research Service. “Ecuador: In Brief,” [R44294]. June S. Beittel. Updated Feb 13, 2018. Congressional Research Service. “Ecuador's 2017 Elections,” [IF10581] June S. Beittel. Updated April 20, 2017. Congressional Research Services. Debt Default “Ecuador's Debt Default: Exposing a Gap in the Global Financial Architecture.” Sarah Anderson and Neil Watkins. Dec 15, 2008. Institute for Policy Studies. “Ecuador: President Orders Debt Default.” Simon Romero. Dec 12, 2008. The New York Times. Violence and Drugs “Ecuador's High Tide of Drug Violence.” Nov 4, 2022. International Crisis Group. “Lasso will propose to the US an Ecuador Plan to confront drug trafficking.” Jun 8, 2022. EcuadorTimes.net. “‘Es hora de un Plan Ecuador': el presidente Lasso dice en entrevista con la BBC que su país necesita ayuda para enfrentar el narcotráfico.” Vanessa Buschschluter. Nov 4, 2021. BBC. “Ecuador declares state of emergency over crime wave.” Oct 19, 2021. Deutsche Welle. Mining “An Ecuadorean Town Is Sinking Because of Illegal Mining.” Updated Mar 28, 2022. CGTN America. “New Mining Concessions Could Severely Decrease Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Ecuador.” Bitty A. Roy. Jun 19, 2018. Tropical Conservation Science. Foreign Infrastructure Investments “Ecuador prioritizing 4 road projects involving more than US$1bn.” Nov 28, 2022. BNamericas. “USTDA Expands Climate Portfolio in Ecuador.” May 27, 2022. U.S. Trade and Development Agency. “Ecuador's controversial and costliest hydropower project prompts energy rethink.” Richard Jiménez and Allen Panchana. Dec 16, 2021. Diálogo Chino. “Ecuador's Power Grid Gets a Massive Makeover.” Frank Dougherty. Mar 1, 2021. Power. Fishing “China fishing fleet defied U.S. in standoff on the high seas.” Joshua Goodman. Nov 2, 2022. Chattanooga Times Free Press. “Report to Congress: National 5-year Strategy for Combating Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing (2022-2026).” October 2022. U.S. Interagency Working Group on IUU Fishing. “United States Launches Public-Private Partnership In Peru And Ecuador To Promote Sustainable, Profitable Fishing Practices.” Oct 7, 2022. U.S. Agency for International Development. “US Coast Guard Conducts High Seas Boarding for First Time in the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization Convention Area.” U.S. Coast Guard. Oct 5, 2022. Diálogo Americas. “Walmart, Whole Foods, and Slave-Labor Shrimp.” Adam Chandler. Dec 16, 2015. The Atlantic. South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO) Cutter Ships 22 USC Sec. 2321j, Update “Coast Guard Cutter Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress,” [R42567]. Ronald O'Rourke. Updated August 30, 2022. Congressional Research Service. Julian Assange “How Julian Assange became an unwelcome guest in Ecuador's embassy.” Luke Harding et al. May 15, 2018. The Guardian. “Ecuador Expels U.S. Ambassador Over WikiLeaks Cable.” Simon Romero. Apr 5, 2011. The New York Times. Chevron Case “Controversial activist Steven Donziger is a folk hero to the left, a fraud to Big Oil.” Zack Budryk. Dec 27, 2022. The Hill. Venezuela “Ecuador: Lasso Calls for Increased Pressure on Venezuela.” Apr 14, 2021. teleSUR. China Trade Deal “Ecuador reaches trade deal with China, aims to increase exports, Lasso says.” Jan 3, 2023. Reuters. “On the Ecuador-China Debt Deal: Q&A with Augusto de la Torre.” Sep 23, 2022. The Dialogue. “Ecuador sees trade deal with China at end of year, debt talks to begin.” Alexandra Valencia. Feb 5, 2022. Reuters. Business Reforms “Will Ecuador's Business Reforms Attract Investment?” Ramiro Crespo. Mar 3, 2022. Latin American Advisor. U.S. Ecuador Partnership “Why Ecuador's president announced his re-election plans in Washington.” Isabel Chriboga. Dec 22, 2022. The Atlantic Council. “USMCA as a Framework: New Talks Between U.S., Ecuador, Uruguay.” Jim Wiesemeyer. Dec 21, 2022. AgWeb. “US seeks to bolster Ecuador ties as China expands regional role.” Dec 19, 2022. Al Jazeera. “As China's influence grows, Biden needs to supercharge trade with Ecuador.” Isabel Chiriboga. Dec 19, 2022. The Atlantic Council. “The United States and Ecuador to Explore Expanding the Protocol on Trade Rules and Transparency under the Trade and Investment Council (TIC).” Nov 1, 2022. Office of the United States Trade Representative. “A delegation of U.S. senators visits Ecuador.” Oct 19, 2022. U.S. Embassy & Consulate in Ecuador. Referendum “Guillermo Lasso Searches for a Breakthrough.” Sebastián Hurtado. Dec 19, 2022. Americas Quarterly. State Enterprise Resignation “Ecuador President Guillermo Lasso asks heads of all state firms to resign.” Jan 18, 2023. Buenos Aires Times. Lithium Triangle “Why the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act Could Benefit Both Mining and Energy in Latin America.” John Price. Aug 22, 2022. Americas Market Intelligence. Colombia “Latin America's New Left Meets Davos.” Catherine Osborn. Jan 20, 2023. Foreign Policy. “How Colombia plans to keep its oil and coal in the ground.” María Paula Rubiano A. Nov 16, 2022. BBC. “Colombia: Background and U.S. Relations.” June S. Beittel. Updated December 16, 2021. Congressional Research Service. Tax Reform “In Colombia, Passing Tax Reform Was the Easy Part.” Ricardo Ávila. Nov 23, 2022. Americas Quarterly. “U.S. Government Must Take Urgent Action on Colombia's Tax Reform Bill.” Cesar Vence and Megan Bridges. Oct 26, 2022. U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “Letter from ACT et. al. to Sec. Janet Yellen, Sec. Gina Raimondo, and Hon. Katherine Tai.” U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Relationship with U.S. “Does glyphosate cause cancer?” Cancer Treatment Centers of America. Jul 8, 2021. City of Hope. “Colombian Intelligence Unit Used U.S. Equipment to Spy on Politicians, Journalists.” Kejal Vyas. May 4, 2020. The Wall Street Journal. “Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence.” Luoping Zhang et al. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research Vol. 781, July–September 2019, pp. 186-206. “Colombia to use drones to fumigate coca leaf with herbicide.” Jun 26, 2018. Syria “Everyone Is Denouncing the Syrian Rebels Now Slaughtering Kurds. But Didn't the U.S. Once Support Some of Them?” Mehdi Hasan. Oct 26, 2019. The Intercept. “U.S. Relations With Syria: Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet.” Jan 20, 2021. U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. “Behind the Sudden Death of a $1 Billion Secret C.I.A. War in Syria.” Mark Mazzetti et al. Aug 2, 2017. The New York Times. “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.” C. J. Chivers and Eric Schmitt. Mar 24, 2013. The New York Times. Government Funding “House Passes 2023 Government Funding Legislation.” Dec 23, 2022. House Appropriations Committee Democrats. “Division C - Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2023.” Senate Appropriations Committee. Jen's highlighted version “Division K - Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2023.” Senate Appropriations Committee. Laws H.R.2617 - Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 H.R.7776 - James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 Jen's highlighted version Bills H.R. 8711 - United States-Ecuador Partnership Act of 2022 S. 3591 - United States-Ecuador Partnership Act of 2022 Audio Sources A conversation with General Laura J. Richardson on security across the Americas January 19, 2023 The Atlantic Council Clips 17:51 Gen. Laura Richardson: The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that has been ongoing for the last over a decade in this region, 21 of 31 countries have signed on to this Belt and Road Initiative. I could take Argentina last January, the most recent signatory on to the Belt and Road Initiative, and $23 billion in infrastructure projects that signatory and signing on to that. But again, 21 of 31 countries. There are 25 countries that actually have infrastructure projects by the PRC. Four that aren't signatories of the BRI, but they do actually have projects within their countries. But not just that. Deepwater ports in 17 countries. I mean, this is critical infrastructure that's being invested in. I have the most space enabling infrastructure in the Western Hemisphere in Latin America and the Caribbean. And I just caused question, you know, why? Why is all of this critical infrastructure being invested in so heavily? In terms of telecommunications, 5G, I've got five countries with the 5G backbone in this region. I've got 24 countries with the PRC Huawei 3G-4G. Five countries have the Huawei backbone infrastructure. If I had to guess, they'll probably be offered a discount to upgrade and stay within the same PRC network. And so very, very concerning as we work with our countries. 20:00 Gen. Laura Richardson: What I'm starting to see as well is that this economy...the economy impacts to these partner nations is affecting their ability to buy equipment. And you know, as I work with our partner nations, and they invest in U.S. equipment, which is the best equipment, I must say I am a little biased, but it is the best equipment, they also buy into the supply chain of spare parts, and all those kinds of things that help to sustain this piece of equipment over many, many years. So in terms of the investment that they're getting, and that equipment to be able to stay operational, and the readiness of it, is very, very important. But now these partner nations, due to the impacts of their economy, are starting to look at the financing that goes along with it. Not necessarily the quality of the equipment, but who has the best finance deal because they can't afford it so much up front. 24:15 Gen. Laura Richardson: This region, why this region matters, with all of its rich resources and rare earth elements. You've got the lithium triangle which is needed for technology today. 60% of the world's lithium is in the lithium triangle: Argentina Bolivia, Chile. You just have the largest oil reserves -- light, sweet, crude -- discovered off of Guyana over a year ago. You have Venezuela's resources as well with oil, copper, gold. China gets 36% of its food source from this region. We have the Amazon, lungs of the world. We have 31% of the world's freshwater in this region too. I mean, it's just off the chart. 28:10 Gen. Laura Richardson: You know, you gotta question, why are they investing so heavily everywhere else across the planet? I worry about these dual-use state-owned enterprises that pop up from the PRC, and I worry about the dual use capability being able to flip them around and use them for military use. 33:30 Interviewer: Russia can't have the ability to provide many of these countries with resupply or new weapons. I mean, they're struggling to supply themselves, in many cases, for Ukraine. So is that presenting an opportunity for maybe the US to slide in? Gen. Laura Richardson: It is, absolutely and we're taking advantage of that, I'd like to say. So, we are working with those countries that have the Russian equipment to either donate or switch it out for United States equipment. or you Interviewer: Are countries taking the....? Gen. Laura Richardson: They are, yeah. 45:25 Gen. Laura Richardson: National Guard State Partnership Program is huge. We have the largest National Guard State Partnership Program. It has come up a couple of times with Ukraine. Ukraine has the State Partnership Program with California. How do we initially start our great coordination with Ukraine? It was leveraged to the National Guard State Partnership Program that California had. But I have the largest out of any of the CoCOMMs. I have 24 state partnership programs utilize those to the nth degree in terms of another lever. 48:25 Gen. Laura Richardson: Just yesterday I had a zoom call with the U.S. Ambassadors from Argentina and Chile and then also the strategy officer from Levant and then also the VP for Global Operations from Albermarle for lithium, to talk about the lithium triangle in Argentina, Bolivia and Chile and the companies, how they're doing and what they see in terms of challenges and things like that in the lithium business and then the aggressiveness or the influence and coercion from the PRC. House Session June 15, 2022 Clips Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA): The GAO found that the LCS had experienced engine failure in 10 of the 11 deployments reviewed. Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA): One major reason for the excessive costs of LCS: contractors. Unlike other ships where sailors do the maintenance, LCS relies almost exclusively on contractors who own and control the technical data needed to maintain and repair. Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA): Our top priority and national defense strategy is China and Russia. We can't waste scarce funds on costly LCS when there are more capable platforms like destroyers, attack submarines, and the new constellation class frigate. A review of the President's Fiscal Year 2023 funding request and budget justification for the Navy and Marine Corps May 25, 2022 Senate Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Defense Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Carlos Del Toro, Secretary, United States Navy Admiral Michael M. Gilday, Chief of Naval Operations General David H. Berger, Commandant of the Marine Corps Clips Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS): I think the christening was just a few years ago...maybe three or so. So the fact that we christened the ship one year and a few years later we're decommissioning troubles me. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS): Are there not other uses, if there's something missing from this class of ships, that we would avoid decommissioning? Adm. Michael Gilday: We need a capable, lethal, ready Navy more than we need a larger Navy that's less capable, less lethal, and less ready. And so, unfortunately the Littoral combat ships that we have, while the mechanical issues were a factor, a bigger factor was was the lack of sufficient warfighting capability against a peer competitor in China. Adm. Michael Gilday: And so we refuse to put an additional dollar against that system that wouldn't match the Chinese undersea threat. Adm. Michael Gilday: In terms of what are the options going forward with these ships, I would offer to the subcommittee that we should consider offering these ships to other countries that would be able to use them effectively. There are countries in South America, as an example, as you pointed out, that would be able to use these ships that have small crews. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and Secretary ofDefense Lloyd J. Austin III Remarks to Traveling Press April 25, 2022 China's Role in Latin America and the Caribbean March 31, 2022 Senate Foreign Relations Committee Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Kerri Hannan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Diplomacy, Policy, Planning, and Coordination, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State Peter Natiello, Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator, Latin America and Caribbean Bureau, U.S. Agency for International Development Andrew M. Herscowitz, Chief Development Officer, U.S. International Development Finance Corporation Margaret Myers, Director of the Asia & Latin America Program, Inter-American Dialogue Evan Ellis, Senior Associate, Center for Strategic and International Studies Clips 24:20 Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA): Ecuador for example, nearly 20 years ago, former President Rafael Correa promised modernization for Ecuador, embracing Chinese loans and infrastructure projects in exchange for its oil. Fast forward to today. Ecuador now lives with the Chinese financed and built dam that's not fully operational despite being opened in 2016. The Coca Codo Sinclair Dam required over 7000 repairs, it sits right next to an active volcano, and erosion continues to damage the dam. The dam also caused an oil spill in 2020 that has impacted indigenous communities living downstream. And all that's on top of the billions of dollars that Ecuador still owes China. 56:40 Peter Natiello: One example that I could provide is work that we've done in Ecuador, with Ecuadorian journalists, to investigate, to analyze and to report on the issue of illegal and unregulated fishing off Ecuador's coast. And we do that because we want to ensure that Ecuadorian citizens have fact-based information upon which they can make decisions about China and countries like China, and whether they want their country working with them. 1:23:45 Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA): There are 86 million tons of identified lithium resources on the planet. On the planet. 49 million of the 86 million are in the Golden Triangle. That's Argentina, Bolivia, Chile. So what's our plan? 1:54:10 Evan Ellis: In security engagement, the PRC is a significant provider of military goods to the region including fighters, transport aircraft, and radars for Venezuela; helicopters and armored vehicles for Bolivia; and military trucks for Ecuador. 2:00:00 Margaret Myers: Ecuador is perhaps the best example here of a country that has begun to come to terms with the challenges associated with doing business with or interacting from a financial or investment perspective with China. And one need only travel the road from the airport to Quito where every day there are a lot of accidents because of challenges with the actual engineering of that road to know why many Ecuadorians feel this way. Examining U.S. Security Cooperation and Assistance March 10, 2022 Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Watch Full Hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Jessica Lewis, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State Mara Elizabeth Karlin, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans and Capabilities, U.S. Department of Defense Clips 1:23:17 Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT): According to one study, the DoD manages 48 of the 50 new security assistance programs that were created after the 9/11 attacks and out of the 170 existing security assistance programs today, DOD manages 87, a whopping 81% of those programs. That is a fundamental transition from the way in which we used to manage security assistance. And my worry is that it takes out of the equation the people who have the clearest and most important visibility on the ground as to the impact of that security assistance and those transfers. Sen. Chris Murphy: We just spent $87 billion in military assistance over 20 years in Afghanistan. And the army that we supported went up in smoke overnight. That is an extraordinary waste of U.S. taxpayer dollars, and it mirrors a smaller but similar investment we made from 2003 to 2014 in the Iraqi military, who disintegrated when they faced the prospect of a fight against ISIS. Clearly, there is something very wrong with the way in which we are flowing military assistance to partner countries, especially in complicated war zones. You've got a minute and 10 seconds, so maybe you can just preview some lessons that we have learned, or the process by which we are going to learn lessons from all of the money that we have wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan. Jessica Lewis: Senator, I'll be brief so that Dr. Karlin can jump in as well. I think we do need to learn lessons. We need to make sure, as I was just saying to Senator Cardin, that when we provide security assistance, we also look not just at train and equip, but we look at other things like how the Ministries of Defense operate? Is their security sector governant? Are we creating an infrastructure that's going to actually work? Mara Elizabeth Karlin: Thank you for raising this issue, Senator. And I can assure you that the Department of Defense is in the process of commissioning a study on this exact issue. I will just say in line with Assistant Secretary Lewis, it is really important that when we look at these efforts, we spend time assessing political will and we do not take an Excel spreadsheet approach to building partner militaries that misses the higher order issues that are deeply relevant to security sector governance, that will fundamentally show us the extent to which we can ultimately be successful or not with a partner. Thank you. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT): You know, in Iraq, last time I was there, we were spending four times as much money on security assistance as we were on non-security assistance. And what Afghanistan taught us amongst many things, is that if you have a fundamentally corrupt government, then all the money you're flowing into the military is likely wasted in the end because that government can't stand and thus the military can't stand. So it also speaks to rebalancing the way in which we put money into conflict zones, to not think that military assistance alone does the job. You got to be building sustainable governments that serve the public interests in order to make your security assistance matter and be effective. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. National Security Challenges and U.S. Military Activity in North and South America March 8, 2022 House Armed Services Committee Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Melissa G. Dalton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs Office of the Secretary of Defense General Laura Richardson, USA, Commander, U.S. Southern Command General Glen D. VanHerck, USAF, Commander, U.S. Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command Clips 17:30 General Laura Richardson: Colombia, for example, our strongest partner in the region, exports security by training other Latin American militaries to counter transnational threats. 1:20:00 General Laura Richardson: If I look at what PRC (People's Republic of China) is investing in the [SOUTHCOM] AOR (Area of Responsibility), over a five year period of 2017 to 2021: $72 billion. It's off the charts. And I can read a couple of the projects. The most concerning projects that I have are the $6 billion in projects specifically near the Panama Canal. And I look at the strategic lines of communication: Panama Canal and the Strait of Magellan. But just to highlight a couple of the projects. The nuclear power plant in Argentina: $7.9 billion. The highway in Jamaica: $5.6 billion. The energy refinery in Cuba, $5 billion. The highway in Peru: $4 billion. Energy dam in Argentina: $4 billion, the Metro in Colombia: $3.9 billion. The freight railway in Argentina: $3 billion. These are not small projects that they're putting in this region. This region is rich in resources, and the Chinese don't go there to invest, they go there to extract. All of these projects are done with Chinese labor with host nation countries'. U.S. Policy on Democracy in Latin America and the Caribbean November 30, 2021 Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Watch full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Brian A. Nichols, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State Todd D. Robinson, Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State Clips 1:47:15 Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): I'd like to start with Mexico. I am increasingly concerned that the Mexican government is engaged in a systematic campaign to undermine American companies, and especially American energy companies that have invested in our shared prosperity and in the future of the Mexican people and economy. Over the past five months, Mexican regulators have shut down three privately owned fuel storage terminals. Among those they shut down a fuel terminal and Tuxpan, which is run by an American company based in Texas, and which transports fuel on ships owned by American companies. This is a pattern of sustained discrimination against American companies. And I worry that the Mexican government's ultimate aim is to roll back the country's historic 2013 energy sector liberalisation reforms in favor of Mexico's mismanaged and failing state-owned energy companies. The only way the Mexican government is going to slow and reverse their campaign is if the United States Government conveys clearly and candidly that their efforts pose a serious threat to our relationship and to our shared economic interests. 2:01:50 Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ): Mr. Nichols, can you can you just be a little more specific about the tactics of the GEC? What are some of the specific activities they're doing? And what more would you like to see them do? Brian A. Nichols: The Global Engagement Center both measures public opinion and social media trends throughout the world. They actively work to counter false messages from our strategic competitors. And they prepare media products or talking points that our embassies and consulates around the hemisphere can use to combat disinformation. I think they do a great job. Obviously, it's a huge task. So the the resources that they have to bring to bear to this limit, somewhat, the ability to accomplish those goals, but I think they're doing vital, vital work. 2:13:30 Todd D. Robinson: We are, INL (International Narcotics and Law Enforcement) are working very closely with the Haitian National Police, the new Director General, we are going to send in advisors. When I was there two weeks ago, I arrived with -- they'd asked for greater ability to get police around the city -- I showed up with 19 new vehicles, 200 new protective vests for the police. The 19 was the first installment of a total of 60 that we're going to deliver to the Haitian National Police. We're gonna get advisors down there to work with the new SWAT team to start taking back the areas that have been taken from ordinary Haitians. But it's going to be a process and it's going to take some time. Sen. Bob Menendez: Well, first of all, is the Haitian National Police actually an institution capable of delivering the type of security that Hatians deserve? Todd D. Robinson: We believe it is. It's an institution that we have worked with in the past. There was a small brief moment where Haitians actually acknowledged that the Haitian National Police had gotten better and was more professional. Our goal, our long term goal is to try to bring it back to that Sen. Bob Menendez: How much time before we get security on the ground? Todd D. Robinson: I can't say exactly but we are working as fast as we can. Sen. Bob Menendez: Months, years? Todd D. Robinson: Well, I would hope we could do it in less than months. But we're working as fast as we can. Global Challenges and U.S. National Security Strategy January 25, 2018 Senate Committee on Armed Services Watch the full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Dr. Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman of Kissinger Associates and Former Secretary of State Dr. George P. Shultz, Thomas W. and Susan B. Ford Distinguished Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University and Former Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage, President, Armitage International and Former Deputy Secretary of State Clips Dr. George Shultz: Small platforms will carry a very destructive power. Then you can put these small platforms on drones. And drones can be manufactured easily, and you can have a great many of them inexpensively. So then you can have a swarm armed with lethal equipment. Any fixed target is a real target. So an airfield where our Air Force stores planes is a very vulnerable target. A ship at anchor is a vulnerable target. So you've got to think about that in terms of how you deploy. And in terms of the drones, while such a system cannot be jammed, it would only serve to get a drone—talking about getting a drone to the area of where its target is, but that sure could hit a specific target. At that point, the optical systems guided by artificial intelligence could use on-board, multi-spectral imaging to find a target and guide the weapons. It is exactly that autonomy that makes the technologic convergence a threat today. Because such drones will require no external input other than the signature of the designed target, they will not be vulnerable to jamming. Not requiring human intervention, the autonomous platforms will also be able to operate in very large numbers. Dr. George Shultz: I think there's a great lesson here for what we do in NATO to contain Russia because you can deploy these things in boxes so you don't even know what they are and on trucks and train people to unload quickly and fire. So it's a huge deterrent capability that is available, and it's inexpensive enough so that we can expect our allies to pitch in and get them for themselves. Dr. George Shultz: The creative use of swarms of autonomous drones to augment current forces would strongly and relatively cheaply reinforce NATO, as I said, that deterrence. If NATO assists frontline states in fielding large numbers of inexpensive autonomous drones that are pre-packaged in standard 20-foot containers, the weapons can be stored in sites across the countries under the control of reserve forces. If the weapons are pre-packaged and stored, the national forces can quickly deploy the weapons to delay a Russian advance. So what's happening is you have small, cheap, and highly lethal replacing large, expensive platforms. And this change is coming about with great rapidity, and it is massively important to take it into account in anything that you are thinking about doing. Foreign Military Sales: Process and Policy June 15, 2017 House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade Watch the full hearing on YouTube Witnesses: Tina Kaidanow, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State Vice Admiral Joseph Rixey, Director, U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency Clips 14:40 Tina Kaidanow: Arms Transfers constitute an element of foreign policy. We therefore take into account foreign policy considerations as we contemplate each arms transfer or sale, including specifically, the appropriateness of the transfer in responding to U.S and recipient security needs; the degree to which the transfer supports U.S. strategic foreign policy and defense interests through increased access and influence; allied burden sharing and interoperability; consistency with U.S. interests regarding regional stability; the degree of protection afforded by the recipient company to our sensitive technology; the risk that significant change in the political or security situation of the recipient country could lead to inappropriate end use or transfer; and the likelihood that the recipient would use the arms to commit human rights abuses or serious violations of international humanitarian law, or retransfer the arms to those who would commit such abuses. As a second key point, arms transfers support the U.S. Defense industrial base and they reduce the cost of procurement for our own U.S. military. Purchases made through the Foreign Military Sales, known as the FMS, system often can be combined with our Defense Department orders to reduce unit costs. Beyond this, the US defense industry directly employs over 1.7 million people across our nation. 20:20 Vice Admiral Joseph Rixey: FMS is the government-to-government process through which the U.S. government purchases defense articles, training, and services on behalf of foreign governments, authorized in the Arms Export Control Act. FMS is a long standing security cooperation program that supports partner and regional security, enhances military-to-military cooperation, enables interoperability and develops and maintains international relationships. Through the FMS process, the US government determines whether or not the sale is of mutual benefit to us and the partner, whether the technology can and will be protected, and whether the transfer is consistent with U.S. conventional arms transfer policy. The FMS system is actually a set of systems in which the Department of State, Department of Defense, and Congress play critical roles. The Department of Defense in particular executes a number of different processes including the management of the FMS case lifecycle which is overseen by DSCA (Defense Security Cooperation Agency). Technology transfer reviews, overseen by the Defense Technology Security Administration, and the management of the Defense Acquisition and Logistics Systems, overseen by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, and the military departments. This process, or a version of it, also serves us well, in the DoD Title X Building Partnership Capacity arena, where the process of building a case, validating a requirement and exercising our U.S. acquisition system to deliver capability is modeled on the FMS system. I want to say clearly that overall the system is performing very well. The United States continues to remain the provider of choice for our international partners, with 1,700 new cases implemented in Fiscal Year 2016 alone. These new cases, combined with adjustments to existing programs, equated to more than $33 billion in sales last year. This included over $25 billion in cases funded by our partner nations' own funds and approximately $8 billion in cases funded by DOD Title X program or Department of State's Appropriations. Most FMS cases move through the process relatively quickly. But some may move more slowly as we engage in deliberate review to ensure that the necessary arms transfer criteria are met. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)

