| | | | |  | | By Robbie Gramer and Eric Bazail-Eimil | |  Your NatSec Daily hosts asked six leading foreign policy voices across the left, right, and center to put on their debate moderator hats and see what they’d ask Vice President Kamala Harris in the debate if they had the chance. | Justin Sullivan/Getty Images | With help from Daniel Lippman Subscribe here | Email Robbie| Email Eric Political nerds rejoice: It’s debate night in America. Vice President KAMALA HARRIS and former President DONALD TRUMP are gearing up for a high-stakes presidential debate this evening — their first ever face-to-face encounter and a key opportunity to pitch their platforms to undecided Americans. Here at NatSec Daily, we’re hoping for lengthy and substantive discussions from both Harris and Trump on their foreign policy priorities. But in the (very likely) event that doesn’t happen, we’ve still got you covered. Your NatSec Daily hosts asked SIX leading foreign policy voices across the left, right, and center to put on their debate moderator hats and see what they’d ask Harris in the debate if they had the chance. We decided to focus on Harris here because Trump’s idiosyncratic worldview is familiar and national security experts not quoted here have told us they still have unanswered questions about how the vice president’s foreign policy would differ from that of President Joe Biden. Here are some questions on their minds:
- “Are there any elements of the Biden administration's approach to Ukraine where you thought that we should've gone further or faster (e.g., the provision of weapons or reducing restrictions on their use)? Are you prepared to allow Ukraine to strike deeply into Russia on Russian military targets?” — MIKE FROMAN, President of the Council on Foreign Relations
- “How can we do a better job helping democratic dissidents and opposition leaders in countries like Venezuela, Georgia, and Russia to safely continue trying to reform their countries and bring about democratic change? Should democracies continue to rely mostly on sanctions, should sanctions be improved, and can we do more than just sanction autocratic regimes?” — EVELYN FARKAS, Executive Director of the McCain Institute and former Obama administration Defense Department official.
- “This year Congress passed a bill that would ban TikTok unless it fully divests from Chinese ownership. Mr. Trump subsequently came out against a ban. Do you believe that TikTok poses a special threat to our security, to our democracy, or the health of our kids? If so, would a change of ownership be enough to satisfy your concerns?” — TOM MALINOWSKI, former Democratic congressman from New Jersey and State Department official in the Obama administration
- “North Korea now has a defense alliance with Russia and advanced nuclear weapon program and ballistic missiles that can reportedly hit the continental United States. And yet we've had no official communication with the North Korean government in four years. How would you solve this intractable problem?” — MORGAN ORTAGUS, founder of Polaris National Security and former Trump administration State Department spokesperson
- “You were charged with handling the ‘root causes of migration in Central America.’ And yet, over the course of this administration, we've seen over 10 million illegal immigrant encounters, China increase its investment and role in Central America, authoritarianism proliferate in the region, and security cooperation with Mexico decline. Do you believe you succeeded in your job and what would a Harris presidential administration do differently?” — CARRIE FILIPETTI, Executive Director of the Vandenberg Coalition and former State Department official in the Trump administration
- “If you win the election, would you continue the Biden administration’s attempts to ‘manage competition’ with the Chinese Communist Party, or would you adopt a more proactive approach to contain Beijing’s revisionist ambitions? Relatedly, do you agree with President Biden that America is not in a cold war with the CCP?” — MICHAEL SOBOLIK, Senior Fellow in Indo-Pacific Studies at the American Foreign Policy Council
Of course, we couldn’t let them have all the fun. We have some (admittedly less serious) questions too: - Trump said in 2019 he tried to approach Denmark about purchasing Greenland for the United States. Do you see any merit to Trump’s suggestion that the U.S. seek to acquire Greenland? If not, why not?
- The Justice Department has seized hundreds of millions of dollars worth of luxury yachts from Russian oligarchs, and now the U.S. is in charge of maintaining the vessels. How should the U.S. defray those costs? Should the U.S. lease out the yachts to billionaires? Raffle off a stay on one of those yachts? Raise yacht bonds?
If you’re hungry for even more questions, read this round-up of policy questions for both candidates from around the POLITICO newsroom (featuring contributions from your hosts and our own DAVE BROWN). | | A message from Lockheed Martin: Innovation that Powers Economic Growth
The F-35 helps secure our world. The program unites valued allies and partners, powers small businesses, and creates high-paying, high-tech jobs for workers in critical innovation fields. Learn more. | | | | | TO INVESTIGATE OR NOT TO INVESTIGATE: Biden administration officials are stopping short of calling for an independent U.S. probe into the Friday killing of AYSENUR EZGI EYGI during a demonstration in the occupied West Bank apparently by the Israel Defense Forces. Speaking to reporters, National Security Council spokesperson JOHN KIRBY said that the White House would wait and allow an Israeli criminal investigation to unfold before calling for an independent U.S. probe. “We're going to want to see where it goes now in terms of the criminal investigation and what they find and if and how anyone is held accountable, before we move beyond that,” said Kirby in reference to the Israeli decision to allow for a non-military probe. Secretary of State ANTONY BLINKEN also condemned the killing of Eygi, who was shot in the head, as "unprovoked and unjustified" today. But President JOE BIDEN’s Democratic allies on Capitol Hill say that doesn’t go far enough. “While I appreciate Secretary Blinken’s statement today, the need for fundamental change in the IDF’s use of force in the West Bank has been evident for years — going back to the killing of Palestinian-American journalist SHIREEN ABU AKLEH and even earlier,” Sen. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-Md.) told NatSec Daily in a statement. “It shouldn’t have required the deaths of 3 more American citizens within the last 11 months to make that clear. It is our responsibility to seek justice and accountability for the loss of these Americans’ lives — and in order to get that we need an independent, U.S.-led investigation.” The IDF has stated it is “very likely” Eygi was hit by Israeli fire, but maintains she was not intentionally targeted. | | | |   | | | FIRST IN NATSEC DAILY – J STREET'S UNCLEAR POSITION ON ISRAEL AID: The moderate pro-Israel group J Street has changed its policy on conditioning aid to Israel but its own website still says it opposes imposing conditions, our DANIEL LIPPMAN writes in. In a statement the group issued last Wednesday, it called for “maximum pressure” on Israeli Prime Minister BENJAMIN NETANYAHU to get a deal. It also said Biden should “Pledge a thorough review of every single arms shipment scheduled from the U.S. to Israel and make clear that certain offensive weapons will be withheld if Israel chooses to continue to pursue the illusory goal of ‘total victory’ rather than take good-faith steps to end the war.” But J Street’s website says it is against conditions on aid, saying “No” in a question about whether it supported “cutting or conditioning U.S. aid to Israel.” “We also think that U.S. foreign assistance to Israel should be dispersed without conditions,” the website reads. Asked about the apparent inconsistency, J Street spokesperson JENNIFER ABRAHAMSON said in a statement to NatSec Daily: “The language in the FAQ is our longstanding policy opposing calls to condition and withhold all aid to Israel — something we do not support as an organization that supports the 2016 MOU and lobbies for annual appropriations of U.S. security aid to Israel. It isn’t meant to cover the conditioning of aid already provided for in U.S. law and policy like the Leahy Law, the Humanitarian Corridor Act or, now, NSM-20. But your inquiry raises a very good point and we'll make the distinction clear on our website asap.” Read: Blinken asked Lammy on August call what it would take for UK to reconsider Israeli weapons suspension by our own ERIN BANCO, NAHAL TOOSI and Robbie NEW TEHRAN SANCTIONS: The Treasury Department announced new sanctions against Iran Air and officials and entities in Russia and Iran that facilitated the transfer of ballistic missiles between the two countries. Deputy Treasury Secretary WALLY ADEYEMO said in a release that the sanctions were necessary as “Iran has opted to intensify its involvement in Russia’s illegal war.” Adeyemo added that “the United States, along with our partners, will continue to stand with Ukraine.” NSC spokesperson Kirby told reporters today that Iran provided Russia with close-range Fatah missiles, which have a range of 75 miles, and that Russia has received those missiles. He added that France, Germany and the United Kingdom would unveil their own sanctions suspending partnerships with Iranian state-owned businesses and that the U.S. would “supplement” their actions. Read: Ukraine to press top US and UK officials on striking deeper inside Russia by our own JOE GOULD, Nahal and PAUL McLEARY. IT’S TUESDAY. Thanks for tuning in to NatSec Daily! This space is reserved for the top U.S. and foreign officials, the lawmakers, the lobbyists, the experts and the people like you who care about how the natsec sausage gets made. Aim your tips and comments at rgramer@politico.com and ebazail@politico.com, and follow Robbie and Eric on X @RobbieGramer and @ebazaileimil. While you’re at it, follow the rest of POLITICO’s national security team: @nahaltoosi, @PhelimKine, @connorobrienNH, @paulmcleary, @magmill95, @johnnysaks130, @ErinBanco, @reporterjoe, and @JGedeon1 | | A message from Lockheed Martin: F-35: Strengthening Our Supply Chain. Securing Our Future.
The F-35 is the most economically significant defense program in U.S. history, contributing approximately $72 billion annually and advances the industry to outpace global competitors by supplying more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs. Learn more. | | | | | A CYBER CONCLAVE: Executives from top tech companies and government agencies are assembling in Washington State today for a high-stakes Microsoft summit about preventing a repeat of this July’s global computing outage. As our friends at Morning Cybersecurity scooped this morning (for Pros!), the conference will be headlined by Microsoft president and vice chair BRAD SMITH and Crowdstrike CEO GEORGE KURTZ. And representatives from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security and the White House’s Office of the National Cyber Director are expected to be in attendance, persons familiar with the event logistics told our own JOSEPH GEDEON. There are fears among some tech industry insiders that Microsoft could overcorrect after July’s IT blackout, which saw disruptions with Crowdstrike software crash millions of Windows computers, by blocking their access to the most sensitive core of their software. That in turn could kneecap competitors in the security space and boost Microsoft’s own product offerings. “Microsoft could screw our products over with one change,” said a summit invitee granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about it. | | DÉJA VU, COACH EDITION: Stop us if you’ve heard this one before — Sen. TOMMY TUBERVILLE (R-Ala.) is jamming a top general’s promotion. As our own CONNOR O’BRIEN reports, the Alabama Republican has placed a procedural hold on Lt. Gen. RONALD CLARK’s promotion to four-star general, arguing he helped keep Defense Secretary LLOYD AUSTIN’s January hospitalization a secret from the White House. Clark, Austin’s senior military aide, is up for promotion to lead Army forces in the Pacific. His nomination was cleared by the Senate Armed Services Committee, of which Tuberville is a member, in July, but the Senate did not confirm him before August recess. Tuberville, who has leveraged holds on military promotions in the past to voice his opposition with the Pentagon, said in a brief interview that other senators want answers about why Clark did not inform the White House about Austin’s health issues. "This is not just one person. I mean this is Democrat and Republican wanting to know what the heck happened here," he said. "And the American people need the truth here. Why did we not have full disclosure of what happened? And so once we get that, we'll be good.” | | FIRST IN NATSEC DAILY — DEMOCRATS’ ARLINGTON LETTER: Nine Democratic lawmakers are issuing a new call for the Pentagon to release an incident report about the Aug. 26 altercation between Trump campaign officials and an employee at Arlington National Cemetery. In the letter to Army Secretary CHRISTINE WORMUTH, shared first with NatSec Daily, the House members, led by Rep. SETH MOULTON (D-Mass.), asked for a copy of the incident report and urged the Army to release a redacted version for the general public. They also called on the Army to release information about its communications with the Trump campaign ahead of the visit. “Arlington National Cemetery is a national shrine to the honored dead of the Armed Forces and is not, and should never be, a place to conduct politics. It is hallowed ground, and those who made the ultimate sacrifice for this country deserve the utmost dignity and respect,” they wrote. “We thank the Army for standing firm in this belief and commend the professionalism of the Cemetery official who sought to uphold those values.” | | | | CHINA ON THE WIRE: Iran wasn’t the only country whose deepening ties with Russia U.S. officials lashed today. As our own STUART LAU reports, the U.S. also accused China of giving “very substantial help” to Russia’s war machine. Speaking in Brussels to reporters, Deputy Secretary of State KURT CAMPBELL warned that China is going beyond providing “dual-use equipment” to Russia and explained that the materials China has recently provided Russia are “component pieces of a very substantial effort on the part of China to help sustain, build and diversify various elements of the Russian war machine.” Campbell added that Moscow and Beijing are trying to “both hide and protect certain elements of this worrisome collaboration” and that China is gaining access to top-secret Russian military technology in exchange for its support. The sharp comments from the State Department’s No. 2 diplomat come as Washington has consistently warned about China and Russia’s “no limits” partnership amid the war in Ukraine. Beijing has given the Kremlin economic and diplomatic lifelines in the face of tightening Western sanctions and isolation. | | | | — AI-focused Defense contractor Primer Technologies added Vice Adm. COLLIN GREEN and retired Major Gen. DANIEL SIMPSON to its federal advisory board, NatSec Daily has learned. Green served as deputy commander of Special Operations Command and commander of Naval Special Warfare Command. Simpson served as Air Force assistant deputy chief of staff for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. | | — ELIZABETH DICKINSON, The New York Times: How to talk to Colombia’s largest criminal group — TANYA GOUDSOUZIAN, Responsible Statecraft: The Taliban resistance lives on in the Lion of Panjshir's son — Rep. MARIO DÍAZ-BALART, Washington Examiner: Congress must make sure foreign policy serves a purpose
| | — Atlantic Council, 8 a.m.: A next-generation agenda: Bridging South Korean and NATO perspectives on security — Center for Strategic and International Studies, 8:30 a.m.: Hedging their bets: Taiwan industry adapts to geostrategic risks — Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 10 a.m.: Hearing on several nominations — House Foreign Affairs Committee, 10 a.m.: Great power competition in Africa — Brookings Institution, 11 a.m.: Afghanistan under the Taliban: Power dynamics, regional relations, and U.S. policy — Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1 p.m.: Enhancing U.S.-Republic of Korea economic security cooperation — House Foreign Affairs Europe Subcommittee, 2 p.m.: Countering malign PRC influence in Europe — Georgetown University, 4 p.m.: Keep eyes on Sudan: Mass displacement, food insecurity, and Sudanese women Thanks to our editor, Ben Fox, who should never moderate a presidential debate. Thanks to our producer, Giselle Ruhiyyih Ewing, who asks the best questions. CORRECTION: An item in Monday’s newsletter misstated the state which Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.) represents in Congress. | | | | Follow us on Twitter | | | | Follow us | | | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment