Foreign Policy and International News

Topics Discussed

  • The State of Foreign Policy

  • Russia, Putin, and Alexei Navalny

  • Moment of Hope: Sonceria “Ann” Berry, Secretary of the Senate

  • China, Myanmar, Taiwan, Hong Kong

  • Outside of Politics

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do what we do without you. To become a tangible supporter of the show, please visit our Patreon page, purchase a copy of our book, I Think You're Wrong (But I'm Listening), or share the word about our work in your own circles. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook for daily news briefs, GIF news threads, and our real time reactions to breaking news. To purchase Pantsuit Politics merchandise, check out our TeePublic store and our branded tumblers available in partnership with Stealth Steel Designs. To read along with us, join our Extra Credit Book Club subscription.

Episode Resources

RUSSIA

CHINA

MYANMAR

TAIWAN

HONG KONG

Transcript

Sarah: This is Sarah

Beth: And Beth, 

Sarah: You're listening to Pantsuit Politics.

Beth: The home of grace-filled political conversations.

 Sarah: [00:00:00] Hello everyone. And welcome to another episode of Pantsuit Politics. We are so thrilled to be here with you today as we tackle foreign policy. It feels like we haven't had time to tackle foreign policy in many, many years so we're excited to have the time and space to dive in to situations around the world and why we think you should care.

 Before we get into that, we wanted to share that we send a weekly email on Friday and we write in it sometimes and that's good. And, and we're happy to share a little behind the scenes scoops. into our making Pantsuit Politics and our lives, but the real Jim and our weekly newsletter are the insights and feedback and just philosophical wonderings of you guys and our amazing community. So if you have not signed up for the email, go to our website, PantsuitPoliticsShow.com and sign up so you can be a part of this weekly [00:01:00] email newsletter. 

Beth: [00:01:01] Just to give you a little hint of what the newsletter looks like this week, you'll hear from Hope who wrote to us about president Biden's call for unity and her reflections on seeing political leaders with greater empathy as part of that. She shared a quote from Father Gregory Boyle that we both loved so much we wrote it down in our Emily P. Freeman journals. The quote is "If we don't welcome our wanes, we will begin to despise the wounded" and hope said, I genuinely believe that if we have leaders who are more practiced sitting with and grieving their own pain, we would have a healthier country.

I'm not advocating for keeping these people in power. Often self-reflection doesn't happen until we are in a more quiet space. We set boundaries and we stop the harm just like when my toddler hits his sister. I loved that more from hope in this week's newsletter and others and like Sarah said, you can just go to the homepage of our website, scroll down to the purple box, enter your email address. We will not spam you. We'll just see you once a week with amazing listener insights on Fridays. 

Sarah: [00:01:54] So as we are recording Thursday, February 4th, president Joe Biden is heading [00:02:00] to the state department to give a speech to the career diplomats there and usher in his foreign policy approach, which I think is easy to say will be dramatically different from the America first foreign policy approach of the Trump administration. He's expected to address the crisis in Yemen, prioritize the expansion of LGBTQ rights around the world and just empower diplomats who have felt beat down. Who have felt like paying attention to foreign policy and particularly prioritizing diplomacy has not been the preferred route for the past several years.

And so, you know, we here at Pantsuit Politics are also very excited to welcome in another era of foreign policy and diplomacy and paying attention to not only hotspots around the world, but America's role in those hotspots. And so [00:03:00] that's what we thought we'd do here today. We would walk through some of these hotspots.

Beth: [00:03:03] So we're going to talk primarily about Russia and China today. And I think it will be interesting to test that theory that the Biden approach to foreign policy will be dramatically different than the Trump approach because in style, a hundred percent, couldn't be any different right out of the gate in substance.

I think that we're seeing some continuations of what some of the Trump administration did and some of the better instincts of the Trump administration on foreign policy, particularly as it relates to China and Russia but there are many, many fine points in all foreign policy discussions that matter dramatically. So kind of pairing the, what we do in terms of sanctions and arm sales with an ally centered America as moral authority in the world could make a huge difference in where we are. 

Sarah: [00:03:55] Well, I think, you know, both with Russia and China, as we start talking about these in more [00:04:00] detail, what's really important to remember as we think about that transition from the Trump administration to the Biden administration is that for years, the popular narrative around both countries was either we will open them up to a more democratic system, or we will open their economy up to the West, in China's case, and that will lead to all kinds of cultural changes and that will lead to the proliferation and flourishing of democratic norms.

 And what we've seen and I think to the Trump administration's credit, what they forced everyone to look at is that those narratives were not true, and that opening up Russia to a more democratic system with the fall of the Soviet union and opening up China to the Western economy didn't usher in the changes everyone anticipated they would. And so, you know, I think that the Biden administration sees that and accepts that and has, and has articulated as much 

Beth: [00:04:56] And with both Russia and China, we are focusing in on [00:05:00] them because those governments are benefited any time liberal democracy is undermined. There is a stated specific interest in those countries in proving out that authoritarian models of government are superior to Western democracy. And so even though Russia and China could not be more different in terms of the countries themselves and the people who live there and their cultures, that objective to undermine democracy is aligned.

 And the case for caring more about foreign policy, if you're a person who usually kind of skips over this stuff, is that I think they provide both a mirror and a window into a lot of what is driving the bus in domestic politics here in the United States right now, and help us understand how some of our internal stuff presents a serious national security risk when you look at the goals of these countries.

Sarah: [00:05:57] So let's start with Russia. Russia has been in the news [00:06:00] recently, particularly surrounding the opposition leader, Alexei Nevany. Just this week, Alexei Nevany was sentenced to prison for more than two and a half years because the court found that he violated the terms of his probation. Well, what was he on probation for? Well he was on probation for a 2014 embezzlement conviction that the European court of human rights ruled was unlawful and that Russia had paid him compensation in line with that ruling.

So the original charge was an intimidation technique as found by most Western nations and human rights advocates and so he gets charged, he gets found guilty. You know, the, the courts in Russia are largely just seen as an arm of the government. And while he was on probation, if we all remember he was poisoned, it was very dramatic. 

So he was in Siberia. He was flying back to Moscow, I believe. And he became a violently ill vomiting, eventually was put into a [00:07:00] coma. And so the, the, in this sort of dramatic turn of events, the pilot flew him to a hospital in Russia. And then he was taken from the hospital in Russia to Germany for treatment.

He is literally in a coma and the government's accusation at this hearing is that he violated his probation by leaving the country and not alerting, I guess his, his government officials, his probation officers, I don't know how one would have do that in a coma, but he actually says, I did try to tell them what was going on or like my people tried to alert them to what was happening.

 Of course they knew it was happening because just like the original charge, this charge of violating the probation is trumped up. Okay. So now they're saying you were supposed to serve three and a half years on the suspended sentence from a charge from what seven years ago. He had served a year under house arrest so that's counting as time served. 

And now he's gonna serve this two and a half years cause they're no longer suspending it because he violated his probation all while in a coma. Now he is [00:08:00] very, very good at taking advantage of the internet and the media and, you know, taking what could be a terrible situation for his side and using it to his advantage.

So, you know, he took this moment when he returned to Russia, even though he knew he would probably be arrested for violating his probation and spoke at the airport, took the moment when everybody was paying attention to his return to Russia, despite the great risk of arrest and shared this video about the corruption inside the inside Russia that we'll talk about in just a minute.

And he definitely used his moment in the courtroom to speak to what was going on. So first he goes after Vladimir Putin, he says he's never participated in any debates or campaign in an election. Murder is the only way he knows how to fight. He'll go down in history as nothing but a poisoner. We all remember, remember Alexander, the liberator [00:09:00] and Yaroslav the wise. 

Well, now we have Valdimir, the underpants poisoner, and he called him the underpants poisoner because it's believed that the nerve agent that they use to poison him was put on the waistband of his underwear. He went on to speak about the economic situation in Russia. And he says, we've got 20 million people living below the poverty line.

We have tens of millions of people living without the slightest prospect for the future. Life is bearable in Moscow, but travel 100 kilometers in any direction and everything's a mess. Our whole country is living in this mess without the slightest prospects, earning 20,000 rubles a month. And they're all silent.

They try to shut people up with these show trials, lock up this one to scare millions more. One person takes to the streets and they lock up another five to scare 15 million more. I hope very much that people won't look at this trial as a signal that they should be more afraid. This isn't a demonstration of strength. It's a show of weakness. You can't lock up millions and hundreds of thousands of people. I hope very much that people will realize this and they will, because you can't [00:10:00] look up the whole country.

 Upon his return to Russia, there were protests that he called for across the country. I mean, usually these protests were so long because they were called for on the internet and the internet access was focused on Moscow and the big cities. We're also focused on Moscow and the big cities, but as the internet has expanded, so has Navalny's reach and you saw protests across the country. You know, there's lots of coverage of in cities where it was like 40 below little towns and rural areas where it's like 40, below zero people are out protesting and there were also an enormous amount of arrests.

Police detained more than, detained more than 5,750 people nationwide, which was the biggest one day total in Russia since Soviet times. And many of the protesters reported that they were attacked, intimidated by police custody, you know, and they did a lot of other intimidation as the protest went on once Navalny was sentenced. So, I mean, in Russia, I think Putin has finally found an opposition leader who understands both [00:11:00] the Russian people and the culture and the media there and how to use the internet. So, as I said, when he, everyone was focused on his return to Russia they released a two hour YouTube video about this black sea palace that Putin had built. And it's been viewed over a hundred million times. I watched it. Have you watched any of it, Beth? 

Beth: [00:11:16] No, it's been in my browser tabs forever though. I can't wait to get into it. 

Sarah: [00:11:20] It's fascinating. It's so highly produced. I mean like Rachel Maddow and her like linking people together, it's got nothing on Navalny. Let me tell you, like, he just, he's very, very systematic about linking people together. They like put together 3d graphics, like showing you what the palace will look like based on photos they have from workers and receipts they have from the like super fancy Italian furniture makers. And I mean, it's ridiculous that the palace is ridiculous.

It's definitely over the top. And it's really interesting because when Putin came out and like response finally responded to the video. It was it wasn't like, no, it's not true. He said, neither he, nor his relatives owned any of [00:12:00] the properties. Well, that's not what he was accused of doing Navalny is very clear of like, he doesn't own it, but here's the shells.

Like here's all the people covering from him. Now they're trying to say, it's like still being built and it's a, it's an apartment hotel. And you know, they're kind of batting it around. And I think, you know, I listened to a reporter for Medusa, an independent Russian newspaper on Pod Save the World and he was just saying like, Navalny is much like Putin and like, and honestly, like even sort of you, you hear this undercurrent and a lot of like Russian culture and a lot of Russian political reporting and like, it's all about showing strength, right?

It's all about, you can see why Donald Trump was so drawn to Putin and the way that he behaves and he believes that any, any response is seen as weakness. So any sort of giving into protestors is not acceptable because that's saying like we're actually on any sort of equal footing and where we're taking [00:13:00] concessions from humans.

So like that's impossible. I mean, they used to issue permits for these protests for a long time. And they would say, see, like, see, we let you, we let you protest. We let you say what you want to say. But now, you know, Navalny has gone from being just an enemy to being really seen by the government as a traitor.

And so now they don't issue permits for any of the protests. They'll just grab people off the street and arrest them. And so. You know, it's, it is an enormous risk that Navalny operates. But I think that he in, in a lot of ways understands Putin and, and every time Putin gives him this platform, upon which to either be persecuted openly within these courts or refuses to respond to the, the levels you know, the accusations of corruption, which is how Navalny started. He started as like a, an activist stockholder. He would, he would buy stock in these companies and then expose the corruption. 

And like, I mean, I think it's also important to remember that like, Navalny is not some. Liberal hero, right? Like [00:14:00] he's very nationalistic. He has said Islamophobic things in the past and some really awful things about certain populations within Russia. Like, but, you know, he's kind of become a politician over time and has focused on the things that really unite Russians against Putin, which was hard to do for a long time, because, you know, when Russia annexed Crimea, that was enormously popular in Russia.

And I think that's something else to, to remember, right is that Russia is not this populace hungry for Western democracy, that Putin is just putting down in every like harshly oppressing. That he, that he was enormously popular in the country after the annexation of Crimea, that was like seen as this like bringing countries that had been pushed out of the Russian empire back into the fold.

And it was very patriotic. And despite the fact that it was like enormously and continues to be enormously alarming for the you know, Western Europe, the idea that Russia will come and take back [00:15:00] some of these areas or countries, like it was popular inside Russia. But you know, as Navalny kind of references this in his speech, is that over time, this has become very different.

Like the financial stagnation in Russia is real, like people's wages, aren't rising. You know, the government was forced to raise the retirement age on some of the government pension funds, which was enormously unpopular. They're suffering under some of the sanctions that they've been under, due to their meddling in the 2016 election.

And the, obviously the sanctions from the annexation of Crimea. And so their wages are declining. Their population is declining. They have a little bit of a brain drain and so people are miserable. And they know that the government will go out of their way to and intimidate them and arrest them. And, you know, even, maybe even attack them while under arrest.

But I was reading an article and they said, there's a common Russia, Russian saying, which is what's better, a horrible end or horror without end? And the guy was [00:16:00] arguing well, the former is preferable. You know, like you might be taken out by the police, but it's, you know, there's not a lot of prospects inside the economy in Russia right now. And that's what people are really facing.

Beth: [00:16:10] The photograph that was circulating of Navalny as he was being taken into detention where he's making a heart with his hands as they're separating him from his wife illustrated to me a lot of what you were just saying about how shrewd he is. Because while I think he is brave, obviously in standing up and relentless in his opposition to Putin, I think he also has studied other opposition leaders and understands what a signal it is to the public when you are visibly choosing the political fight over your family. 

And seeing the personal cost of all of this that is comparable to something we're going to talk about in Myanmar in just a second. A lot of what you're saying about Navalny reminds me of Aung San Suu Kyi, that we're going to talk about in Myanmar, but I'm interested, [00:17:00] Sarah, since you've spent so much time thinking about Russia in what you see as the reality of Russia that American citizens need to really comprehend and appreciate?

Sarah: [00:17:10] Well, I mean, I think it was just hard. Why don't we talk about Russia so much, right? It doesn't have like this huge population, like China. It doesn't have a huge economy. I think Italy's GDP is bigger than Russia. But here's what it does have: a lot of nuclear weapons. 90% of nuclear weapons belong to the United States or Russia.

And so arms treaties and arms control is something that we have to talk about. And we have to think about particularly in relationship to Russia. Well we have good news, the US and Russia have formally extended the new start nuclear arms treaty through 2026. That just happened. That's really good. That limits the number of nuclear warheads each country can deploy. And it calls for like by onsite inspections to verify compliance. 

I mean, we have to stay in relationship with Russia as the United States, because who else is going to inspect, who else is going to make sure that this country who has the [00:18:00] ability to really obliterate I don't know, all of us stays in compliant and like we keep an eye on them.

Like, I mean, for better or for worse, the cold war with regards to nuclear weapons, sort of, you know, married us together. We're we're in this together now. And so I think that that's one reason why as Americans, you know, Russia will and should always be on our radar. 

You know, they're a military superpower. They have, they spend an enormous amount on their military. They exercise a lot of military power, you know, because of the USSR. They inherited a spot on the United nations security council, which means they can veto a lot of stuff, right? Like they could veto a lot of stuff that's important to us so they have that because of their military power and the nuclear power, they have power on the international stage and they exercise that military super power through arm sales and, you know, just assistance.

 Um, you saw it in Belaruse right. Belarus is a part of that fallen empire. It's another country that it's not like Crimea. There's a lot of people in Crimea who want to be back with Russia. [00:19:00] That's not necessarily true in Belarus and so you saw that popular uprising around the presidential election.

Well, the president was able to call in help from Putin and from the Russian military and those protests haven't really quite gone anywhere. And I think that that's, you know, their ability to step into places like Syria, to step into North Korea and exercise that influence through their military might is something we can't ignore either.

They're also an energy superpower. They have enormous oil and gas reserves that are used by the Chinese and other areas in the world. Now I was just reading a really interesting article in the financial times about how renewable energies are going to shift. The global power around dramatically that that renewable energies have really taken off.

And so for, you know, decades, the ways in which super powers have been created around fossil fuels is going to change. That's already changing. It will continue to change. And so that might change her Russia. But as of now, there are enormous energy and gas reserves give them [00:20:00] power on the international stage.

And that when I say Russia, I mean Putin, I mean, he can be there through 2036. He's already been there 20 years. He'll he will have been in power in Russia longer than Stalin. And so, you know, it's hard to talk about any of this and why do we spend so much time thinking about Vladimir Putin? Well, because for all intents and purposes, Putin is Russia.

And I think paying attention to what motivates him, particularly his desire for influence on the global stage. And I think the sense that Russia should be a super power should have enormous influence should be an empire again, I think that that's why that the annexation of Crimea was both an insight into why they are so dangerous and an insight to why he's popular in Russia sometimes, at certain points in his reign, whatever we want to call it. And so I think for, you know, for all those reasons, we can't ever really just turn our backs and ignore Russia. 

Beth: [00:20:56] The readout of Biden's call with [00:21:00] Putin indicated that it was pretty tough conversation and that Biden is confronting Putin more over things like the solar winds packing, the reporting that the Russian military, uh, paid for bounties on Americans in Afghanistan.

I'm wondering what you see in Biden and Blinken's approaches here that you think will be materially different, other than that public confrontation aspect from where the Trump administration's been on Russia? 

Sarah: [00:21:32] Well, I mean, I think part of the, you know, those calls are interesting, but Oh, he just lies, you know, he's just going to say that wasn't us, we didn't do it.

So it's more about just registering your displeasure than it is actually thinking you're going to have any influence on Putin himself, because he's just going to, stone-cold say, well, it wasn't us. We weren't doing any bounties on American CEDS. We weren't a part of the solar winds that wasn't us. 

But I was listening to someone talk about how long he's been there. Um, not only in Russia, but on the global [00:22:00] stage and that he seen people come and go. And I thought, well, that's interesting because that's also the position Joe Biden is in, right. Um, that is a fundamental strength he has as well that he's been here this whole time. He's been thinking and watching Putin this entire time.

I mean, I think it will be interesting to see how that plays out if some, when he's finally met with someone. And I think that that was his fear of Hillary Clinton too. Right? Like he felt like this, this was somebody who knew his tricks, who knew how he manipulated things who understood the centers of out of which he operates, um, and could respond more effectively and I think that's true, Joe Biden too. Um, and I think that we'll see that hopefully play out. 

Beth: [00:22:39] Well, we're going to go to China next, and I'm really interested to see if you hear all of the connections that I think I'm hearing between what you've been learning about Russia and what I've been learning about Myanmar and situation in Taiwan, which both impact China but before we do, we always liked to have a little moment of hope 

Sarah: [00:22:54] and particularly of importance when you're talking about Vladimir Putin. Yes. 

Beth: [00:22:58] And I was really [00:23:00] excited. I'm going to dive into the power sharing agreement in the Senate next week on the Nightly Nuance. But a piece of it is that we are about to have our first Black woman serving as the Senate's secretary and secretary of the Senate is a really important role at someone who is ensuring that Senate records are maintained, that all operations are running smoothly.

This is the person who oversees the page program and, uh, Chuck Schumer has announced. That Sonceria Ann Berry is going to take that role beginning March 1st, she is from Alabama. She set up Doug Jones's office after his special election victory. She's worked in the Senate for more than 40 years, most recently as deputy chief of staff to Patrick Leahy.

 Everything I read about her this morning has been so complimentary. It seems like people are really excited. She's only the eighth woman to serve in this role and the first Black woman. And I just think it's uplifting and exciting to see things moving in this direction.

[00:24:00] Sarah: [00:24:05] I was focusing on the importance of Russia on the global stage, you were focusing on China, tell us what you learned. 

Beth: [00:24:11] Well, China, of course is an entirely different ball game. As you mentioned, China is, you know, a lot more people than Russia. We have 1.4 billion people in China in an area of land that is almost as big as the United States. It's the second largest economy in the world, right behind the United States. It also has nuclear capabilities.

 And the headline for me about China is that it's growing faster than any other developed economy in the world. And that is a marked difference from Russia, which we just heard a new secretary of defense Lloyd Austin say is a country in decline.

So we have to think about Russia a little bit differently than China. That is certainly not the case and the strategy and the Chinese communist party is to increase China's influence in the world, to be seen as this like benign international cooperative partner [00:25:00] and to subtly and gradually shift the world's view in seeing China's form of leadership is superior to liberal democracy.

So let's talk about what that means in Myanmar, which you've probably heard a lot about in the news. And I want to do a little geography, both because I'm a geography nerd and I love it. And because I think probably most of us could not find Myanmar on a map. And so let's talk about where it is. 

It is a little smaller than Texas in terms of land size. It is bordered by Bangladesh, India, China, Laos, and Thailand. About 54 million people live in Myanmar. There are about 29 million people in Texas so very densely populated. British East India company seized control of Myanmar in the 19th century, it was then briefly occupied by Japan and reconquered by allies after world war two and then it became independent in 1948.

 And really since 1948, there has been some form of civil war in Myanmar, [00:26:00] among ethnic groups. The majority of ethnic Burmese people, Myanmar also known as Burma, are overwhelmingly Buddhist. That's about 70% of the population, but there are dozens of other ethnicities and religious practices. And so you have real ethno sectarian violence happening. 

There in 2011, the military government that was in power was dissolved following the first general election in 20 years and a civilian government was installed. But as part of that process, the military like wrote a constitution that gave it enormous power even as you were having a democratically elected government coming into power and that government hit the gas and started running and Myanmar's economy starts growing and society starts opening up in some ways, and people are really excited. In 2015 people thought like we're going to eat. We're going to take it to the next level because Aung San [00:27:00] Suu Kyi who we're going to talk more about won a majority with her party, the national league for democracy in both houses of Myanmar's government.

And she had really become this symbol of the movement for democracy and, and was talked about as like, uh, a spiritual inheritor of the nonviolent movement because she spent 15 years under house arrest and she was a Nobel peace prize Laureate. She survived an assassination attempt. And so people were really excited about her leadership. So in those 2015 elections, she wins the right to be the president of Myanmar but her late husband and children are foreign citizens and the constitution would not because of that, allow her to be the president. So she assumed a new role, the state counselor of Myanmar, which is a little bit like a prime minister.

However, the military resisted a lot of her reform efforts and the government [00:28:00] leadership she installed, like the bureaucrats that came into power with her did not have much experience and were really slow to make progress. And so a lot of this momentum starts dropping off and supporters of her and her party get really disillusioned.

And things get worse in 2017 when the military starts an ethnic cleansing operation against the Muslim Rohingya minority in a state in Western Manmar. About a hundred thousand people were put in refugee camps, lots and lots of Rohingya Muslims fled to Bangladesh. And very confusingly and disappointingly for the international community Aung San Suu Kyi cooperated with the military and defended this campaign in the international court of justice.

So some people thought she was being pragmatic and trying to cooperate with the military here to move the country toward democracy and others saw this as a real betrayal. Myanmar had been growing [00:29:00] economically. And most of that investment is now coming from other Asian countries because of the Rohingya Muslim crisis, many Western countries pulled investment and pulled aid.

 So other Asian countries have just ramped up their investments. And China is one of the main investors in Myanmar. Because of the way the military and the business elite operate there the economy is growing in a very inequitable way. And there is a lot of smuggling and drug production, and that is the backdrop for the elections that took place in November.

So even though we had some disillusionment. The NLD won 83% of the open seats in parliament. This was seen as a referendum on Aung San Suu Kyi and she passed it and the military refused to accept the results. So if she was trying to be pragmatic around the ethnic cleansing operation, it did not work. The military started arguing in the country's highest court that the [00:30:00] election was fraudulent.

They surrounded the houses of parliament with soldiers and last Monday, the military detained party leaders, cabinet ministers, opposition, politicians, writers, and activists. And they used a military owned TV station to just announce that they were taking over. They just announced the coup. They said, we're declaring a state of emergency as we're entitled to do under the constitution.

It's going to last one year and they suspended most television broadcast and canceled all domestic and international flights. They suspended telephone and internet access in major cities. The stock market closed, the banks closed people, ran out to try to get cash and to stock up on food and supplies.

So now Aung San Suu Kyi is being held by the military and she has been charged, so Sarah was talking about Navalny and these trumped up charges. She is being charged with illegally importing, at least 10 walkie talkies and that is punishable by up to three years in prison. Myanmar's president has been charged with violations [00:31:00] of Corona virus restrictions, also punishable by incarceration.

This is the militaries MO. They often use arcane offenses to try to sideline leaders that they think of as threats. So you have protestors supporting her. There is a lot of coverage in the West on the way these protesters are using the hunger games salute, which has become a symbol for pro-democracy movements in Southeast Asia.

The protests are very serious. You have things happening like healthcare workers going on strike from their jobs and going to work in charity healthcare clinics so that people can still get care. Okay. 

So I talked about this under the heading of China. Because China is such a major investor in Myanmar because China shares a 1300 mile border with Myanmar, China developed a working relationship with Aung San Suu Kyi, and they also have a working relationship with the military. The UN security council is discussing condemnation for the coup and advocating Aung San Suu Kyi's immediate release. And there is concern that [00:32:00] China, which has been fairly quiet about this so far could veto that resolution because overall, if you look at the big picture, this moves Myanmar in a direction that you might assume China is more comfortable with than the pro democracy direction.

And this is a really difficult spot for the Biden administration because the United States doesn't have a lot of influence in Myanmar. We don't do a lot of trade there. We don't have a lot of investment there. We don't do a lot of aid. What we did do, we pulled back because of the ethnic cleansing, um, that happened to the Rohingya Muslims.

And so we could try some sanctions or pull back some aid even more, but we don't have a lot of options. We don't want to pull out altogether in a way that causes Myanmar to draw even closer to China. So this is a really tough position for the United States to be in, in terms of formulating our response.

Sarah: [00:32:55] You see, I think so many similar threads with Russia, which [00:33:00] is a big global player for different reasons is looking to find influence. And so, you know, I think you see this with Russia and Syria, if there is conflict, particularly between an authoritarian government and or authoritarian players and, you know, others, rebels, pro democracy, whatever you, whatever the case may be, those hotspots are there chances to exert influence and to stack the deck so that they can remain in power and they can remain influential.

Beth: [00:33:35] And you see that trend continuing in Taiwan. So just a little bit of history and geography about Taiwan. It is officially called the Republic of China. It's bordered by China, Japan, and the Philippines. It is of course, an Island. It's about the size of Maryland and Delaware combined. About 24 million people live in Taiwan. If you combine Maryland and Delaware you'd have about 7 million people. So again, very [00:34:00] densely populated. It has been through Dutch colonization, Chinese rule, been part of Japan's empire and then post-World war II has been back under China's control and this is kind of confusing. When we talk about China, what do we mean?

There was a Chinese civil war where mainland China was lost from the Republic of China to the Chinese communist party. That is the view of it from Taiwan and the Republic of China in Taiwan claims to be the legitimate representative of China to the world. But its jurisdiction has effectively been limited to Taiwan and other small Pacific islands.

And during the Carter administration, the United States went from recognizing the Republic of China in Taiwan as the representative to the world to recognizing the people's Republic of China, which is controlled by the Chinese communist party. So mainland China claims that it controls Taiwan and it refuses to have diplomatic relations with countries that recognize Taiwan as the Republic of China.

And there's [00:35:00] a tension in Taiwan because you have a multi-party democratic system and you have people who favor unification with mainland China. And you have people who favor independence and embracing a Taiwanese identity. The United States has a policy of deliberate ambiguity regarding Taiwan. So we have relationships with the people of Taiwan and their government, but we have like a pseudo embassy.

It's not an official embassy. We have not gone so far in our relationships with Taiwan that we have provoked China. We do have fairly bipartisan consensus and have for a long time that we stand with Taiwan against military aggression from the people's Republic of China. Okay.

 So the first weekend of the Biden administration has little welcome gift. The people's Republic of China dispatches two large formations of war planes, close to Taiwan. 15 war planes, including eight that are capable of carrying nuclear weapons. And they send them in an air defense [00:36:00] identification area that they had stayed out of for a very long time. So Taiwan, scrambles fighter jets in a war scenario simulation to monitor these Chinese flights.

And China's ministry of defense, then issues a statement saying we warn those Taiwan independence elements. Those who play with fire will burn themselves. In Taiwan, independence means war. Subtle. Okay. In response, on Thursday, the Navy sent a guided missile destroyer through the Taiwan Strait. That ship is the USS John S McCain and sending ships and specifically this ship through the Taiwan Strait is not new. It's something that we tend to do when things get hot between China and Taiwan. Just to remind everybody that America cares about this. And so this is a continuation of foreign policy. We did this during the Obama years. We did it during the Trump years.

We're doing it in the Biden years. Now this is the first time in the Biden [00:37:00] administration. The Trump administration took things a little farther. They sold military hardware to Taiwan. They sent some high-level officials to Taiwan and it is expected that the Biden administration will be even bolder in recognizing Taiwan and uplifting the cause of Taiwanese independence.

We have a lot more on the line here than in Myanmar, because Taiwan is our ninth largest trading partner. It is doing very well economically. It's been remarkable in its handling of COVID-19, which has increased it's standing in the world. Of course, it has a woman president. That's just a theme in countries that have done remarkably well, uh, with COVID-19.

This is a very delicate situation for everybody and strategic ambiguity has been good for everyone. It's also really fragile. You know, Taiwan doesn't want to be a pawn in some kind of conflict between the United States and China, Taiwanese citizens are not United about their desires for the country. [00:38:00] And we also understand that probably our best move toward China, as outlined in this really fascinating paper called The Longer Telegram that we'll link in the show notes, is to exploit division within the Chinese communist party, because people think that Xi Jinping uh, is really ambitious and really aggressive and has amassed an awful lot of wealth for himself and demands an awful lot of loyalty.

And so I'm just wondering as we watch this, if Xi Jinping will overplay his hand here because we've got a pretty aggressive Biden administration and a world that is not a big fan of China because of everything related to COVID-19 and Taiwanese citizens are seeing how aggressive China is being in Hong Kong.

And so if you were ever thinking, maybe we would like to be part of one United China, you might see Hong Kong and think no, perhaps not. And so [00:39:00] this situation feels potentially explosive to me. It's like one of those things where a really small misstep on any party's part could escalate the conflict very rapidly.

Sarah: [00:39:11] You know, we talked about China's strengths and they are many, but it does not only operate out of a position of strength. You know, it has an aging population, which is deeply problematic for any country. It has not been able to continue its influence and solve these ambiguous situations like Taiwan and Hong Kong and has overplayed their hand dramatically.

Uh, we also have not talked about the Uyghurs. You know, as more and more people escape the systematic oppression and genocide of the Uyghur people by the Chinese government, the international community continues to pay more and more attention. You know, the guardian had a recent profile on this that is just heartbreaking.

And there was another one on the BBC that was outlining systematic rape of the Uyghur [00:40:00] women that are in these detention camps ,that just the psychological and physical trauma that's going on under the Chinese government in this part of the world. And I, you know, I think that with any sort of ambitious position, which I also believe the Chinese communist party is in.

Xi Jinipng, in particular like they overplay, like I think that they go too far and I think, you know, it, part of this fault lies with the international community for believing that. And particularly like at the end of, uh, of the colonization of Hong Kong and Taiwan that these like ambiguous situations, we're just going to drift out on the ether forever.

You know, I think some of that responsibility lies farther than China, but the idea that, you know, we were just gonna open up the markets to China and they were going to play by the rules and never become ambitious or aggressive or oppressive was foolish. And I, you know, I think we, we see that now and I think you're right. I think like it's going to most likely get worse before it gets better, [00:41:00] because I don't think that even in the face of their covering up of the situation with COVID-19 in the beginning of January 2020, and the sort of fallout around the world, they also have, you know, It's not that it's not just a weakness.

That's also like a position of, well, look, see we contained it and, and, and they're buying vaccines to pass out to developing countries. So like, they're, they're never gonna stop playing for that position of strength and influence. And, you know, it's going to be constantly shifting ground upon which both the United States and the international community has to decide where they stand well.

Beth: [00:41:40] And I think that is what's most interesting about both conversations, but I loved it when you were talking about how our fortunes in many ways are tied up with Russia and that's true, but China too. It's true about every country in the globe. We cannot have pure allies and pure enemies anymore. One of the things that I loved in this piece, the Longer Telegram, which is an [00:42:00] anonymous paper published by a senior government official through the Atlantic council.

And it really dissects what we know about our relationship with China and what our strategic objectives ought to be. And it talked about how there are areas where we very much need to view China as a partner. Climate change is one of them. Nuclear proliferation is one of them. We can't just say like we're writing off China.

And I think the difficulty in Myanmar that we have shows what happens when you don't bring people in to trade relationships, then you don't have many tools at your disposal, right? The only tools you start to have are military. And I think that is why it's been almost impossible to articulate like a coherent explanation of US foreign policy for such a long time, because segregating out those buckets where we really need to work with other countries, versus the things that are red lines that we cannot allow other countries to cross and that we should be held [00:43:00] to as well, versus things that are priorities, versus places where we're competitors.

 It's really difficult and confusing. And I'm interested to see not only how the Biden administration meets each of these fires that come up on the foreign policy front, but how they help the American public kind of come along in an understanding of what our relationships with other countries should be.

Sarah: [00:43:24] Well, and I think what it hopefully shows that America first is it's not just that we have a philosophical difference with that approach. It's that it's delusional, you know, the idea that we can seclude ourselves and not have influence in the world or that we can influence through seclusion is just ridiculous.

The world continues to turn right. Players in the international stage, like China and Russia continue to have influence, continue to try to expand their power, both just through influence and through actual physical territory, through [00:44:00] violence, through acts of aggression and the idea that we can just protect our interests without ever engaging when big players like Russia and China will absolutely continue to engage no matter what populous strand of isolationism is popular in the United States right now is what we all need to realize. 

Beth: [00:44:19] And I think we would be remiss if we didn't discuss in this conversation, how many Americans were advocating for the military to take control of our government following the 2020 election. And if you want to know what that looks like, here are our examples. People being detained on charges that are false, internet blackouts, television blackouts, phone blackouts, runs on banks, stocking up on supplies. 

I think that we got such a mild version [00:45:00] of that sort of panic buying during COVID but cannot imagine what it would look like if we actually had the military seize control in the United States. And so this kind of casual flirtation with authoritarianism that is discussed online and is making its way offline needs a big foreign policy lesson in my opinion, to, to do a reality check, this is what we're actually talking about.

What's on your mind outside of politics, Sarah? 

[00:46:00] Sarah: [00:46:00] Okay. I have this hip. That's been bothering me.

Beth: [00:46:04] Strong, start.

Sarah: [00:46:06] I have this hip that's been bothering me for a long time. You know, I fell when I was like a kabillion months pregnant with Felix. Sometimes I wonder if like that's how it started. I remember picking up Felix long past when I probably should have been picking up Felix and feeling like a subtle pop.

I wonder if that's where it started. I don't know, but it's, it's kind of consistently sore and I've done a million things. Like I go to the chiropractor, I get dry needling. I do yoga, but it really, you know, I've changed the way I sleep at night and I went to the chiropractor recently. And he was like, I walked in Uggs.

He was like, uh, you know, that shoes the worst. Right? And I'm like, no, I know. Like, he's like, there's nothing, there's no support to them. He's like, you know, if this consistently bothers you and you're like walking around in shoes with no support, that's definitely [00:47:00] part of it like, and he told me this the first time I came, like, you really need to wear tennis shoes.

And I, you know, I'm such, I'm so good at like, not getting caught up in the appearance of things. Like, I think people who whine about minivans making them feel like old and a mom and uncle are the lamest. No offense if you're one of those people, or like even like certain beauty standards, like I will happily discard.

I don't spend a lot of time, like worried about the, the, like the look of things. But something about wearing supportive shoes makes me feel so old and so deeply and cool. And really, and I hope this doesn't hurt my mom's feelings. Like my mom, my mom has always had feet problems like her whole life. She has the worst feet and I'm like, but I know, I know I need to, I've been wearing tennis shoes with insoles cause I'm the oldest for like the past couple days.

And I think I can already feel a difference. You know, me, like you tell the people how like I treat every tiny physical [00:48:00] malady as a problem to be solved. And I'm like hardcore investigator researcher, problem solver until I fix it. Is that not usually my MO?

Beth: [00:48:09] Oh, that's a hundred percent your MO like and if we're traveling and Sarah has a, a discomfort.

Sarah: [00:48:17] Does minor, minor 

Beth: [00:48:18] discomfort. I promise you that, like, what's a fair percentage. You think Sarah, like 30 to 40% of your mental energy is there until you've discovered the Genesis of the, of the issue and what the solution's going to be? 

Sarah: [00:48:31] Yeah, for sure. At least 30%. Yeah. Cause I just. There's just this part of my brain. That's like, problem must be solved. There must be something like with my diet or how I'm sleeping or how I'm holding my body or the exercise I'm doing or not doing, or my stress level. Like I even did it with my stress level. Right. Like I just threw everything at it. Like I'm meditating. I'm doing the new calm naps.

Like I'm doing all the things until I get at the problem and this hip, [00:49:00] even though I think if I'd been honest with myself from the beginning of course the shoes I'm wearing around my house are, I feel it like when I would wear really heavy boots in particular, like it really, really makes it worse. 

And it's like, just something about that though. Like I could not accept. I hate the idea of like being the person, even though I've like thrown out heels. Literally when I have one pair of like the super fancy supportive heels. And I literally have to dust them when I wear them because they're black patent leather and I have to dust them off cause I wear them so rarely they're covered in an inch of dust.

So like I was happy to throw out the heels and was like very like wearing heels is dumb. You know, I worry about Nancy Pelosi clomping around those marble hallways at 80 years old in heels. So like in some levels, like I was so happy to throw it away, but there is something about like wearing the tennis shoes just around my house that I could not openly face. Clearly, that's that will [00:50:00] be part of the solution. You just need to do that and like, feeling like am I going to have to be wearing lace-up shoes for the rest of my life? I do not want to do that.

Beth: [00:50:10] Well, so many things it's here. First of all, this is a societal problem because we all need to be wearing more supportive shoes. We just do. We should just build the shoes in a more supportive way. Because we know this, this is not new information now. Here in the year of our Lord 2021. Manufacturer's we need more supportive shoes.

We need them to be cute. And some people are doing that. I do think there are some good options for you. I've spent a lot of time trying to help my mom find good shoes. And I think there are some really good options out there. I think one of the biggest blessings of the last year has been that I've worn tennis shoes every day.

And I can tell a huge difference. Like I feel better walking around my house in tennis shoes than when I was wearing not tennis shoes every day and even slippers, like I love to wear slippers. I don't feel good the days that I wear slippers all [00:51:00] day, it's the tennis shoes that do it for me. I think what feels old about this, this is what I experienced anyway. 

When I reach a level of difficulty physically that I recognize is not going away, that it cannot be fixed. It can only be mitigated, but like I have these pains in my thumbs right now. It's just clearly arthritis. And I know like I can try to keep this from getting worse and I can do some things to help.

But it's just going to be here. That's just where I am. And that is what makes you kind of confront the stage of life that you're in. Right. Because it's not an injury. It is a wear and tear on your body. 

Sarah: [00:51:42] Yeah. And I mean, I th the thing is like, I don't, I'm not afraid of getting old. Listen, I've had far too many friends pass away tragically. Every day is a gift. I feel that in my cells, in my bones, In my sore hip. Like it's not, it's just, [00:52:00] there's something about the, just the, the sense of like, I don't know, at a certain age of life, you kind of, even if you know, what's good for, you always feel like a choice, it felt like a choice. 

It felt like I know this is good for me and I'm happy to do it. I'm not giving up anything except for other people's, you know, crap about it. And even though I'm like, I'm not a big shoe person, it just feels like I'm giving something up and I don't really have a choice about it. Honestly. I really think it's because I feel like I'm becoming my mom who always like and continues to like struggle with shoes.

 Usually I'd benefit. Right now the tennis shoes I'm wearing are super cute Allbirds that she couldn't wear and gave me because they hurt her feet. So like, Oh man. I just think there's, there's an issue of like becoming your parents too. That's like, not even about getting old. It's about, I don't know, like identity and like rebellion. Oh, I don't know. Now I clearly I need to talk to my therapist about 

Beth: [00:52:55] it. You know, for me, I think it's more like the, in congruence between [00:53:00] the emotional dimension of getting older and the physical dimension of getting older, because emotionally I love getting older. Like I wouldn't go back for anything, nothing. Right, right, right. We're turning 40 this year. I'm here for it. I feel more in control and more like myself freer. Like I am all about aging right now. Honestly, I found a few gray hairs today and I was like, looking good. You're doing just fine. 

Sarah: [00:53:27] Keep at it. I'm here for my gray hairs. They're coming into my bangs, which I think is going to look baller. So I'd like to keep that going. 

Beth: [00:53:32] Yep. I feel really, really good about aging in every way, except physically. And like you said, it's not aesthetic. It's just the feeling. It's just like those places where I realized like, Oh, That is not going to feel better. We're going to be rolling.

Sarah: [00:53:49] When I was younger, I thought like you got older and you like got tougher. Like things affected you less and it is the opposite. I thought you would get older and you'd be like, well, I'm gonna eat whatever donuts I [00:54:00] want. Who cares? But no, the donuts make you feel 10 times worse, terrible then they made you feel when you were 20. That sucks. Nobody warned me about that. I don't like that at all. 

Beth: [00:54:10] Ellen today was like, mom, do you like strawberry milk or chocolate milk better? I was like, I can't look at either

Sarah: [00:54:16] Strawberry is an abomination, I don't know why they make it. Um, let me just get that off my chest or serve it to children in school. Yeah, I just, I think that's the part too. It's like, it just feels like you've earned some sort of calluses and you should be able to like, enjoy this stuff and it not affect it's the same way, you know, you, and I've had this conversation about alcohol, like.

Oh, my gosh, any alcohol sends me in like the worst sort of like crummy mood spiral. Now I do. It's weird. I feel like liquor doesn't do it as much as wine, but it just makes me feel so terrible, so, so terrible. 

Beth: [00:54:55] Yeah. A thousand percent not worth it ever. No. [00:55:00] Well, someone once told me, I think, as a compliment that she liked how uncool we are and I feel like we've really leaned into that.

Sarah: [00:55:06] I resent that. See wha-no! I hate that so much. 

Beth: [00:55:14] Very real. Just watched Fake Famous, and I need you to watch it so that we can talk about it fully. But as I was watching it, I thought, no, I'm really pleased with being uncool because we are very, very real, right. I am not striving in any way to like present a view of life where I've, I just have to tell you this one part, because it was, I will never get over it.

These people are buying toilet seats, like the thing that you put on your toilet to sit on and holding it up to make it look like they're staring out of an airplane window. Oh, my God, I will never get over it. I will never ever get over it. What is this show? Is it it's a documentary about Instagram influencers and the documentary team takes three [00:56:00] people and tries to make them fake famous.

So they buy a bunch of bots to follow them and they stage all these photo shoots and it is something else. I cannot wait for you to watch it. But it made me feel real good about sitting on my podcast, talking about our sore hips, because I would much rather be doing that than pretending to be on an airplane truly.

Sarah: [00:56:24] Truly any day of the week, especially with you my dear.

Beth: [00:56:28] Likewise, my friend. Let us grow old together.

Sarah: [00:56:34] Oh and of course with all of you. Thank you for joining us for another episode of Pantsuit Politics. We hope you have the best weekend available to you.

Beth: Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production.  

Sarah: Alise Napp is our managing director. Dante Lima is the composer and performer of our theme music. 

Beth: Our show is listener supported. Special thanks to our executive producers. 

Sarah: David McWilliams. Ali Edwards, Martha Bronitsky, Amy Whited, 

Janice Elliot, Sarah Ralph, Barry Kaufman, Jeremy Sequoia, Laurie LaDow, Emily Neesley,  

Allison Luzader. Tracey Puthoff,  Danny Ozment, Molly Kohrs, Julie Hallar, 

Jared Minson, Marnie Johansson. The Kriebs!

Beth: Shari Blem, Tiffany Hassler, Morgan McCue, Nicole Berkless, Linda Daniel, Joshua Allen, and Tim Miller. 

Sarah: To support Pantsuit Politics, and receive lots of bonus features, visit patreon.com/pantsuit politics. 

Beth: You can connect with us on our website, PantsuitPoliticsShow.com. Sign up for our weekly emails and follow us on Instagram.

Alise Napp2 Comments