The Kurdistan in America podcast is honored to have Ms. Jennifer Gavito as our guest in the first episode of Season Four.Ms. Gavito is the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iran, Iraq, and Public Diplomacy at the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. She previously served as the Minister-Counselor for Political Affairs at the US Embassy in London. She has spent most of her Foreign Service career working in and on the Middle East.The discussion is centered on her role at the Department of State, Erbil-Baghdad relations, the political and security situation in Kurdistan and the rest of Iraq, security issues in the broader region, as well as her personal story and view of the Kurdistan Region.

Season 5, Episode 1: This season, Diplomatic Immunity is exploring the depths of multilateralism to learn how consensus-driven diplomacy survives in an era of renewed great power competition. For the first episode, ISD Director of Research and Programs Kelly McFarland talked to two experts with experience at the United Nations. First, Kelly chatted with ISD alumni Alistair Somerville to walk through the history of the 77-year-old institution.  Alistair Somerville is a staff assistant at the UN Secretariat's office in Washington, the UN Information Centre, where he coordinates the Secretariat's work with academic institutions, think tanks, and the media in Washington and around the United States.  To dig deeper into the issues affecting the United Nations today, Kelly talked to Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman who has served as a high-ranking diplomat with both the United States and the United Nations. Ambassador Feltman explains why he has been pleasantly surprised by the UN's efforts in light of the war in Ukraine and is cautiously optimistic about the future of the institution.  Jeffrey Feltman is the John C. Whitehead Visiting Fellow in International Diplomacy in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings and a Senior Fellow at the UN Foundation, both based in Washington, D.C.   Ambassador Feltman was appointed as the first U.S. Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa, a position he held from April 2021 until January 2022.  From July 2012 until his April 2018 retirement, he served as United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs.  From 2009 until 2012, Ambassador Feltman was the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.  Prior to his 2004-2008 tenure as U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon, he served as a U.S. diplomat in Erbil, Baghdad, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Tunis, Amman, Budapest, and Port-au-Prince. Episode recorded: October 10, 2022 (interview with Alistair Somerville) and November 30, 2022 (Interview with Ambassador Feltman) Produced by Daniel Henderson and Kelly McFarland.  Episode Image: Flags at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. Mathias Reding on Unspalsh Diplomatic Immunity: Frank and candid conversations about diplomacy and foreign affairs Diplomatic Immunity, a podcast from the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University, brings you frank and candid conversations with experts on the issues facing diplomats and national security decision-makers around the world.  Funding support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.  For more, visit our website, and follow us on Twitter @GUDiplomacy. Send any feedback to diplomacy@georgetown.edu.

The Cognitive Crucible is a forum that presents different perspectives and emerging thought leadership related to the information environment. The opinions expressed by guests are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of or endorsement by the Information Professionals Association. During this episode, Amb. Roger Carstens discusses the United States hostage recovery enterprise and how his office helps bring U.S. citizens home. After explaining the legislative landscape, Roger explains the differences between kidnapping, wrongful detention, and hostage scenario, as well as engagement with state compared to non-state actors. Roger also discusses today's media landscape, weaponization of the international rules-based system, geopolitical dynamics, maneuver warfare, and a tech research agenda. Resources: Amb. Roger Carstens, Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs (SPEHA) Hostage Recovery Fusion Cell National Security Council FACT SHEET: U.S. Government Hostage Policy Presidential Policy Directive 30 (PPD 30) Executive Order -- Hostage Recovery Activities Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act We Want to Negotiate: The Secret World of Kidnapping, Hostages and Ransom by Joel Simon Prisoner: My 544 Days in an Iranian Prison - Solitary Confinement, a Sham Trial, High-Stakes Diplomacy, and the Extraordinary Efforts It Took to Get Me Out by Jason Rezaian The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides Link to full show notes and resources https://information-professionals.org/episode/cognitive-crucible-episode-99 Guest Bio:  Roger D. Carstens is the Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs (SPEHA) at the U.S. Department of State. Mr. Carstens was the former Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor at the U.S. Department of State, where he oversaw the Bureau's work in Near Eastern Affairs, Western Hemisphere Affairs, and the Office of Security and Human Rights. Previously, he served in Amman, Jordan, as the Country Director for a U.S.-based INGO that provided humanitarian assistance and stability support to Syrian refugees and internally displaced persons. Prior positions include Senior Civilian Advisor on the Commander's Advisory and Assistance Team (CAAT) in Afghanistan; Project Director for an INGO based in Somalia; Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security; and Special Assistant for Legislative Affairs in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Mr. Carstens is a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel who served in Special Forces and the 1st Ranger Battalion. He is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy and holds master's degrees from the U.S. Naval War College and St. John's College. About: The Information Professionals Association (IPA) is a non-profit organization dedicated to exploring the role of information activities, such as influence and cognitive security, within the national security sector and helping to bridge the divide between operations and research. Its goal is to increase interdisciplinary collaboration between scholars and practitioners and policymakers with an interest in this domain. For more information, please contact us at communications@information-professionals.org. Or, connect directly with The Cognitive Crucible podcast host, John Bicknell, on LinkedIn. Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, 1) IPA earns from qualifying purchases, 2) IPA gets commissions for purchases made through links in this post.

Welcome to a new series that spotlights individuals within the Stephen M. Kellen Term Member Program. Drawing on the enormous amount of talent and expertise within the Council's Term Member Program, this series features a term member in conversation with a fellow term member discussing their career path, how they got to where they are, the challenges they have faced along the way, and the current work they are doing. We hope this regular series will provide an opportunity for Council term members to better engage and learn from one another, draw upon shared experiences within the group, and connect across geographies. This installment in this series features third-year term member Asha Castleberry-Hernandez, senior advisor in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs at the U.S. Department of State and major in the U.S. Army Reserve, in conversation with second-year term member Brian Mateo, associate dean of civic engagement for Bard College. For those of you who do not know her yet, Asha is a distinguished national security expert whose career includes serving as the Kuwait desk officer at U.S. Army Central, working on security cooperation with the Office of Military Cooperation and the Kuwait Ministry of Defense, and senior key leadership engagement officer for Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq and Kuwait. During the Obama administration, Asha served at the U.S. Mission at the United Nations working peacekeeping operations in Africa. In 2020, Asha ran as a Democratic candidate for Congress in New York District 17. In addition to her work in government, she is a founder of Diversity in National Security Network, board member of Women of Color Advancing Peace, Security, and Conflict Transformation, and international strategy fellow with Schmidt Futures.

In seven episodes, the Babel: U.S. Power and Influence in the Middle East podcast miniseries will take a closer look at two decades of heightened U.S. engagement in the region. Over seven weeks, Babel will cover how the United States has used its military, economic, diplomatic, and soft power tools in the Middle East—and how the Middle East has responded.   In the seventh episode, Jon concludes the series by looking at views on how the Middle East should fit into U.S. global strategy. He talks with Stephen Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs at Harvard University's Kennedy School; Dalia Dassa Kaye, senior fellow at UCLA's Burkle Center for International Relations; Martin Indyk, distinguished fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who served as U.S. ambassador to Israel and as assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs; and Michael Doran, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute who served in the Bush administration as a senior director on the National Security Council, a deputy assistant secretary of Defense, and senior advisor in the State Department.  Michael Doran, "Biden Koshers Iranian Terror," Tablet Magazine, April 13, 2022. Martin Indyk, "The Price of Retrenchment: What the Ukraine Crisis Reveals About the Post-American Middle East," Foreign Affairs, February 14, 2022. Dalia Dassa Kaye, "America Is Not Withdrawing From the Middle East," Foreign Affairs, December 1, 2021. Stephen Walt, "What Comes After the Forever Wars," Foreign Policy, April 28, 2021. Transcript, "U.S. Power and Influence in the Middle East: Part Seven," CSIS, April 19, 2022.

In seven episodes, the Babel: U.S. Power and Influence in the Middle East podcast miniseries will take a closer look at two decades of heightened U.S. engagement in the region. Over seven weeks, Babel will cover how the United States has used its military, economic, diplomatic, and soft power tools in the Middle East—and how the Middle East has responded.   In part three, Jon looks at how the United States has used its economic toolkit in the region, and how successful sanctions and development aid have been in advancing U.S. interests in the Middle East. He speaks with Howard Schatz, a senior economist at RAND who served on the Bush administration's Council of Economic Advisors in 2007; Amy Hawthorne, the deputy director for research for the Project on Middle East Democracy who served as a senior advisor for Near Eastern Affairs in the State Department during the Arab Spring; and Ali Vaez, the International Crisis Group's Iran project director.   Howard Shatz. "The Power and Limits of Threat: The Caesar Syrian Civilian Protection Act at One Year,” Real Clear Defense. July 7, 2021.   Amy Hawthorne, "Egypt: Trends in Politics, Economics, and Human Rights," Before The House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East, North Africa, and International Terrorism, 116th Congress, 2020. Ali Vaez and Naysan Rafati, “U.S. Maximum Pressure Meets Iranian Maximum Pressure,” International Crisis Group, November 5, 2019.  Transcript, "U.S. Power and Influence in the Middle East: Part Three," CSIS, March 15, 2022.

New INSS Podcast: A panel discussion from the INSS 15th Annual International Conference on the US presence in the Middle East. What is the Biden administration's policy on the ME? Ms. Dana Stroul, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East and Mr. David Schenker, Taube Fellow and Director of the Program on Arab Politics, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, former US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs explain, in a conversation with Col. (res.) Adv. Pnina Sharvit Baruch, Senior Research Fellow, INSS

New World Order: The Middle East Biden Takes Over Amy Tachco Office of Regional and Multilateral Affairs, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State December 17, 2020 @ 5p.m. CT President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris will take office on January 20 and their administration is likely to be far different from the one led by President Donald Trump.  TNWAC is pleased to join WACH in a discussions with experts in domestic and foreign affairs to discuss how the world is likely to change in 2021. Join us 5 p.m. (Central Time) Thursday, Dec. 17 for our conversation  with  Amy Tachco, director of the Office of Regional And Multilateral Affairs in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs of the U.S. Department of State. We will open with remarks from Irina Karmanova, from the State Department Office of Public Liaison. ABOUT AMY TACHCO Amy Tachco joined the Foreign Service in 2002 after a brief stint in finance in New York.  She has served in Karachi, Casablanca, Madrid (twice), Beirut, and in Washington in the Bureaus of Near Eastern and African Affairs.  She served as Political Counselor at U.S. Embassy Damascus in the run-up to closure of the Mission in 2012, and was Minister Counselor for Political Affairs at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations under Ambassadors Samantha Power and Nikki Haley. She also served as Foreign Policy Adviser to the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet Commander in Manama, Bahrain.  A graduate of Smith College and the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, she speaks French, Spanish, Italian, and Arabic.

In the eighth episode of our new Women in the Military series, host Beverly Kirk spoke with U.S. Army Reserves Major Asha Castleberry-Hernandez who is currently a senior advisor in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs at the State Department. The pair discussed defending democracy abroad, strategic competition in the Middle East, and how the United States should engage in the region.

In the fourth episode of our new Women in the Military series, host Beverly Kirk spoke with Brigadier General Paula Lodi, Deputy Commanding General (Support) US Army Medical Command; Colonel Kirsten Aguilar, Commander, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER), and the 673d Air Base Wing; Army Reservist Major Asha Castleberry, currently Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs at the State Department; and Dr. Samantha Weeks, a retired Air Force Commander, 14th Flying Training Wing, Columbus Air Force Base, Mississippi. The group discussed how to lead during a crisis, most recently with the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as their hopes for the next generation of leaders.

In the fourth episode of our new Women in the Military series, host Beverly Kirk spoke with Brigadier General Paula Lodi, Deputy Commanding General (Support) US Army Medical Command; Colonel Kirsten Aguilar, Commander, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER), and the 673d Air Base Wing; Army Reservist Major Asha Castleberry, currently Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs at the State Department; and Dr. Samantha Weeks, a retired Air Force Commander, 14th Flying Training Wing, Columbus Air Force Base, Mississippi. The group discussed how to lead during a crisis, most recently with the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as their hopes for the next generation of leaders.

Needless to say, the Afghanistan situation just basically was a rapid implosion once we started to reduce our presence there.    The Beyond the Soundbite guest this week is Owen Kirby. He's a fellow with the University of Central Florida's Office of Global Perspectives & International Initiatives.   He recently served as the director of USAID Office of Transition Initiatives where he oversaw U.S. assistance programs to nations struggling to build democracy and peace.   Prior to that, he was the senior governance advisor in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, in 2009 and served as the senior adviser in the U.S. Department of State Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs from 2004 to 2009.   He has worked on projects in Afghanistan since the initial U.S. occupation.   Kirby was in Kabul in early August working on civil society projects and engaging with Afghan government officials before the Taliban took over.   ABOUT THE SHOW Political figures and influencers are often heard in brief bites that don't capture the context of the whole story. “Central Florida: Beyond the Soundbite” expands the conversation with these newsmakers along the I-4 corridor and beyond. Join award-winning Spectrum News 13 anchor and Orlando Woman of the Year Ybeth Bruzual, political reporter Greg Angel, and veteran producer Gary Darling for a must-hear interview each week and learn about the issues affecting Central Florida.

Since the Second Lebanon War in 2006, Israel and Hezbollah have not engaged in major hostilities. There has been a mutual deterrence whereby Israel and Hezbollah avert all-out war. However, this uneasy truce is weakening. Today, Lebanon is facing a dire economic and political crisis. Moreover, the development of the precision-guided munition (PGM) program persists as Hezbollah seeks to convert some of its estimated 140,000 rockets into accurate missiles, a serious threat for Israel. Moreover, Hezbollah has fired anti-aircraft weapons at Israel from Syria as the organization seeks to support Iran's presence there. Is deterrence unraveling and is a full-blown conflagration inevitable? Host David Makovsky discusses this major decision point with Hanin Ghaddar, David Schenker, and Amos Gilead.Hanin Ghaddar is the Friedmann Fellow at The Washington Institute's Geduld Program on Arab Politics, where she focuses on Shia politics throughout the Levant. Prior to the Washington Institute, she served as the longtime managing editor of Lebanon's NOW news website, where she shed light on the evolution of Hezbollah in Lebanon's political system and Iran's growing influence throughout the region.David Schenker is the Taube Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute. David served as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs through January 2021.Amos Gilead dedicated most of his military career to the Military Intelligence Corps. As Chief of the Intelligence Research and Analysis Division, General Gilead was responsible for producing the national intelligence assessment and national strategic (political and military) production and analysis. Currently, he teaches security and intelligence studies at IDC Herzliya's Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy & Strategy.Audio clips from C-SPAN “Israeli Prime Minister Remarks at U.N. General Assembly”See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

What is China up to in the Middle East? How is its massive Belt and Road infrastructure project affecting U.S. foreign policy and American citizens? Asha Castleberry-Hernandez, senior advisor in the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, discusses all of this, plus vaccine diplomacy, energy, and human rights, as she shares some of the Biden administration's thinking on these major issues with "Doorstep" co-hosts Tatiana Serafin and Nick Gvosdev.

What is China up to in the Middle East? How is its massive Belt and Road infrastructure project affecting U.S. foreign policy and American citizens? Asha Castleberry-Hernandez, senior advisor in the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, discusses all of this, plus vaccine diplomacy, energy, and human rights, as she shares some of the Biden administration's thinking on these major issues with "Doorstep" co-hosts Tatiana Serafin and Nick Gvosdev.

Photo: PARSONS (1808) View of Baghdad on the Persian side of the Tigris.The New John Batchelor ShowCBS Audio Network@BatchelorshowTales of arriving in the armed camp of Bagdad, 2021. David Schenker Malcolm Hoenlein @Conf_of_pres @mhoenlein1David Schenker is a Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute. Confirmed by the Senate on June 5, 2019, he served as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs through January 2021. In that capacity, he was the principal Middle East advisor to the secretary of state and the senior official overseeing the conduct of U.S. policy and diplomacy in a region stretching from Morocco to Iran to Yemen, with responsibility for eighteen countries, the Palestinian Authority, and Western Sahara.  Related articles https://english.aawsat.com/home/article/2914476/lebanese-ministers-expand-claim-over-disputed-maritime-area-israel https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/542223-our-presence-in-iraq-remains-a-vital-us-national-security-interest https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-iraq-talk-troops/2021/04/07/e9a15998-97cb-11eb-8f0a-3384cf4fb399_story.html  

On the occasion of the commemoration of the Independence Manifesto Day, HM King Mohammed VI has granted his pardon to 756 convicts, said a statement by the Ministry of Justice. A high-level US delegation, led by Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Schenker, on Sunday visited the premises of the future Consulate General of the United States in Dakhla. The US delegation, accompanied by minister of Foreign Affairs, African Cooperation and Moroccans Abroad, Nasser Bourita, and the US ambassador to Morocco, David Fischer, toured the various offices of this future US diplomatic representation. During this visit, the Wali of the Dakhla-Oued Eddahab region, governor of the province of Oued Eddahab, Lamine Benomar, and the presidents of the elected councils were also present. The US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs arrived on Saturday afternoon in Dakhla, the second stop on a tour in the Moroccan Sahara after Laayoune. The visit to Dakhla of this high-level US delegation is the result of the telephone conversation held, on December 10, 2020, between HM King Mohammed VI and US President Mr. Donald Trump who had announced the signing of a proclamation, with all that this act entails as an undeniable legal and political force and with immediate effect, on the decision of the United States of America to recognize, for the first time in its history, the full sovereignty of the Kingdom of Morocco over the entire region of the Moroccan Sahara. In this regard, and as the first concrete expression of its sovereign initiative of great importance, the United States of America has decided to open a consulate in Dakhla, with a primarily economic vocation, to encourage U.S. investments and contribution to economic and social development, mainly for the benefit of the inhabitants of the southern provinces. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/aziz-mustaphi/message

Guest Joey Hood, Dartmouth '96, had originally thought he’d spend a life in government service or maybe in politics, but after he realized government majors were mostly really passionate, argumentative lawyers in training, he concentrated in his beloved French. Taking opportunities that presented themselves and ones he concocted on his own, he did every foreign study program in France availle, taught English and studied west African literature in Senegal, and pursued a Fulbright Fellowship in Burkino Faso, investigating the colonial roots of the current educational system and policies there.So when he landed a spot in the U.S. foreign service, it might sense that his language and cultural skills would send him back to West Africa. Instead, this generalist diplomat has spent more than two decades chiefly in the middle east. Every new assignment has been a graduate seminar on a new culture and geopolitical chess game and he considers the best job out there, the hardship posts and difficulties in leaving somewhere just when it’s starting to grow on you, notwithstanding.In this episode, find out from Joey taking things as they come, but making the most of every moment once you’ve reached your destination, is a winning strategy when your career bounces you all over the world…on ROADS TAKEN...with Leslie Jennings Rowley About This Episode's GuestJoey Hood, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs at the U.S. Department of State, has spent over two decades in the foreign service. A generalist diplomat who has been assigned chiefly in the middle east, he has served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Iraq and Kuwait and Consul General in Dharan, Saudi Arabia. His current role keeps him in Washington, D.C. but who knows where the next assignment will take him.  Mentioned in this episode is the book Our Kids by Robert Putnam.  Executive Producer/Host: Leslie Jennings RowleyMusic: Brian Burrows 

Hour 1 * ‘We’ve been living a lie’: Lincoln man goes viral with hilarious rant against boneless chicken wings – Nebraska man says ‘boneless wings’ are blasphemy and the time for change is now – The Hill. * US trade deficit surges 18.9% in July to $63.6B, highest amount in 12 years! * FamilySearch the genealogical branch of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has announced that RootsTech 2021 will be held in February as a free, virtual event. the annual family history conference will now be held online Feb. 2527. * Biden Declares Himself an Ally of the Protesters – NYT. * Joe Biden Twitter post suggests followers will become more violent if he isn’t elected – Johnathan Jones. * Why Won’t Biden Condemn Antifa or BLM Violence? – Ben Shapiro. Hour 2 * Hillary gave Ghislaine Maxwell’s nephew ‘very powerful’ position at State Department – ‘Special treatment’: ‘Put in charge of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, covering the Middle East’. * ‘A foreign government was trying to influence the CLINTON campaign’ – ‘Clear double standard’: Documents reveal FBI helped Hillary while targeting Trump. * Nolte: Rose McGowan Rips DNC, Clintons — ‘I Believe Joe Biden Is a Rapist’. * RNC Officially Repudiates Discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. * Detroit Absentee Ballot Chaos: ‘So Inaccurate We Can’t Even Attempt to Make Right’. * Postal Service kills off money-making program to prevent Christian scene on stamps ‘This is hypocrisy at its worst’. * Andrew Cuomo Allows Rock Stars to Bypass New York Quarantine to Attend VMAs. * Portland Rioters Bring Guillotine, Burn American Flags. * The NFL had 77 positive COVID-19 tests from 11 teams re-examined by a New Jersey lab after false positives, and all those tests came back negative – NY AP. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/loving-liberty/support

* Hillary gave Ghislaine Maxwell's nephew 'very powerful' position at State Department - 'Special treatment': 'Put in charge of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, covering the Middle East'. * 'A foreign government was trying to influence the CLINTON campaign' - 'Clear double standard': Documents reveal FBI helped Hillary while targeting Trump. * Nolte: Rose McGowan Rips DNC, Clintons — ‘I Believe Joe Biden Is a Rapist’. * RNC Officially Repudiates Discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. * Detroit Absentee Ballot Chaos: ‘So Inaccurate We Can’t Even Attempt to Make Right’. * Postal Service kills off money-making program to prevent Christian scene on stamps 'This is hypocrisy at its worst'. * Andrew Cuomo Allows Rock Stars to Bypass New York Quarantine to Attend VMAs. * Portland Rioters Bring Guillotine, Burn American Flags. * The NFL had 77 positive COVID-19 tests from 11 teams re-examined by a New Jersey lab after false positives, and all those tests came back negative - NY AP.

To mark World Humanitarian Day, in this episode podcast we have Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, Richard Albright. Within the US State Department, he’s responsible for humanitarian policy, advocacy and assistance programs, and directing nearly $2 billion US dollars for humanitarian response. The ICRC works with a lot of donors as a neutral and independent humanitarian organization which includes the United States through PRM. Mr. Albright has held many different titles around the world working for the US government. He has served as Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, Foreign Policy Advisor to the Chief of Naval Operations at the Department of Defense as well as roles as Coordinator for Economic and Development Assistance at U.S. Embassy Islamabad, Senior Humanitarian Coordinator at U.S. Embassy Baghdad, and as PRM’s Director for the Office of Asia and the Near East. We discuss humanitarian donorship, crisis response and the significance of World Humanitarian Day. Hosted by Niki Clark.

View Summary   The killing of Gen. Qassem Suleimani in January 2020 sent conflicting signals about the depth of U.S. engagement in the Gulf. The United States seems intent to diminish its presence while keeping an active hand in regional affairs. Meanwhile, Russia and China are exploring ways to reshape their own presence in the region. Please join the CSIS Middle East Program for a conference to examine the Gulf region in the wake of General Qassem Suleimani's death. Two expert panels will explore security threats and new opportunities for diplomacy in the region. General Joseph L. Votel will then deliver a keynote address on Great Power competition in the Gulf, followed by a Q&A moderated by Jon B. Alterman, senior vice president, Zbigniew Brzezinski chair in global security and geostrategy, and director of the Middle East Program. The Honorable John McLaughlin, Distinguished Practitioner in Residence, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), and former Acting Director of Central Intelligence The Honorable Christine Wormuth, Director, International Security and Defense Policy Center, RAND Corporation, and former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Ambassador Anne Patterson, Former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State    Ambassador Douglas Silliman,President, The Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington, and former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq  Dr. Ali Vaez,Iran Project Director, International Crisis Group  General Joseph L. Votel, President and CEO, Business Executives for National Security; Distinguished Senior Fellow on National Security, Middle East Institute; and former Commander of U.S. Central Command This event is made possible by generous support from the United Arab Emirates Embassy.

View Summary   The killing of Gen. Qassem Suleimani in January 2020 sent conflicting signals about the depth of U.S. engagement in the Gulf. The United States seems intent to diminish its presence while keeping an active hand in regional affairs. Meanwhile, Russia and China are exploring ways to reshape their own presence in the region. Please join the CSIS Middle East Program for a conference to examine the Gulf region in the wake of General Qassem Suleimani's death. Two expert panels will explore security threats and new opportunities for diplomacy in the region. General Joseph L. Votel will then deliver a keynote address on Great Power competition in the Gulf, followed by a Q&A moderated by Jon B. Alterman, senior vice president, Zbigniew Brzezinski chair in global security and geostrategy, and director of the Middle East Program. The Honorable John McLaughlin, Distinguished Practitioner in Residence, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), and former Acting Director of Central Intelligence The Honorable Christine Wormuth, Director, International Security and Defense Policy Center, RAND Corporation, and former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Ambassador Anne Patterson, Former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State    Ambassador Douglas Silliman,President, The Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington, and former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq  Dr. Ali Vaez,Iran Project Director, International Crisis Group  General Joseph L. Votel, President and CEO, Business Executives for National Security; Distinguished Senior Fellow on National Security, Middle East Institute; and former Commander of U.S. Central Command This event is made possible by generous support from the United Arab Emirates Embassy.

In this episode of the National Security Podcast we talk to Kelly Magsamen about American national security policy - what is driving it, where it is going, and if we’re headed into a cul-de-sac of policy failure. We also find out if the Obama administration moved too slowly to counter China’s militarisation of the South China Sea or whether it was a mistake by Beijing to even build bases amongst its Southeast Asian neighbours. And we ask considering the global rules-based order, why should we care anymore and did it ever even matter? Kelly Magsamen is the vice president for National Security and International Policy at the Center for American Progress. Prior to joining American Progress, she served in various national security positions. Magsamen was the principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs and performed the duties of assistant secretary of defense. In these positions, she was a lead adviser to the secretary of defense for U.S. defense policy and strategy across the Indo-Asia-Pacific, including in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Prior to her tenure at the Pentagon, Magsamen served on the National Security Council (NSC) staff for two presidents and four national security advisers. As special assistant to the president and senior director for strategic planning, she was responsible for long-term planning and helped craft the 2015 U.S. National Security Strategy. She also served as senior adviser for Middle East reform during the height of the Arab Spring. As NSC director for Iran, she was responsible for coordinating U.S. policy on Iran. Magsamen began her government career as a presidential management fellow at the U.S. State Department, where she worked on Iraq policy in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, at the U.S. Mission to NATO, and as special assistant and chief of staff to the counselor. Chris Farnham is the presenter of the National Security Podcast. He joined the National Security College in June 2015 and is currently Senior Outreach and Policy Officer. His career focus has been on geopolitics with experience working in and out of China for a number of years as well as operating in Australia and Southeast Asia. We’d love to hear your feedback for this podcast series! Send in your questions, comments, or suggestions for future episodes to podcast@policyforum.net. You can also Tweet us @APPSPolicyForum or find us on Facebook. The National Security Podcast and Policy Forum Pod are available on Spotify, iTunes, Stitcher, and wherever you get your podcasts. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Ravit Baer and Alon Sachar will discuss the recent, complex Israeli election and how the results could affect the region, the peace process, Israel and her allies, including the United States. Baer is the deputy consul general and heads the political and public diplomacy departments at the Israeli Consulate in the Pacific Northwest. She has been a career diplomat since 2004. Sachar has worked to advance Middle East peace under two U.S. administrations and served at the State Department Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs and at the U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem. He co-authored A Path to Peace: A Brief History of Israeli Palestinian Negotiations and a Way Forward in the Middle East with former Senator George Mitchell (D–VT). MLF Organizer: Celia Menczel MLF: Middle East Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Larry Schwartz, former deputy assistant secretary in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, and Domenic DiGiovanni, vice president of Red Arch, join host Alistair Taylor to discuss the illegal theft and smuggling of cultural artifacts from the Middle East, and what regional governments and international partners can do to help preserve the region’s cultural heritage.

Yemen: Most of us don't know where that is but we Americans have been participating in a war there since 2015. In a surprise move, the 116th Congress recently put a resolution on President Trump's desk that would LIMIT our participation in that war. In this episode, learn about our recent history in Yemen: Why are we involved? When did our involvement start? What do we want from Yemen? And why is Congress suddenly pursuing a change in policy? In the second half of the episode, Jen admits defeat in a project she's been working on and Husband Joe joins Jen for the thank yous. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Click here to contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536 Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD167: Combating Russia (NDAA 2018) LIVE CD131: Bombing Libya CD102: The World Trade Organization: COOL? Additional Reading Article: Hurricane Michael upgraded to a Category 5 at time of U.S. landfall, NOAA, April 19, 2019. Article: US carries out first airstrikes in Yemen in nearly 3 months by Ryan Browne, CNN, April 1, 2019. Article: The assassination of Jamal Khashoggi by Joyce Lee and Dalton Bennett, The Washington Post, April 1, 2019. Article: Trump revokes Obama rule on reporting drone strike deaths, BBC News, March 7, 2019. Article: US carried out 36 airstrikes in Yemen last year by Andrew Kennedy, The Defense Post, January 7, 2019. Article: See no evil: Pentagon issues blanket denial that it knows anything about detainee abuse in Yemen by Alex Emmons, The Intercept, January 7, 2019. Report: Senate bucks Trump's Saudi approach by Jeff Abramson, Arms Control Association, January/February 2019. Article: Saudi strikes, American bombs, Yemeni suffering by Derek Watkins and Declan Walsh, The New York Times, December 27, 2018. Article: The wooing of Jared Kushner: How the Saudis got a friend in the White House by David D. Kirkpatrick, Ben Hubbard, Mark Landler, and Mark Mazzetti, The New York Times, December 8, 2018. Report: Saudi lobbyists bout 500 nights at Trump's DC hotel after 2016 election by John Bowden, The Hill, December 5, 2018. Article: Hidden toll of US drone strikes in Yemen: Nearly a third of deaths are civilians, not al-Quaida by Maggie Michael and Maad al-Zikry, Military Times, November 14, 2018. Article: Jamal Khashoggi's friends in Washington are in shock by Scott Nover, The Atlantic, October 12, 2018. Report: Catastrophic Hurricane Michael strikes Florida Panhandle, National Weather Service, October 10, 2018. Article: Yemen's President Hadi heads to US for medical treatment, Aljazeera, September 3, 2018. Article: Bab el-Mandeb, an emerging chokepoint for Middle East oil flows by Julian Lee, Bloomberg, July 26, 2018. Report: YEM305: Unknown reported killed, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, March 29, 2018. Article: Yemen: Ex-President Ali Abdullah Saleh killed, Aljazeera, December 10, 2017. Article: In Yemen's secret prisons, UAE tortures and US interrogates by Maggie Michael, AP News, June 22, 2017. Report: Yemen: UAE backs abusive local forces, Human Rights Watch, June 22, 2017. Article: What we know about Saudi Arabia's role in 9/11 by Simon Henderson, Foreign Policy, July 18, 2016. Report: Yemen: Background and U.S. relations by Jeremy M. Sharp, Congressional Research Service, February 11, 2015. Article: How al Qaeda's biggest enemy took over Yemen (and why the US government is unlikely to support them) by Casey L. Coombs and Jeremy Scahill, The Intercept, January 22, 2015. Report: Yemen protests erupt after fuel price doubled, Aljazeera, July 30, 2014. Article: U.S. charges saudi for 2002 oil tanker bombing by MAREX, Feburary 6, 2014. Report: "Between a Drone and Al-Qaeda": The civilian cost of US targeted killings in Yemen, Human Rights Watch, October 22, 2013. Article: Yemen: Opposition leader to be sworn in Saturday by Reuters, The New York Times, December 7, 2011. Article: Yemen's Saleh signs deal to give up power by Marwa Rashad, Reuters, November 23, 2011. Article: Yemen's leader agrees to end 3-decade rule by Kareem Fahim and Laura Kasinof, The New York Times, November 23, 2011. Article: Yemeni president's shock return throws country into confusion by Tom Finn, The Guardian, September 23, 2011. Article: Yemen: President Saleh 'was injured by palace bomb', BBC News, June 23, 2011. Article: Government in Yemen agrees to talk transition by Laura Kasinof, The New York Times, April 26, 2011. Article: Hundreds take to streets in Yemen to protest by Faud Rajeh, The New York Times, February 16, 2011. Article: U.S. plays down tensions with Yemen by Eric Schmitt, The New York Times, December 17, 2010. Article: Cables depict range of Obama diplomacy by David E. Sanger, The New York Times, December 4, 2010. Article: Yemen's drive on Al Qaeda faces international skepticism by Mona El-Naggar and Robert F. Worth, The New York Times, November 3, 2010. Article: Op-Ed: The Yemeni state against its own people by Subir Ghosh, Digital Journal, October 11, 2010. Roundtable Summary: Reform priorities for Yemen and the 10-Point agenda, MENAP, Chatham House, February 18, 2010. Article: As nations meet, Clinton urges Yemen to prove itself worthy of aid by Mark Landler, The New York Times, January 27, 2010. Article: After failed attack, Britain turns focus to Yemen by John F. Burns, The New York Times, January 1, 2010. Resources Congress.gov: S.J.Res.54 - A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress Govtrack: S.J.Res. 7: A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by ... Congress IMF.org: Gulf Cooperation Council Countries Middle East Institute: Addressing the Crisis in Yemen: Strategies and Solutions Open Knowledge Repository: Leveraging Fuel Subsidy Reform for Transition in Yemen US Dept. of Treasury: International Monetary Fund Sound Clip Sources House Proceedings: Yemen Resolution Debate, 116th Congress, April 4, 2019. Congressional Record Sound Clips: 1:06:30 Rep. Michael McCaul (TX):This resolution stretches the definition of war powers hostilities to cover non-U.S. military operations by other countries. Specifically, it reinterprets U.S. support to these countries as ‘‘engagement in hostilities.’’ This radical reinterpretation has implications far beyond Saudi Arabia. This precedent will empower any single Member to use privileged war powers procedures to force congressional referendums that could disrupt U.S. security cooperation agreements with more than 100 countries around the world. 1:14:30 Rep. Barbara Lee (CA): Yes, Madam Speaker, I voted against that 2001 resolution, because I knew it was open-ended and would set the stage for endless wars. It was a blank check. We see this once again today in Yemen. We must repeal this 2001 blank check for endless wars. Over the past 18 years, we have seen the executive branch use this AUMF time and time again. It is a blank check to wage war without congressional oversight. 1:21:30 Rep. Ro Khanna (CA): My motivation for this bill is very simple. I don’t want to see 14 million Yemenis starve to death. That is what Martin Griffith had said at the U.N., that if the Saudis don’t stop their blockade and let food and medicine in, within 6 months we will see one of the greatest humanitarian crises in the world. Senate Floor Proceedings: Yemen Resolution Debate, 115th Congress, 2nd Session, December 12, 2018. Congressional Record Pt. 1 Congressional Record Pt. 2 Sound Clips: 7:09:00 Sen. Bernie Sanders (VT): Finally, an issue that has long been a concern to many of us—conservatives and progressives—is that this war has not been authorized by Congress and is therefore unconstitutional. Article I of the Constitution clearly states it is Congress, not the President, that has the power to send our men and women into war—Congress, not the President. The Framers of our Constitution, the Founders of this country, gave the power to declare war to Congress—the branch most accountable to the people—not to the President, who is often isolated from the reality of what is taking place in our communities. The truth is—and Democratic and Republican Presidents are responsible, and Democratic and Republican Congresses are responsible—that for many years, Congress has not exercised its constitutional responsibility over whether our young men and women go off to war. I think there is growing sentiment all over this country from Republicans, from Democrats, from Independents, from progressives, and from conservatives that right now, Congress cannot continue to abdicate its constitutional responsibility. 7:14:45 Sen. Bob Corker (TN): I have concerns about what this may mean as we set a precedent about refueling and intelligence activities being considered hostilities. I am concerned about that. I think the Senator knows we have operations throughout Northern Africa, where we are working with other governments on intelligence to counter terrorism. We are doing refueling activists in Northern Africa now, and it concerns me—he knows I have concerns—that if we use this vehicle, then we may have 30 or 40 instances where this vehicle might be used to do something that really should not be dealt with by the War Powers Act. 7:49:06 Sen. Todd Young (IN): We don’t have much leverage over the Houthis. We have significant leverage over the Saudis, and we must utilize it. 7:58:30 Sen. Jim Inhofe (OK): The Sanders-Lee resolution is, I think, fundamentally flawed because it presumes we are engaged in military action in Yemen. We are not. We are not engaged in military action in Yemen. There has been a lot of discussion about refueling. I don’t see any stretch of the definition that would say that falls into that category. 8:01:00 Sen. Jim Inhofe (OK): Saudi Arabia is an important Middle Eastern partner. Its stability is vital to the security of our regional allies and our partners, including Israel, and Saudi Arabia is essential to countering Iran. We all know that. We know how tenuous things are in that part of the world. We don’t have that many friends. We can’t afford to lose any of them. 8:04:30 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): It is important to note some-thing that we take for granted in the region—this now long-term detente that has existed between the Gulf States and Israel, which did not used to be something you could rely on. In fact, one of the most serious foreign policy debates this Senate ever had was on the sale of AWACS to Saudi Arabia back in the 1980s. The objection then was that by empowering Saudi Arabia, you were hurting Israel and Israeli security. No one would make that argument today because Saudi Arabia has been a good partner in trying to figure out a way to calm the tensions in the region and, of course, provide some balance in the region, with the Iranian regime on the other side continuing to this day to use inflammatory and dangerous rhetoric about the future of Israel. So this is an important partnership, and I have no interest in blowing it up. I have no interest in walking away from it. But you are not obligated to follow your friend into every misadventure they propose. When your buddy jumps into a pool of man-eating sharks, you don’t have to jump with him. There is a point at which you say enough is enough. 8:06:00 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): Muhammad bin Salman, who is the Crown Prince, who is the effective leader of the country, has steered the foreign policy of Saudi Arabia off the rails. Folks seem to have noticed when he started rounding up his political opponents and killing one of them in a consulate in Turkey, but this has been ongoing. Look back to the kidnapping of the Lebanese Prime Minister, the blockade of Qatar without any heads-up to the United States, the wholesale imprisonment of hundreds of his family members until there was a payoff, the size of which was big enough to let some of them out. This is a foreign policy that is no longer in the best interests of the United States and cannot be papered over by a handful of domestic policy reforms that are, in fact, intended to try to distract us from the aggressive nature of the Saudis’ foreign policy in the region. 8:08:15 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): I am appreciative that many of my colleagues are willing to stand up for this resolution today to end the war in Yemen. I wish that it weren’t because of the death of one journalist, because there have been tens of thousands who have died inside Yemen, and their lives are just as important and just as worthwhile as Jamal Khashoggi’s life was, as tragic as that was. But there is a connection between the two, which is why I have actually argued that this resolution is in some way, shape, or form a response to the death of Jamal Khashoggi, for those who are primarily concerned with that atrocity. Here is how I link the two: What the Saudis did for 2 weeks was lie to us, right? In the most bald-faced way possible. They told us that Jamal Khashoggi had left the consulate, that he had gotten out of there alive, that they didn’t know what happened, when of course they knew the entire time that they had killed him, that they had murdered him, that they had dismembered his body. We now know that the Crown Prince had multiple contacts all throughout the day with the team of operatives who did it. Yet they thought we were so dumb or so weak— or some combination of the two—that they could just lie to us about it. That was an eye-opener for a lot of people here who were long-term supporters of the Saudi relationship because they knew that we had trouble. They knew that sometimes our interests didn’t align, but they thought that the most important thing allies did with each other was tell the truth, especially when the truth was so easy to discover outside of your bilateral relationship. Then, all of a sudden, the Saudis lied to us for 2 weeks—for 2 weeks—and then finally came around to telling the truth because everybody knew that they weren’t. That made a lot of people here think, well, wait a second—maybe the Saudis haven’t been telling us the truth about what they have been doing inside Yemen. A lot of my friends have been supporting the bombing campaign in Yemen. Why? Because the Saudis said: We are hitting these civilians by accident. Those water treatment plants that have been blowing up—we didn’t mean to hit them. That cholera treatment facility inside the humanitarian compound—that was just a bomb that went into the wrong place, or, we thought there were some bad guys in it. It didn’t turn out that there were. It turns out the Saudis weren’t telling us the truth about what they were doing in Yemen. They were hitting civilian targets on purpose. They did have an intentional campaign of trying to create misery. I am not saying that every single one of those school buses or those hospitals or those churches or weddings was an attempt to kill civilians and civilians only, but we have been in that targeting center long enough to know—to know—that they have known for a long time what they have been doing: hitting a lot of people who have nothing to do with the attacks against Saudi Arabia. Maybe if the Saudis were willing to lie to us about what happened to Jamal Khashoggi, they haven’t been straight with us as to what is happening inside Yemen, because if the United States is being used to intentionally hit civilians, then we are complicit in war crimes. And I hate to tell my colleagues that is essentially what the United Nations found in their most recent report on the Saudi bombing campaign. They were careful about their words, but they came to the conclusion that it was likely that the Saudi conduct inside Yemen would amount to war crimes under international law. If it is likely that our ally is perpetuating war crimes in Yemen, then we cannot be a part of that. The United States cannot be part of a bombing campaign that may be—probably is— intentionally making life miserable for the people inside of that country. 8:14:00 Sen. Chris Murphy (CT): There is no relationship in which we are the junior partner—certainly not with Saudi Arabia. If Saudi Arabia can push us around like they have over the course of the last several years and in particular the last several months, that sends a signal to lots of other countries that they can do the same thing—that they can murder U.S. residents and suffer almost no consequences; that they can bomb civilians with our munitions and suffer no consequences. This is not just a message about the Saudi relationship; this is a message about how the United States is going to interact with lots of other junior partners around the world as well. Saudi Arabia needs us a lot more than we need them, and we need to remind folks of that over and over again. Spare me this nonsense that they are going to go start buying Russian jets or Chinese military hardware. If you think those countries can protect you better than the United States, take a chance. You think the Saudis are really going to stop selling oil to the United States? You think they are going to walk away from their primary bread winner just because we say that we don’t want to be engaged in this particular military campaign? I am willing to take that chance. We are the major partner in this relationship, and it is time that we start acting like it. If this administration isn’t going to act like it, then this Congress has to act like it. 8:44:15 Sen. Mike Lee (UT): Many of my colleagues will argue—in fact some of them have argued just within the last few minutes—that we are somehow not involved in a war in Yemen. My distinguished friend and colleague, the Senator from Oklahoma, came to the floor a little while ago, and he said that we are not engaged in direct military action in Yemen. Let’s peel that back for a minute. Let’s figure out what that means. I am not sure what the distinction between direct and indirect is here. Maybe in a very technical sense—or under a definition of warfare or military action that has long since been rendered out- dated—we are not involved in that, but we are involved in a war. We are co-belligerents. The minute we start identifying targets or, as Secretary James Mattis put it about a year ago, in December 2017, the minute we are involved in the decisions involving making sure that they know the right stuff to hit, that is involvement in a war, and that is pretty direct. The minute we send up U.S. military aircraft to provide midair refueling assistance for Saudi jets en route to bombing missions, to combat missions on the ground in Yemen, that is our direct involvement in war. 8:48:00 Sen. Mike Lee (UT): Increasingly these days, our wars are high-tech. Very often, our wars involve cyber activities. They involve reconnaissance, surveillance, target selection, midair refueling. It is hard—in many cases, impossible—to fight a war without those things. That is what war is. Many of my colleagues, in arguing that we are not involved in hostilities, rely on a memorandum that is internal within the executive branch of the U.S. Government that was issued in 1976 that provides a very narrow, unreasonably slim definition of the word ‘‘hostilities.’’ It defines ‘‘hostilities’’ in a way that might have been relevant, that might have been accurate, perhaps, in the mid-19th century, but we no longer live in a world in which you have a war as understood by two competing countries that are lined up on opposite sides of a battlefield and engaged in direct exchanges of fire, one against another, at relatively short range. War encompasses a lot more than that. War certainly encompasses midair refueling, target selection, surveillance, and reconnaissance of the sort we are undertaking in Yemen. Moreover, separate and apart from this very narrow, unreasonably slim definition of ‘‘hostilities’’ as deter- mined by this internal executive branch document from 1976 that contains the outdated definition, we our- selves, under the War Powers Act, don’t have to technically be involved in hostilities. It is triggered so long as we ourselves are sufficiently involved with the armed forces of another nation when those armed forces of another nation are themselves involved in hostilities. I am speaking, of course, in reference to the War Powers Act’s pro- visions codified at 50 USC 1547(c). For our purposes here, it is important to keep in mind what that provisions reads: ‘‘For purposes of this chapter [under the War Powers Act], the term ‘introduction of United States Armed Forces’ includes the assignment of members of such Armed Forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities.’’ In what sense, on what level, on what planet are we not involved in the commanding, in the coordination, in the participation, in the movement of or in the accompaniment of the armed forces of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia-led coalition in the civil war in Yemen? 9:57:15 Sen. Richard Blumenthal (CT): In March of this year, I led a letter to the Department of Defense with my colleague Senator JACK REED of Rhode Island, along with many of our colleagues on the Senate Armed Services Committee, stating our concern regarding U.S. support for Saudi military operations against the Houthis in Yemen and asking about the DOD’s involvement, apparently without appropriate notification of Congress, and its agreements to provide refueling sup- port to the Saudis and the Saudi coalition partners. We were concerned that the DOD had not appropriately documented reimbursements for aerial re- fueling support provided by the United States. Eight months later—just days ago— the Department of Defense responded to our letter and admitted that it has failed to appropriately notify Congress of its support agreements; it has failed to adequately charge Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates for fuel and refueling assistance. That admission 8 months after our inquiry is a damning indictment. These errors in accounting mean that the United States was directly funding the Saudi war in Yemen. It has been doing it since March of 2015. Video: Trump: Khashoggi case will not stop $110bn US-Saudi arms trade, The Guardian, October 12, 2018. Donald Trump: I would not be in favor of stopping from spending $110 billion, which is an all-time record, and letting Russia have that money, and letting China have that money. Because all their going to do is say, that's okay, we don't have to buy it from Boeing, we don't have to buy it from Lockheed, we don't have to buy it from Ratheon and all these great companies. We'll buy it from Russia and we'll buy it from China. So what good does that do us? Hearing: U.S. Policy Toward Middle East, House Foreign Affairs Committee, C-SPAN, April 18, 2018. Witnesses: David Satterfield: Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Wess Mitchell: Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Sound Clips: 18:00 David Satterfield: We all agree, as does the Congress, that the humanitarian crisis in Yemen is unacceptable. Last month, the governments of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates provided $1 billion to Yemen's humanitarian response appeal, and this complements the US government pledge of $87 million and more than $854 million contributed since beginning of fiscal year 2017. 19:45 Wess Mitchell: Turkey is a 66 year member of the NATO alliance and member of the defeat ISIS coalition. It has suffered more casualties from terrorism than any other ally and hosts 3.5 million Syrian refugees. It supports the coalition through the use of Incirlik air base through its commitment of Turkish military forces against Isis on the ground in (Dibick? al-Bab?) And through close intelligence cooperation with the United States and other allies. Turkey has publicly committed to a political resolution in Syria that accords with UN Security Council. Resolution 2254. Turkey has a vested strategic interest in checking the spread of Iranian influence and in having a safe and stable border with Syria. Despite these shared interests, Turkey lately has increased its engagement with Russia and Iran. Ankara has sought to assure us that it sees this cooperation as a necessary stepping stone towards progress in the Geneva process, but the ease with which Turkey brokered arrangements with the Russian military to facilitate the launch of its Operation Olive Branch in Afrin district, arrangements to which America was not privy, is gravely concerning. Ankara claims to have agreed to purchase, to, to purchase the Russian S 400 missile system, which could potentially lead to sanctions under section 231 of CAATSA and adversely impact Turkey's participation in the F-35 program. It is in the American national interest to see Turkey remains strategically and politically aligned with the west. Hearing: U.S. Policy Toward Yemen, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, C-SPAN, April 17, 2018. Witnesses: Robert Jenkins: Deputy Assistant Administrator at USAID Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, & Humanitarian Assistance David Satterfield: Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Robert Karem: Assistant Defense Secretary for International Security Affairs Nominee and former Middle East Adviser to Vice President Cheney Sound Clips: 9:30 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Well, Yemen has always faced significant socioeconomic challenges. A civil war, which began with the Houthis armed takeover of much of the country in 2014 and their overthrow of Yemen's legitimate government in January 2015, has plunged the country into humanitarian crisis. 17:25 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Our first witness is acting assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs, Ambassador David Satterfield. Ambassador Satterfield is one of the most distinguished, one of our most distinguished diplomats. He most recently served as director general, the multinational force and observers in the Sinai peninsula and previously served as US Abassador to Lebanon. 17:45 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Our second witness is Robert Jenkins, who serves as the Deputy Assistant Administrator for USA ID Bureau for Democracy, conflict and humanitarian assistance. Mr. Jenkins, recently mark 20 years at USAID and previously served as the Director of Office of Transition Initiatives. 18:15 Chairman Bob Corker (TN): Our third witness is Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, Robert Kerem. Prior to his Senate confirmation last year, Mr. Karem served as National Security of Staff of Vice President Cheney and then as National Security Advisor to the House, majority leader's Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy. 20:15 David Satterfield: US military support serves a clear and strategic purpose to reinforce Saudi and Mrid self defense in the face of intensifying Houthi and Iranian enabled threats and to expand the capability of our Gulf partners to push back against Iran's regionally destabilizing actions. This support in turn provides the United States access and influence to help press for a political solution to the conflict. Should we curtail US military support? The Saudis could well pursue defense relationships with countries that have no interest in either ending the humanitarian crisis, minimizing civilian casualties or assisting and facilitating progress towards a political solution. Critical US access to support for our own campaign against violent extremists could be placed in jeopardy. 30:00 Robert Karem: Conflict in Yemen affects regional security across the Middle East, uh, and threatens US national security interests, including the free flow of commerce and the Red Sea. Just this month, the Houthi, his attack to Saudi oil tanker and the Red Sea threatening commercial shipping and freedom of navigation and the world's fourth busiest maritime choke point, the Bab el Mandeb. 32:00 Robert Karem: The Defense Department is currently engaged in two lines of effort in Yemen. Our first line of effort and our priority is the fight against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and ISIS in Yemen, two terrorist organizations that directly threaten the United States, our allies and our partners. To combat AQIP, AQAP, and ISIS, US forces in coordination with the UN recognized government of Yemen are supporting our regional key counter terrorism partners in ongoing operations to disrupt and degrade their ability to coordinate, plot and recruit for external terrorist operations. Additionally, US military forces are conducting airstrikes against AQAP and ISIS in Yemen pursuant to the 2001 a authorization for the use of military force to disrupt and destroy terrorist network networks. Our second line of effort is the provision of limited noncombat support to the Saudi led coalition in support of the UN recognized government of Yemen. The support began in 2015 under President Obama and in 2017 president Trump reaffirmed America's commitment to our partners in these efforts. Fewer than 50 US military personnel work in Saudi Arabia with the Saudi led coalition advising and assisting with the defense of Saudi territory, sharing intelligence and providing logistical support, including aerial refueling. 35:45 Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): Mr. Karem. I'm gonna Start with you. Um, in regards to the US military assistance that we give to the kingdom, you said that is to embolden their capacity and to reduce noncombatant casualties. Last March, the CENTCOM commander General Votel stated that the United States government does not track the end results of the coalition missions. It refills and supports with targeting assistance. So my question to you is, how do you determine that we are effectively reducing the non combatant casualties if we don't in fact track the results of the kingdoms military actions? Robert Karem: Senator, thank you. Um, it's correct that we do not monitor and track all of the Saudi aircraft, um, uh, a loft over Yemen. Uh, we have limited personnel and assets in order to do that. Uh, and CENTCOM's focus is obviously been on our own operations in Afghanistan, in Iraq and in Syria. Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): I understand that, but my question is, our stated mission is to reduce noncombat and casualties. If we don't track, how do we determine that? Robert Karem: So I think one of our stated missions is precisely that. Um, there are multiple ways that I think we do have insight into, uh, Saudi, uh, targeting behavior. Um, we have helped them with their processes. Um, we have seen them implement a no strike list. Um, and we have seen their, their, their uh, capabilities, uh, improved. So the information is based upon what the Saudis tell you, how they're conducting the mission rather than the after impact of the mission. I think our military officers who are resident in Saudi Arabia are seeing how the Saudis approach, uh, this, this effort that took getting effort. Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): But you know, obviously the proof is in the results and we don't know whether the results are, there are not fair statement. Robert Karem: I think we do see a difference in how the Saudis have operated in Yemen, how they operate. Sen. Ben Cardin (MD): I understand how they operate but we don't know whether in fact that's been effective. The United Nations Security Council panel of experts on Yemen concluded in recent reports that the cumulative effect of these airstrikes on civilian infrastructure demonstrates that even with precaution, cautionary measures were taken, they were largely inadequate and ineffective. Do you have any information that disagrees with that assessment? Robert Karem: Senator, I think the assessment of, uh, our central command is that the Saudi, uh, and Emirati targeting efforts, uh, have improved, um, uh, with the steps that they've taken. We do not have perfect understanding because we're not using all of our assets to monitor their aircraft, but we do get reporting from the ground on what taking place inside Yemen. 40:15 Sen. Rand Paul (KY): Ambassador Satterfield. I guess some people when they think about our strategy might question the idea of our strategy. You know, if your son was shooting off his pistol in the back yard and doing it indiscriminately and endangering the neighbors, would you give hmi more bullets or less? And we see the Saudis acting in an indiscriminate manner. They've bombed a funeral processions, they've killed a lot of civilians. And so our strategy is to give them more bombs, not less. And we say, well, if we don't give him the bomb, somebody else will. And that's sort of this global strategy, uh, that many in the bipartisan foreign policy consensus have. We have to, we have to always be involved. We always have to provide weapons or someone else will and they'll act even worse. But there's a, I guess a lot of examples that doesn't seem to be improving their behavior. Um, you could argue it's marginally better since we've been giving them more weapons, but it seems the opposite of logic. You would think you would give people less where you might withhold aid or withhold a assistance to the Saudis to get them to behave. But we do sort of the opposite. We give them more aid. What would your response be to that? David Satterfield: Senator, when I noted in my remarks that progress had been made on this issue of targeting, minimizing or mitigating civilian casualties, that phrase was carefully chosen into elaborate further on, uh, my colleagues remarks, uh, Robert Karem. We do work with the Saudis and have, particularly over the last six to nine months worked intensively on the types of munitions the Saudis are using, how they're using, how to discriminate target sets, how to assure through increased loiter time by aircraft that the targets sought are indeed clear of collateral or civilian damage. This is new. This is not the type of interaction… Sen. Rand Paul (KY): And yet the overall situation in Yemen is a, is a disaster. David Satterfield: The overall situation is extremely bad. Senator. Sen. Rand Paul (KY): I guess that's really my question. We had to rethink...And I think from a common sense point of view, a lot of people would question giving people who misbehave more weapons instead of giving them less on another question, which I think is a broad question about, you know, what we're doing in the Middle East in general. Um, you admitted that there's not really a military solution in Yemen. Most people say it's going to be a political solution. The Houthis will still remain. We're not going to have Hiroshima. We're not going to have unconditional surrender and the good guys win and the bad guys are vanquished. Same with Syria. Most people have said for years, both the Obama administration and this administration, probably even the Bush administration, the situation will probably be a political solution. They will no longer, it's not going to be complete vanquished meant of the enemy. We're also saying that in Afghanistan, and I guess my point as I think about that is I think about the recruiter at the station in Omaha, Nebraska, trying to get somebody to sign up for the military and saying, please join. We're going to send you to three different wars where there is no military solution. We're hoping to make it maybe a little bit better. I think back to Vietnam. Oh, we're going to take one more village. If we take one more village, they're going to negotiate and we get a little better negotiation. I just can't see sending our young men and women to die for that for one more village. You know the Taliban 40% in Afghanistan. Where are we going to get when they get to 30% don't negotiate and when we it, it'll be, it'll have been worth it for the people who have to go in and die and take those villages. I don't think it's one more life. I don't think it's worth one more life. The war in Yemen is not hard. We talk all about the Iranians have launched hundreds of missiles. Well, yeah, and the Saudis have launched 16,000 attacks. Who started it? It's a little bit murky back and forth. The, the Houthis may have started taking over their government, but that was a civil war. Now we're involved in who are the good guys of the Saudis, the good guys or the others, the bad guys. Thousands of civilians are dying. 17 million people live on the edge of starvation. I think we need to rethink whether or not military intervention supplying the Saudis with weapons, whether all of this makes any sense at all or whether we've made the situation worse. I mean, humanitarian crisis, we're talking about, oh, we're going to give my, the Saudis are giving them money and I'm like, okay, so we dropped, we bomb the crap out of them in this audience. Give them $1 billion. Maybe we could bomb last maybe part of the humanitarian answers, supplying less weapons to a war. There's a huge arms race going on. Why do the Iranians do what they do? They're evil. Or maybe they're responding to the Saudis who responded first, who started it? Where did the arms race start? But we sell $300 billion a weapons to Saudi Arabia. What are the Iranians going to do? They react. It's action and reaction throughout the Middle East. And so we paint the Iranians as the, you know, these evil monsters. And we just have to correct evil monster. But the world's a much more complicated place back and forth. And I, all I would ask is that we try to get outside our mindset that we, uh, what we're doing is working because I think what we're doing hasn't worked, and we've made a lot of things worse. And we're partly responsible for the humanitarian crisis in Yemen.  48:30 David Satterfield: The political picture on the ground in Yemen has changed radically with the death, the killing of a Ali Abdullah Saleh, uh, with the fragmentation of the General People's Congress. All of that, while tragic in many of its dimensions, has provided a certain reshuffling of the deck that may, we hope, allow the United Nations to be more effective in its efforts. 1:05:45 Sen. Todd Young (IN): Approximately how many people, Mr. Jenkins require humanitarian assistance in Yemen? David Jenkins: 22 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): What percent of the population is that? David Jenkins: Approximately 75% was the number of people requiring humanitarian assistance increase from last year. It increased by our, we're estimating 3.5 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): And how much has it increased? David Jenkins: About 3.5 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): Okay. How many are severely food insecure? David Jenkins: 17.8 million. Sen. Todd Young (IN): How many children are severely malnourished? David Jenkins: 460,000 Sen. Todd Young (IN): How many people lack access to clean water and working toilets? David Jenkins: We estimate it to be around 16 million people. Sen. Todd Young (IN): Does Yemen face the largest cholera outbreak in the world? David Jenkins: It does. Sen. Todd Young (IN): How many cholera cases have we seen in Yemen? David Jenkins: A suspected over a 1 million cases. Sen. Todd Young (IN): And how many lives has that cholera outbreak claim? David Jenkins: Almost 2100. 1:46:00 Robert Jenkins: I do know that the vast majority of people within that, the majority of people in need, and that 22 million number live in the northern part of the country that are accessible best and easiest by Hodeidah port, there is no way to take Hodeidah out of the equation and get anywhere near the amount of humanitarian and more importantly, even commercial goods into the country. Hearing: Violence in Yemen, House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Middle East and North America, C-SPAN, April 14, 2015. Witnesses: Gerald Feierstein: Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. Former Ambassador to Yemen (2010-2013) Sound Clips: 1:45 Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (FL): On September 10th of last year, President Obama announced to the American public his plan to degrade and destroy the terrorist group ISIL. While making his case for America's role in the fight against ISIL, the president highlighted our strategy in Yemen and held it up as a model of success to be emulated in the fight against ISIL. Yet about a week later, the Iran backed Houthis seized control of the capital and the government. Despite this, the administration continued to hail our counter-terror operations in Yemen as a model for success, even though we effectively had no partner on the ground since President Hadi was forced to flee. But perhaps even more astonishingly in what can only be described as an alarmingly tone deaf and short sighted, when Press Secretary Ernest was asked at a press briefing if this model was still successful after the Yemeni central government collapsed and the US withdrew all of our personnel including our special forces, he said yes, despite all indications pointing to the contrary. So where do we stand now? That's the important question. President Hadi was forced to flee. Saudi Arabia has led a coalition of over 10 Arab nations and Operation Decisive Storm, which so far has consisted of airstrikes only, but very well could include ground forces in the near future. 4:45 Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (FL): Iran has reportedly dispatched a naval destroyer near Yemen in a game of chicken over one of the most important shipping routes in the Gulf of Aden. This area is a gateway between Europe and the Middle East and ran was not be allowed to escalate any tensions nor attempt to disrupt the shipping lanes. 13:30 Rep. David Cicilline (NJ): I think it's safe to say that the quick deterioration of the situation in Yemen took many people here in Washington by surprise. For many years, Yemen was held up as an example of counter-terrorism cooperation and it looked as if a political agreement might be achieved in the aftermath of the Arab spring. The United States poured approximately $900 million in foreign aid to Yemen since the transition in 2011 to support counter-terrorism, political reconciliation, the economy and humanitarian aid. Now we face a vastly different landscape and have to revise our assumptions and expectations. Furthermore, we risk being drawn deeply into another Iranian backed armed conflict in the Middle East. 17:30 Rep. Ted Deutch (FL): Following the deposition of Yemen's longtime autocratic Saleh in 2011, the US supported an inclusive transition process. We had national dialogue aimed at rebuilding the country's political and governmental institutions and bridging gaps between groups that have had a long history of conflict. Yemen's first newly elected leader, President Hadi made clear his intentions to cooperate closely with the United States. 18:00 Rep. Ted Deutch (FL): Yemen, the poorest country on the peninsula, needed support from the international community. The United States has long viewed Yemen as a safe haven for all Qaeda terrorists, and there was alarming potential for recruitment by terrorist groups given the dire economic conditions that they faced. In fact, the US Department of Homeland Security considers al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the affiliate, most likely the al Qaeda affiliate, most likely to attempt transnational attacks against the United States. 18:30 Rep. Ted Deutch (FL): While the national dialogue was initially viewed as successful, the process concluded in 2014 with several key reforms still not completed, including the drafting of the new constitution. The Hadi government had continued to face deep opposition from Yemen's northern tribes, mainly the Shiite Iranian backed Houthi rebels, over the past year. The Houthis, in coordination with tribes and military units still loyal to Saleh, began increasing their territorial control, eventually moving in to Sanaa. Saleh had long been thought to have used his existing relationship to undermine the Hadi government. Houthis are well trained, well funded, and experienced fighters, having fought the Yemeni government and Saudi Arabia in 2009. 23:15 Gerald Feierstein: I greatly appreciate this opportunity to come before you today to review recent developments in Yemen and the efforts that the United States is undertaking to support the government of Yemen under president Rabu Mansour Hadi and the Saudi led coalition of Operation Decisive Storm, that is aimed at restoring the legitimate government and restarting the negotiations to find peaceful political solutions to Yemen's internal conflict. 26:45 Gerald Feierstein: To the best of our understanding, the Houthis are not controlled directly by Iran. However, we have seen in recent years, significant growth and expansion of Iranian engagement with the Houthis. We believe that Iran sees opportunities with the Houthis to expand its influence in Yemen and threatened Saudi and Gulf Arab interests. Iran provides financial support, weapons training, and intelligence of the Houthis and the weeks and months since the Houthis entered Sanaa and forced the legitimate government first to resign and ultimately to flee from the capitol, we have seen a significant expansion of Iranian involvement in Yemen's domestic affairs. 27:30 Gerald Feierstein: We are also particularly concerned about the ongoing destabilizing role played by former President Saleh, who since his removal from power in 2011 has actively plotted to undermine President Hadi and the political transition process. Despite UN sanctions and international condemnation of his actions, Saleh continues to be one of the primary sources of the chaos in Yemen. We have been working with our Gulf partners and the international community to isolate him and prevent the continuation of his efforts to undermine the peaceful transition. Success in that effort will go a long way to helping Yemen return to a credible political transition process. 42:00 Gerald Feierstein: From our perspective, I would say that that Yemen is a unique situation for the Saudis. This is on their border. It represents a threat in a way that no other situation would represent. 52:30 Gerald Feierstein: I mean, obviously our hope would be that if we can get the situation stabilized and get the political process going again, that we would be able to return and that we would be able to continue implementing the kinds of programs that we were trying to achieve that are aimed at economic growth and development as well as supporting a democratic governance and the opportunity to try to build solid political foundations for the society. At this particular moment, we can't do that, but it's hard to predict where we might be in six months or nine months from now. 1:10:00 Gerald Feierstein: When the political crisis came in Yemen in 2011, AQAP was able to take advantage of that and increase its territorial control, to the extent that they were actually declaring areas of the country to be an Islamic caliphate, not unlike what we see with ISIL in Iraq and Syria these days. Because of our cooperation, primarily our cooperation with the Yemeni security forces, uh, we were able to, uh, to defeat that, uh, at a significant loss of a life for AQAP. Uh, as a result of that, they changed their tactics. They went back to being a more traditional terrorist organization. They were able to attack locations inside of, uh, inside of Sanaa and and elsewhere. But the fact of the matter is that, uh, that we, uh, were achieving a progress in our ability to pressure them, uh, and, uh, to keep them on the defensive as opposed to giving them lots of time. And remember in 2009 in 2010, uh, we saw AQAP mount a fairly serious efforts - the underwear bomber and then also the cassette tape effort to attack the United States. After 2010, uh, they were not able to do that, uh, despite the fact that their intent was still as clear and as strong as it was before. And so a while AQAP was by no means defeated and continue to be a major threat to security here in the United States as well as in Yemen and elsewhere around the world, nevertheless, I think that it was legitimate to say that we had achieved some success in the fight against AQAP. Unfortunately what we're seeing now because of the change in the situation again, inside of Yemen, uh, is that we're losing some of the gains that we were able to make, uh, during that period of 2012 to 2014. That's why it's so important that we, uh, have, uh, the ability to get the political negotiation started again, so that we can re-establish legitimate government inside of Sanaa that will cooperate with us once again in this fight against violent extremist organizations. 1:16:45 Rep. Ted Yoho (FL): How can we be that far off? And I know you explained the counter-terrorism portion, but yet to have a country taken over while we're sitting there working with them and this happens. I feel, you know, it just kinda happened overnight the way our embassy got run out of town and just says, you have to leave. Your marines cannot take their weapons with them. I, I just, I don't understand how that happens or how we can be that disconnected. Um, what are your thoughts on that? Gerald Feierstein: You know, it was very, it was very frustrating. Again, I think that, if you go back to where we were a year ago, the successful conclusion of the National Dialogue Conference, which was really the last major hurdle and completion of the GCC initiative, Houthis participated in that. They participated in the constitutional drafting exercise, which was completed successfully. Uh, and so we were in the process of moving through all of the requirements of the GCC initiative that would allow us to complete successfully the political transition. I think there were a combination of things. One, that there was a view on the part of the Houthis that they were not getting everything that they wanted. They were provoked, in our view, by Ali Abdullah Saleh, who never stopped plotting from the very first day after he signed the agreement on the GCC initiative. He never stopped plotting to try to block the political transition, and there was, to be frank, there was a weakness in the government and an inability on the part of the government to really build the kind of alliances and coalition that would allow them to sustain popular support and to bring this to a successful conclusion. And so I think that all through this period there was a sense that we were moving forward and that we believed that we could succeed in implementing this peaceful transition. And yet we always knew that on the margins there were threats and there were risks, and unfortunately we got to a point where the Houthis and Ali Abdullah Saleh, my personal view is that they recognized that they had reached the last possible moment, where they could obstruct the peaceful political transition that was bad for them because it would mean that they wouldn't get everything that they wanted, and so they saw that time was running out for them, and they decided to act. And unfortunately, the government was unable to stop them. Hearing: Targeted Killing of Terrorist Suspects Overseas, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, C-SPAN, April 23, 2013. Sound Clips: 44:30 Farea al-Muslimi: My name as you mentioned, is Farea al-Muslimi, and I am from Wessab, a remote village mountain in Yemen. I spent a year living with an American family and attended an American high school. That was one of the best years of my life. I learned about American culture, managed the school basketball team and participated in trick or treat and Halloween. But the most exceptional was coming to know someone who ended up being like a father to me. He was a member of the U S Air Force and most of my year was spent with him and his family. He came to the mosque with me and I went to church with him and he became my best friend in America. I went to the U.S. as an ambassador for Yemen and I came back to Yemen as an ambassador of the U.S. I could never have imagined that the same hand that changed my life and took it from miserable to a promising one would also drone my village. My understanding is that a man named Hamid al-Radmi was the target of the drone strike. Many people in Wessab know al-Radmi, and the Yemeni government could easily have found and arrested him. al-Radmi was well known to government officials and even local government could have captured him if the U.S. had told them to do so. In the past, what Wessab's villagers knew of the U.S. was based on my stories about my wonderful experiences had. The friendships and values I experienced and described to the villagers helped them understand the America that I know and that I love. Now, however, when they think of America, they think of the terror they feel from the drones that hover over their heads ready to fire missiles at any time. What violent militants had previously failed to achieve one drone strike accomplished in an instant. 1:17:30 Farea al-Muslimi: I think the main difference between this is it adds into Al Qaeda propaganda of that Yemen is a war with the United States. The problem of Al Qaeda, if you look to the war in Yemen, it's a war of mistakes. The less mistake you make, the more you win, and the drones have simply made more mistakes than AQAP has ever done in the matter of civilians. News Report: Untold Stories of the underwear bomber: what really happened, ABC News 7 Detroit, September 27, 2012. Part 1 Part 2 Hearing: U.S. Policy Toward Yemen, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, C-SPAN, July 19, 2011. Witnesses: Janet Sanderson: Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Daniel Benjamin: State Department Counterterrorism Coordinator Sound Clips: 21:00 Janet Sanderson: The United States continues its regular engagement with the government, including with President Ali, Abdullah Saleh, who's currently, as you know, recovering in Saudi Arabia from his injuries following the June 3rd attack on his compound, the acting president, Vice President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, the opposition, civil society activists, and others interested in Yemen's future. We strongly support the Gulf Cooperation Council's initiative, which we believe would lead to a peaceful and orderly political transition. The GCC initiative signed by both the ruling General People's Congress party and the opposition coalition, joint meeting parties. Only president Saleh is blocking the agreement moving forward and we continue to call on him to sign the initiative. 22:30 Janet Sanderson: While most protests in Yemen have been peaceful over the last couple of months, there have been violent clashes between pro- and anti-government demonstrators and between protesters and government security forces and irregular elements using forced to break up demonstrations. The United States is strongly urged the Yemeni government to investigate and prosecute all acts of violence against protesters. 27:00 Janet Sanderson: We strongly believe that a transition is necessary, that an orderly, peaceful transition is the only way to begin to lead Yemen out of the crisis that it has been in for the last few months. 34:30 Daniel Benjamin: Really, I just want to echo what ambassador Sanderson said. It is vitally important that the transition take place. 1:02:15 Daniel Benjamin: The the view from the administration, particularly from a DOD, which is doing of course, the lion's share of the training, although State Department through anti-terrorism training is doing, uh, uh, a good deal as well, is that the Yemenis are, uh, improving their capacities, that they are making good progress towards, uh, being, able to deal with the threats within their border. But it is important to recognize that, uh, uh, our engagement in Yemen was interrupted for many years. Uh, Yemen, uh, did not have the kind of mentoring programs, the kind of training programs that many of our other counter-terrorism partners had. Um, it was really when the Obama administration came into office that a review was done, uh, in, in March of, uh, beginning in March of 2009, it was recognized that Yemen was a major challenge in the world of counter terrorism. And it was not until, uh, December after many conversations with the Yemenis that we really felt that they were on-board with the project and in fact took their first actions against AQAP. This, as you may recall, was just shortly before the attempted, uh, December 25th bombing of the northwest flight. So this is a military and a set of, uh, Ministry of Interior that is civilian, uh, units that are making good progress, but obviously have a lot to learn. So, uh, again, vitally important that we get back to the work of training these units so that they can, uh, take on the missions they need to. Press Conference: Yemen Conference, C-SPAN, January 27, 2010. Speakers: David Miliband - British Foreign Secretary Hillary Clinton - Secretary of State Abu Bakr al-Kurbi - Yemeni Foreign Minister Sound Clips: 3:30 David Miliband: And working closely with the government of Yemen, we decided that our agenda needed to cover agreement on the nature of the problem and then address the, uh, solutions across the economic, social, and political terrain. Five key items were agreed at the meeting for the way in which the international community can support progress in Yemen. First, confirmation by the government of Yemen, that it will continue to pursue its reform agenda and agreement to start discussion of an IMF program. The director of the IMF represented at the meeting made a compelling case for the way in which economic reform could be supported by the IMF. This is important because it will provide welcome support and help the government of Yemen confront its immediate challenges. 11:45 Hillary Clinton: The United States just signed a three year umbrella assistance agreement with the government of Yemen that will augment Yemen's capacity to make progress. This package includes initiatives that will cover a range of programs, but the overarching goal of our work is to increase the capacity and governance of Yemen and give the people of Yemen the opportunity to better make choices in their own lives. President Saleh has outlined a 10 point plan for economic reform along with the country's national reform agenda. Those are encouraging signs of progress. Neither, however, will mean much if they are not implemented. So we expect Yemen to enact reforms, continue to combat corruption, and improve the country's investment in business climate. 15:45 Abu Bakr al-Kurbi: This commitment also stems from our belief that the challenges we are facing now cannot be remedied unless we implement this agenda of reforms and the 10 points that her exellency alluded to because this is now a priority number of issues that we have to start with, and I hope this is what will be one of the outcomes of this meeting. 16:30 Hillary Clinton: One of the factors that's new is the IMF's involvement and commitment. the IMF has come forward with a reform agenda that the government of Yemen has agreed to work on. 24:30 Hillary Clinton: We were pleased by the announcement of a cease fire, um, between the Saudis and the Houthis. That should lead, we hope, to broader negotiations and a political dialogue that might lead to a permanent, uh, end to the conflict in the north. It's too soon to tell. The Daily Show with John Stewart: Terror 2.0 by Yemen - Sad Libs, CC.com, January 6, 2010. The Daily Show with John Stewart: Terror 2.0 by Yemen, CC.com, January 4, 2010. Community Suggestions See Community Suggestions HERE. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)

The Trump administration is cutting $200 million in aid meant for the Palestinians. The move comes on the heels of previous cuts to U.S. funding for projects in the Palestinian territories. We sat down with Tamara Cofman Wittes, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs at the U.S. State Department, to analyze what impact the cut will have and what it reveals about the administration’s strategy. Our second guest is Josh Glancy, a correspondent for the British publication The Sunday Times. Glancy recently wrote a searing indictment of Jeremy Corbyn in The New York Times following the latest anti-Semitic scandal involving Corbyn where a 2013 video that was discovered showed him questioning whether ‘Zionists’ were truly British. Josh Glancy’s article: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/27/opinion/jeremy-corbyn-anti-semitism-labour-britain.html John McCain’s speech at AJC Global Forum 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=183&v=uHcr2baBftE

On Friday the 13th of April, President Trump bombed the government of Syria… Again. In this episode, learn some of the little-discussed history of and reasons for the on-going attempts to overthrow the government of Syria. Please Support Congressional Dish Click here to contribute using credit card, debit card, PayPal, or Bitcoin Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Mail Contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North #4576 Crestview, FL 32536 Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD167: Combating Russia (NDAA 2018) LIVE Additional Reading Article: 'Obscene masquerade': Russia criticised over Douma chemical attack denial by Patrick Wintour, The Guardian, April 26, 2018. Article: Why does Syria still have chemical weapons? by Patrick Wintour, The Guardian, April 18, 2018. Report: Russia rejects UN resolution for independent Douma investigation, Aljazeera, April 18, 2018. Report: Pentagon warns of IS resurgence in regime areas of Syria, France24, April 17, 2018. Interview: Legal questions loom over Syria strikes, Interview by Jonathan Masters of John B. Bellinger III, Council on Foreign Relations, April 15, 2018. Letter: Text of a letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, April 15, 2018. Report: Trump bombs Syria hours after 88 lawmakers urged him to first consult Congress by Jennifer Bendery, Huffpost, April 13, 2018. Interview: What are U.S. Military options in Syria? Interview by Zachary Laub of Mona Yacoubian, Council on Foreign Relations, April 13, 2018. Report: Thousands of US troops and Marines arrive in Jordan by Shawn Snow, Marine Times, April 13, 2018. Report: Global chemical weapons watchdog 'on its way to Syria', Aljazeera News, April 12, 2018. Report: Pentagon strips Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria troop numbers from web by Tara Copp, Military Times, April 9, 2018. Press Release: Press release on Israeli air strikes in Syria, MFA Russia, February 20, 2018. Article: Kurds pull back from ISIS fight in Syria, saying U.S. 'let us down' by Liz Sly, The Washington Post, March 6, 2018. Report: US has no evidence of Syrian use of sarin gas, Mattis says by Robert Burns, AP News, February 2, 2018. Article: The pundits were wrong about Assad and the Islamic State. As usual, they're not willing to admit it by Max Abrahms and John Glaser, Los Angeles Times, December 10, 2017. Report: [Syria investigator del Ponte signs off with a sting](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-, mideast-crisis-syria-investigator/syria-investigator-del-ponte-signs-off-with-a-sting-idUSKCN1BT29Q) by Reuters Staff, Reuters, September 18, 2017. Article: Trump's red line by Seymour M. Hersh, Welt, June 25, 2017. Article: The 'Pipelineistan' conspiracy: The war in Syria has never been about gas by Paul Cochrane, Middle East Eye, May 10, 2017. Article: MIT expert claims latest chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged by Tareq Haddad, Yahoo, April 17, 2017. Report: MIT expert claims latest chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged by Tareq Haddad, International Business Times, Yahoo, April 17, 2017. Report: Dozens of U.S. missiles hit air base in Syria by Michael R. Gordon, Helene Cooper, and Michael D. Shear, The New York Times, April 6, 2017. Report: ISIS used chemical arms at least 52 times in Syria and Iraq, report says by Eric Schmitt, The New York Times, November 21, 2016. Article: How the White Helmets became international heroes while pushing U.S. Military intervention and regime change in Syria by Max Blumenthal, Alternet, October 2, 2016. Meetings Coverage: Security council unanimously adopts resolution 2254 (2015), endorsing road map for peace process in Syria, setting timetable for talks by UN Security Council, December 18, 2015. Article: How Syria's 'geeky' President Assad went from doctor to dictator by Sarah Burke, NBC News, October 30, 2015. Report: Declared Syrian chemical weapon stockpile now completely destroyed by Thomas Gibbons-Neff, The Washington Post, August 18, 2014. Article: Analysts question US intel on Syria chem attack, DW, January 18, 2014. Book Review: Whose Sarin? by Seymour M. Hersh, London Review of Books, December 19, 2013. Article: UN report says sarin likely used in five locations in Syria, DW, December 13, 2013. Article: Assad did not order Syria chemical weapons attack, says German press by Simon Tisdall and Josie Le Blond, The Guardian, September 9, 2013. Article: Cameron forced rule out British attack on Syria after MPs reject motion by Nicholas Watt and Nick Hopkins, The Guardian, August 29, 2013. Article: Spooks' view on Syria: what wikileaks revealed by Alex Thomson, Channel 4, August 28, 2013. Article: Obama weighs 'limited' strikes against Syrian forces by Thom Shanker, C.J. Chivers, and Michael R. Gordon, The New York Times, August 27, 2013. Report: Moscow rejects Saudi offer to drop Assad for arms deal by Agence France-Presse, Hurriyet Daily News, August 8, 2013. Analysis: UN's Del Ponte says evidence Syria rebels 'used sarin' by Bridget Kendall, BBC News, May 6, 2013. Report: Syrian rebels used nerve gas, UN investigator says by TOI Staff, Times of Israel, May 6, 2013. Report: UN sources say Syrian rebels - not Assad - used sarin gas by Adam Clark Estes, The Atlantic, May 5, 2013. Report: U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator by Reuters Staff, Reuters, May 5, 2013. Letter: Text of White House letter on Syria to senators by The Associated Press, The Seattle Times, April 25, 2013. Article: How economic reforms are contributing to the conflict in Syria by Rodrigo Abd, NPR, May 29, 2012. Article: The only remaining online copy of Vogue's Asma al-Assad profile by Max Fisher, The Atlantic, January 3, 2012. Report: IMF gives Syria high grade for economic reform by Stephen Glain, The National, January 6, 2009. Report: REFILE-LIberalised Syria banks "on sound track" by Reuters Staff, Reuters, May 26, 2008. Article: The redirection: Is the Administration's new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism? by Seymour M. Hersh, The New Yorker, March 5, 2007. Article: Syrian Arab Republic -- IMF article IV consultation, mission's concluding statement, International Monetary Fund, May 14, 2006. Report: Investigator says Syria was behind Lebanon assassination by Warren Hoge, The New York Times, December 12, 2005. Article: Reform hinges on Syria's leader by Evan Osnos, Chicago Tribune, April 22, 2005. Resources Congressional Research Service: Armed Conflict in Syria: Overview and U.S. Response Council on Foreign Relations: Syria's War: The Descent into Horror by Zachary Laub Country Reports on Terrorism: Chapter 6 -- State Sponsors of Terror Overview Gov. Publishing Office: Counter-ISIS Training and Equipment Fund IMF Working Paper: Syria's Conflict Economy by Jeanne Gobat and Kristina Kostial Pipeline Report: Arab Gas Pipeline (AGP), Jordan, Syria, Lebanon Public Law: 9/11 AUMF Public Law: Iraq War AUMF Scientific Advisory Board: OPCW 27th Session March 23, 2018 Wikileaks Tweet on OPCW UN News: Action Group for Syria Final Communique June 30, 2012 UN Security Council Report: Goal in Syria Sound Clip Sources Hearing: US Policy Toward Middle East; House Foreign Affairs Committee; April 18, 2018. Witnesses: -David Satterfield - Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State - Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs - Wess Mitchell - Assistant Secretary of State of European and Eurasian Affairs 15:25 David Satterfield: While preventing the use of chemical weapons in Syria is our immediate concern, the administration’s priority remains the defeat of ISIS. ISIS has lost nearly all of the territory it once controlled in Iraq and Syria, but the fight in Syria still has to be pursued to its conclusion. More broadly, the United States supports a unified and territorially whole Syria. This objective is served by U.S. support for the UN-led Geneva political process, established by UN Security Council Resolution 2254, in which process the U.S. believes strongly that representatives of all Syrians, including all its Kurdish components, should fully participate. 16:30 David Satterfield: The Iraqi government is stabilizing communities, including minority communities that suffered greatly from ISIS, and now we’re beginning private-sector-led, investment-driven reconstruction. 34:15 Representative Eliot Engel (NY): To me, ISIS is one prong of something, an important prong, but one prong of what we should be doing. I really think to rid Syria of the butcher Assad ought to be as important as our ISIS concerns. David Satterfield: I strongly agree with you that a Syria in which Assad remains as leader of this regime is not a Syria which we would predict to be meaningfully secure or stable, or not a source of generation of threat and violent extremism under whatever name in the future, and it’s why we have strongly supported a political process led by the UN. Unfortunately, that political process has been blocked, and the parties responsible for blocking it are quite clear: it’s the Syrian regime itself and the Russians, who through their absence of pressure on the regime in Damascus contributes to, enables this freezing of a Geneva process which, virtually, the entire international community supports. Engel: And through the veto in the United Nations. Satterfield: Exactly, sir. 1:02:20 Representative Dana Rohrabacher: What is our purpose in Syria? Will we accept anything less than—would we accept a compromise that would keep Assad in power, at least in part of Syria, or is our goal and our purpose only to totally eliminate the Assad government? David Satterfield: Mr. Rohrabacher, our purpose of our forces in Syria, as Secretary Mattis, Chairman Dunford have stated repeatedly, is to defeat ISIS. The purpose of our diplomacy, of our international engagement, with respect to Syria, is to support a political process, which at its end has a revised constitution, elections conducted under the auspices of the United Nations. And our belief is that those elections, if freely and fairly conducted amongst all Syrians, including the émigré Syrian communities, would not produce the survival of the Assad regime. Rohrabacher: Okay, let me just note, what you described wasn’t just Syria, but probably three-quarters of the countries of the Middle East. And if we made those demands of—why is it that Syria, we have to make those demands against Syria and not against all these other countries in the Middle East? Satterfield: Because, sir, of the extraordinary depredations of this regime in this country against its citizens, because of the extraordinary and historically unprecedented, in modern times, outflow of— Rohrabacher: You don’t think the rest of the countries in the Middle East have similar track records? You’re trying to tell me that—well, we heard the same thing, of course, about Saddam Hussein, we heard the same thing about Gaddafi, and we ended up creating total chaos—total chaos—in that part of the world. Satterfield: No regime in modern history in the Middle East, including Saddam Hussein’s— Rohrabacher: Yes. Satterfield: —has killed as many of its own citizens, has produced external and internal displacement of its own citizens on the scale of the Assad regime. No. It’s unique, sadly. Rohrabacher: Well, let me just say, Mr. Ambassador, you read history differently than I do. That is an area that is filled with dictators, it’s filled with authoritarian regimes, filled with our allies, that if people rose up against them as they’re rising up against Assad—he’s a bad guy, he’s a dictator, he’s everything you said, but he’s not that different from these other regimes once they are challenged. Once they were challenged, don’t tell me the Qatar government wouldn’t mow down all of their guest workers if there was an uprising in Qatar, and vice versa with these other regimes. I’m very disturbed by the fact that we’re sliding into a war and not having an out that will not lead us to major military commitments to that region. That would be a disaster, and I think it’s based on the analysis that you just said: that Assad is somewhat different than everybody else. I don’t think so. News: Rand Paul Says Syrian Gas Attack was False Flag, or Assad is Dumbest Dictator on the Planet; CNN News; April 17, 2018. Meeting: U.N. Security Council on Airstrikes in Syria; U.N. Security Council; April 14, 2018. Testimony: Secretary Mattis and General Dunford on 2019 Budget Request; House Armed Services Committee; April 12, 2018. Witnesses: - James Mattis - Secretary of Defense - General Joseph F. Dunford Jr. - Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 41:42 Secretary of Defense James Mattis: On Syria, sir, both the last administration and this one made very clear that our role in Syria is the defeat of ISIS. We are not going to engage in the civil war itself. Now, you can look back to a year ago when we did fire missiles into Syria, unrelated to ISIS, and that was, of course, the use of chemical weapons. And some things are simply inexcusable, beyond the pale, and in the worst interest of not just the Chemical Weapons Convention but of civilization itself. 42:48 Secretary of Defense James Mattis: And the only reason Assad is still in power is because of the Russians’ regrettable vetoes in the UN, and the Russian and Iranian military. So, how do we deal with this very complex situation? First of all, we are committed to ending that war though the Geneva process, the UN orchestrated effort. It has been unfulfilled because, again, Russia has continually blocked the efforts. 50:10 Representative Niki Tsongas (MA): So as you’re considering possible steps forward—military actions you might take— what do you hope to achieve by any military action that the administration might eventually decide to take? Secretary of Defense James Mattis: Congresswoman, I don’t want to get, as you’ll understand, into the details of a potential decision by the commander in chief, due to this latest attack, which is absolutely inexcusable. There have been a number of these attacks. In many cases, you know we don’t have troops. We’re not engaged on the ground there, so I cannot tell you that we had evidence, even though we certainly had a lot of media and social-media indicators that either chlorine or sarin were used. As far as our current situation, if, like last time, we decide we have to take military action in regard to this chemical weapons attack, then, like last time, we will be reporting to Congress just as we did when we fired a little over a year ago, slightly over a year ago. As far as the counter violent extremists, counter ISIS— Tsongas: So, let me go back to this. So, before taking any action, you would report to Congress as to the nature of what that action might be. Mattis: I will speak only to the fact that we will report to Congress. We’ll keep open lines of communication. There will be notification to the leadership, of course, prior to the attack. But we’ll give a full report to the Congress itself, probably as rapidly as possible. 54:05 Secretary of Defense James Mattis: I believe there was a chemical attack, and we’re looking for the actual evidence. The OPCW—this is the organization for the Chemical Weapons Convention—we’re trying to get those inspectors in, probably within the week. 1:00:42 Representative Jackie Speier (CA): Mr. Secretary, a Military Times article this week revealed that the Defense Manpower Data Center failed to report the number of combat troops deployed in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan last quarter. That website was also stripped of deployment data from previous quarters. I’m very concerned about that. I think that there’s no combat advantage to obfuscating the number of U.S. service members that were in these countries three months ago, and, furthermore, the American public has a right to know. Do you intend to restore that information to the website? Secretary of Defense James Mattis: I’ll look at it, Congresswoman. As you know, we keep the Congress fully informed, right down to every week. We can update you on exactly the numbers in each case, and we do maintain some degree of confidentiality over the number of troops engaged against enemies in the field. So, I’ll have to look at it. But we will not, of course, ever keep those numbers away from members of Congress, for your oversight. Speier: Well, I know, but this has been an ongoing website that’s provided this information to the public, and all of a sudden, the last quarter, it’s not posted, and they’ve sweeped away all the data for previous quarters. So, it would suggest to, I think, the public and to members of this Congress that you are no longer going to make that information available, and I think the public has a right to know. Mattis: I see. When I come in, ma’am, I don’t come in intending to hide things, but I would just ask, what would you do if you thought the enemy could take advantage of that kind of data, seeing trends at certain times of the year and what they can expect in the future? But I’ll certainly look at it. I share your conviction that the American people should know everything that doesn’t give the enemy an advantage. Speier: Thank you. I yield back. 1:18:09 Representative John Garamendi (CA): What is the legal authority—the precise legal authority—of the United States government to engage in military action in response to the chemical weapons use by the Assad regime? Secretary of Defense James Mattis: Right. I believe that authority’s under Article II. We have forces in the field, as you know, in Syria, and the use of chemical weapons in Syria is not something that we should assume that, well, because you didn’t use them on us this time, you wouldn’t use them on us next time. 1:28:35 Representative Tulsi Gabbard (HI): You know, the president has indicated recently his intention to launch U.S. military attacks against Syria. Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war. Congress has not done so against the Syrian government. Section 3 of the War Powers Resolution requires the president to consult with Congress before introducing U.S. armed forces into situations of hostilities. Section 2 of the War Powers Resolution clarifies the constitutional powers of the president as commander in chief. In Article II, which you referenced, Secretary Mattis, to introduce forces into hostilities only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by an attack upon the U.S., its territories, possessions, or armed forces. Syria’s not declared war against the U.S. or threatened the U.S. The launch of 59 missiles against Syria by Trump last year was illegal and did not meet any of those criteria in the War Powers Resolution. The consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018, which was signed into law by President Trump, states that none of the funds made available by this Act may be used with respect to Syria in contravention of the War Powers Resolution, including for the introduction of U.S. armed military forces into hostilities in Syria. My question is, will the president uphold the Constitution, the War Powers Resolution, and comply with the law that he signed by obtaining authorization from Congress before launching U.S. military attacks against Syria? Secretary of Defense James Mattis: Congresswoman, we have not yet made any decision to launch military attacks into Syria. I think that when you look back at President Obama sending the U.S. troops into Syria at the time he did, he also had to deal with this type of situation, because we were going after a named terrorist group that was not actually named in the AUMF that put them in. This is a complex area, I’ll be the first to admit. Gabbard: It is simple, however, what the Constitution requires. So while you’re correct in saying the president has not yet made a decision, my question is, will he abide by the Constitution and comply with the law? Mattis: Yeah. I believe that the president will carry out his duties under the Constitution to protect the country. Interview: John Kerry - We Got All of the Chemical Weapons Out of Syria; CNN; April 9, 2018. Interview: John Kerry on Getting Chemical Weapons out of Syria, 2014; Meet the Press; April 9, 2018. Testimony: US Policy in Syria After ISIS; Senate Foreign Relations Committee; January 11, 2018. Witnesses: - David Satterfield - Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs 13:45 David Satterfield: A stable Syria absolutely requires the departure of President Assad and his regime. They’ve inflicted suffering and countless deaths on the Syrian people, including use of chemical weapons. This regime is a magnet for terror. It is incapable of democratically leading the whole of Syria. We, our allies, have come to Russia with a path towards the Syrian political transition, towards a political solution, on many occasions, and we call on Russia again today to pressure the regime to work seriously towards a political resolution to this conflict. 14:37 Sen. Bob Corker (TN): We are now not demanding that Assad leave. Instead, as I understand it, we’re embracing the UN resolution as Putin has recently done. Is that correct? David Satterfield: That’s correct, Mr. Chairman. Corker: And that would mean that there would then be an election that would take place. Satterfield: There would be a constitutional reform and revision process, and then there would be an electoral process. That electoral process would be fully under UN monitoring and supervision. Corker: And is it true that—it’s my sense that people like you and others believe that if that process occurs as has been laid out and as supported right now by Russia, do you believe that the way Assad would go through a democratic election where he would lose? Satterfield: Mr. Chairman, we cannot conceive of a circumstance which a genuinely fair electoral process overseen by the UN, with participation of a Syrian displaced community, could lead to a result in which Assad remained at the helm. 21:20 David Satterfield: First step was the defeat of ISIS. As long as ISIS remained a potent fighting force in Syria, the bandwidth, the space to deal with these broader strategic challenges, including Iran and, of course, Assad and the regime, simply wasn’t there. But that bandwidth is being freed up now. With the UN process, with international support for a credible electoral and constitutional reform process, we see political transition in Syria as a potentially achievable goal. We don’t underestimate the challenges ahead. It’s going to be hard—very hard—to do. Assad will cling to power at almost every cost possible. But with respect to Iran, we will treat Iran in Syria and Iran’s enablement of Hezbollah as a separate strategic issue. How do you deal with it? You deal with it in all places that it manifests itself, which is not just Syria, but Iraq, Yemen, the Gulf, other areas where Iran’s maligned behaviors affect our and our allies’ national interests. Difficult challenge, but not impossible challenge, and it is one we are seized with right now, but having a politically transformed Syria will, in and of itself, be a mitigating and minimizing factor on Iran’s influence, and the opposite is also true. Satterfield: We are working on stabilization in the north and the northeast right now very successfully and with a minimum of U.S. physical presence. About 2,000 U.S. military and seven, soon to be 10, foreign service colleagues. This is a highly efficient operation, and it’s working on the ground. But those are only the first steps. The 2254 political process, the process that the entire international community of like-minded states has signed on to, is the key. It’s the key to addressing Assad and his departure; it is the key to resolving the question of foreign forces and Iranian influence. And what are our levers, what are our tools to move that forward? They are denial of legitimacy and authenticity to any claim of victory by the regime or its supporters in Moscow or Tehran, and the withholding of reconstruction funds, which are vital to the regime and we think Moscow’s interests over the long term. Those are potent levers. 48:58 Sen. Bob Corker: As I understand, the troops that are there, they’re not involved in combat. Is that correct? David Satterfield: Senator, there are still combat activities going on in the middle Euphrates valley. The campaign against the so-called Caliphate, that is, the territorially structured presence of ISIS, is not over yet. That campaign continues. The level of fighting has significantly diminished since the days of urban conflict in Mayadeen, Raqqa, Deir ez-Zor. But the fight goes on, and there is combat activity. Corker: But, most of their efforts are in support of those that are actually on the front lines. Satterfield: They are in facilitation of the SDF efforts, who have consistently carried this fight since the beginning. 49:47 Sen. Ron Johnson (OH): Reconstructing Syria’s going to cost somewhere in the order of 200 to 300 billion dollars. Is that…? David Satterfield: That’s a general international estimate, sir. Johnson: So, who has that kind of money? Satterfield: I can tell you who doesn’t: the Syrian regime, Moscow, and Tehran. Who does? The international community companies, international financial institutions. They’ve got the money collectively, but that money is not going to flow into a Syria which has not gone through a political transformation and transition. Hearing: Authorization for Use of Military Force; Senate Foreign Relations Committee; October 30, 2017. 2:55:15 Sen. Rob Portman (OH): Do you think there can be a lasting peace there as long as Assad is in power, and does the current AUMF give you the ability, General Mattis, to be able to deal with that issue if you think that has to be resolved? That might be one example. Rex Tillerson: Well, the current AUMF only authorizes our fight against ISIS in Syria, as I indicated in my remarks. We’re not there to fight the regime. There is no authority beyond the fight against ISIS. Therefore, we have to pursue a future Syria that’s kept whole and intact, and a process, which the UN Security Council process does provide a process by which, in our view, the Assad regime will step down from power. Breaking News: Brian Williams is Guided by the Beauty of Our Weapons in Syria Strikes; MSNBC; April 13, 2017. Breaking News: Zakaria: Trump Just Became President; CNN; April 7, 2017. Report: Hillary Clinton Discussed Rigging the Election in Leaked Audio; The Young Turks; November 1, 2016. Interview: Gen. Wesley Clark - 7 Countries in 5 Years; Democracy Now!; August 6, 2016. Hearing: U.S. Policy and Russian Involvement in Syria; House Foreign Affairs Committee; November 4, 2015. Witnesses: - Anne Patterson - Assistant Secretary of State - Victoria Nuland - Assistant Secretary of State Statement: Situation in Syria; Secretary of State Clinton calls on Assad to resign Interview: 100% Syria Have No Chemical Weapon, John Kerry; Charlie Rose; March 10, 2014. Debate: British House of Commons Debate on Syria; House of Commons; August 29, 2013. Press Briefing: US President Barack Obama in 'red line' warning to Syria over Chemical Weapons; Telegraph; August 21, 2012. Testimony: US Policy Toward Syria; House International Relations Committee; September 16, 2003. Speech: Democracy in Iraq; George Bush; February 26, 2003. Witnesses: - John Bolton - then Undersecretary at the Department of State for Arms Control, current National Security Advisor 53:12 Former Representative Gary Ackerman (NY): Are we talking about regime change in Syria if they do not voluntarily rid themselves of whatever it is we’re saying they have or do that threatens our national security? John Bolton: Mr. Ackerman, as the president has made clear and as we are directed, our preference is to solve these problems by peaceful and diplomatic means. But the president has also been very clear that we’re not taking any options off the table. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)  

The strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship has long been rooted in bipartisan support for an alliance based on shared interests and values. But is the bipartisan consensus on Israel fading away? In this episode of AJC Passport, we speak with Tamara Cofman Wittes, Senior Fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at The Brookings Institution. Tamara, who previously served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs in the Obama Administration, recently co-authored an essay in The Atlantic that examines polling data and probes this question. Our second guest is Dr. Steven Bayme, AJC's Director of Contemporary Jewish Life, who discussed present-day American Jewish attitudes towards Israel. *The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC.

This week's guest is Robert Danin, a senior fellow for Middle East Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and former Deputy Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs during the George W. Bush administration. We spoke with him about the history of the Arab-Israeli peace process. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices