[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. Former New Jersey congressman Tom Malinowski is in the news for multiple reasons right now. As a senior fellow with the McCain Institute think tank, he is in Ukraine now and has an opinion piece on Politico on a way to end the war there that could possibly bypass Putin and bring both peace and justice. Malinowski lost his House seat to Republican Tom Kean Jr. in New Jersey's most contested swing district last year, the 7th Congressional District in New Jersey. As many of you who live in New Jersey and certainly in that area know, he says he won't seek a rematch next year, but his name is among those being mentioned as a possible appointed successor to Senator Bob Menendez if Menendez is forced to resign over his corruption indictment.

Malinowski is one of the many New Jersey Democrats calling on Menendez to step down. In his case, it's not just because of the alleged corruption per se. For Malinowski, it's very much because of the human rights and US foreign policy implications of the alleged corruption. By way of background, I'm going to read a little bit from Tom Malinowski's bio page on the McCain Institute site. Some of you who live in that district know this, but many of you don't. Malinowski was born in communist Poland during the height of the Cold War and emmigrated with his mother to the United States when he was six years old.

From 1994 to 2001, Malinowski served as a speech writer for secretaries of State Warren Christopher and Madeline Albright, and as a senior director on President Clinton's National Security Council. As Chief Washington Advocate for Human Rights Watch, he worked with Senator John McCain to end America's use of torture after the 9/11 attacks. He later served as President Obama's Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. That's all relevant to how he sees the Menendez case. Tom, thanks for coming on with us again. Welcome back to WNYC.

Tom: Thanks for having me, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Can I start right in on the Menendez issue and then we'll get to your Ukraine article as we go, and also some House of Representatives politics, which is obviously in the news. Why do you think Menendez pleading not guilty and innocent until proven guilty should resign?

Tom: He is, of course, entitled to a presumption of innocence in the criminal case against him, as would any American accused of a serious crime, but we have a higher standard for elected officials. The evidence presented in the indictment, the overwhelming evidence that suggests that he was taking huge amounts of money and gold bars, and cars from people who were trying to influence him, apparently on behalf of a foreign government, a foreign dictatorship, Egypt, is enough for me to conclude that he can't represent us in Washington as he's fighting these criminal charges. Most of us in the Democratic Party in New Jersey have come together in asking him to do what I think is the right thing and resign.

Brian Lehrer: Do you see implications for human rights in Egypt in what Menendez allegedly did?

Tom: It looks to me like the Egyptian government, even as it was taking $1.3 billion a year from the United States, was running an influence operation against the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. That's very disturbing. I, during this time was the chairman of the Egypt Human Rights Caucus in the House of Representatives, a bipartisan group that felt that it diminishes the United States to be so close and so reliant on a brutal military dictatorship in the Middle East. We were passing bill after bill in the house to try to restrict the military aid to Egypt and call more attention to the human rights abuses there. A lot of those bills died in the US Senate.

I don't know what role Senator Menendez played in the back rooms where those decisions were were made. I think almost everything that went through his committee now looks a little bit suspect because we know he apparently had this corrupt relationship with the Egyptians. I'm glad we're moving past that. There's a new chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Cardin of Maryland, with whom I've worked very closely in the past, and his first decision as chairman was to put a hold, a block on $300 million of aid to Egypt over human rights. It's a new day.

Brian Lehrer: Why put a hold on that aid to Egypt over human rights? I'm sure most of our listeners don't know what the particular concerns are, and it's ironic that an alleged act of corruption by New Jersey Senator, who was chair of the Foreign Relations Committee is bringing this to light. Americans might not be focusing on it very much, were it not for that with all the domestic issues that we all have to deal with, and the war in Ukraine as the dominant foreign policy issue these days. What are your main human rights concerns with respect to Egypt that would lead you to, I guess, support Chairman Cardin's decision to suspend that aid?

Tom: There are tens of thousands of political prisoners in Egypt. There is brutal, terrible, gruesome torture in Egyptian prisons, including of people who did nothing more than tweet out something critical of the country's military rulers. They've gone after Americans as well, American citizens imprisoned in Egypt. There are Americans in the United States, Egyptian Americans who have been threatened in `Egypt and intimidated by the Egyptian regime. Sometimes we do business with thugs around the world, but these thugs in Egypt, I don't think do very much for the aid they receive from the United States.

They've not been helpful on Russia and Ukraine. They didn't help us when we were fighting ISIS and every other partner of ours in the Middle East contributed to that effort that they-- It's a terrible bargain in my view for the American people. I think it undermines our message. Our message in Russia is that we're helping democracy defeat dictatorship. That's our message when we stand up to China and a lot of other adversaries around the world. I think we got to be a little bit more consistent.

Brian Lehrer: It's a sorry story about Egypt. They were under Mubarak for so long, and then it was a country that was at the center of the so-called Arab Spring decade ago now and more. Now they're back under, I guess what you'd characterize as a military dictatorship.

Tom: 100%. There was a democratic opening during the Arab Spring and the military shut it down. They staged a coup and installed this guy, General Sisi. President Trump called Sisi "my favorite dictator" which was one of the funnier and more honest things that Donald Trump ever said in the White House. Again, I think I'd just come back to how much I think it diminishes the United States when we act as if we need dictators like Sisi to make the American people safer and more prosperous, I don't think we do.

Brian Lehrer: What's your understanding of the charges? Again, they're just charges at this point, but the charges against Menendez that go specifically to enabling the government of Egypt to potentially do things that otherwise US foreign policy would not have allowed?

Tom: The most disturbing of the charges is that he obtained from the State Department and gave to the Egyptians through his wife an accounting of how many Egyptian nationals work at our embassy, the US Embassy in Cairo. This is important because the Egyptian Intelligence Agencies are always looking to pressure and compromise those Egyptians who work for our mission there. Even knowing the number of people who work at the embassy would help them figure out, have we gotten to everybody there? Senator Menendez had to have known that that was the reason why the Egyptians were interested in learning more about those US Embassy employees. It could very well have put them at significant risk.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, anybody from Egypt listening right now? Anyone in Egypt or any Egyptian Americans who are here listening to this show? We're using this as an opening to talk about human rights in Egypt generally, US foreign policy toward Egypt, generally because of the indictment of New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez and his relationship to US foreign policy toward Egypt, in the ways that our guest has been describing. 212-433-WNYC with a story, or a comment, or a question. 212-433-9692. Our guest again, is former New Jersey Congressman Tom Malinowski.

He served two terms in the 7th Congressional District in Jersey before being ousted last year by Republican Tom Kean Jr., and Malinowski having had a long foreign policy and human rights history before that, who has a question or comment or a story? 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or tweet @BrianLehrer. He is joining us from Ukraine, and we'll get to that. Is there a way to enlarge this part of our conversation to US foreign policy toward the Middle East, more generally? Any thoughts on Saudi Arabia, for example, with all they're doing that many Americans would disapprove of on a human rights level and on a foreign policy level, and President Biden's relatively soft stance on them, Trump was soft on them, but Biden is also relatively soft on them compared to what some people would like, and even perhaps Israel in this respect?

Tom: I think with respect to Saudi Arabia, it's very similar to Egypt. I wish that we would remind ourselves and remind some of these partners of ours in the Middle East who the superpower is in our relationship with them. Yes, we get some things from Saudi Arabia. Without the United States, Saudi Arabia would not exist, and yet, setting aside the human rights record, the Saudis under Crown Prince MBS, Mohammed bin Salman, have sided with Russia in the war in Ukraine. They have artificially increased the price of oil in a way that is hurting American consumers, hurting the American middle class, and helping Vladimir Putin. They have intervened in pretty much every conflict and crisis in the Middle East, against American interests in recent years.

I keep reminding people, they've given about five times as much money to Jared Kushner, as they've given to Ukraine to help the humanitarian situation here. Again, it's a situation where they're thugs and they're not even our thugs. My advice to any president, whether it's President Biden or any of his predecessors before him, has been that we need to take a stronger position with respect to our interests in the Middle East, whether it's Egypt or Saudi Arabia, or any of these other authoritarian states. They could not protect themselves without our help, and that help should come with more strings attached.

Brian Lehrer: Here's a question from a listener via text message. It says, "It seemed like Democrats did nothing to stop the funding of Egypt. Please lay out what bills Republicans stopped." Were there such bills?

Tom: In the House of Representatives, we passed a number of bills. One that I got passed that was bipartisan and had Republican support in the House would have had the effect of stopping US arms sales to Egypt, if they continue to harass and intimidate people inside the United States, just about protecting our people, not just human rights there, that died in the Senate with certainly some Republican opposition, but perhaps also, at least not help from Senator Menendez.

We did play some restrictions on the arms sales conditioning, up to $300 million dollars of the $1.3 billion that we give the Egyptians every year on human rights. That language got weakened in the Senate but did eventually pass and it enabled Senator Cardin, Senator Menendez's successor, as chairman of that committee to freeze the aid last week. We've gotten some things done, but I think Congress especially in the wake of this, the scandal needs to take a fresh look at this relationship.

Brian Lehrer: Are you concerned at all about the Biden administration's push to get the Saudis to recognize Israel? From what I've read in New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, who's very Middle East concerned and Middle East experience, wrote a column on this recently to get the Saudis to recognize Israel normalize relations with Israel without enough pressure on Israel to do more toward a two-state solution with the Palestinians.

If the United States is pushing the Arab countries to normalize with Israel, to form a unified front against Iran, which is, I think one of the US main foreign policy concerns in that context, but it leaves the Palestinians without those Arab countries to withhold normalization until something happens for the Palestinians, that maybe that's not the morally correct choice either for the United States. It ignores one of the key interests there too much perhaps, people are alleging. What's your view on that?

Tom: Saudi Arabia should have recognized Israel decades ago. If Saudi Arabia were to recognize Israel now, that would be great. If it recognized Israel alongside a resumption of the Israeli peace process with the Palestinians, a resumption of the two-state solution, that would be even better. It would be a huge breakthrough, a huge win for the Biden administration if they could broker that kind of deal. The problem is that the Saudis are also demanding something else. They are demanding, as part of this deal, a defense treaty with the United States that would be akin to what we have with our NATO allies, with Japan, with South Korea, a legally binding promise that the United States will defend Saudi Arabia forever, if it is attacked.

That's the part I'm concerned about that doesn't make sense to me. We have these defense treaties with only a small number of countries in the world. They're all democracies. They're all countries, that to one extent or another, share our values, or we have a long history of working together for common interests, and Saudi Arabia is not that. Saudi Arabia as I mentioned a few moments ago, is as we speak, trying to undermine our interest in helping Ukraine defeat Russia. They are hurting American consumers. It is a brutal dictatorship run by a man who I think is a dangerous sociopath, MBS.

That was responsible for the kidnapping and beheading of a journalist based in the United States, Jamal Khashoggi. Why would we want to, in effect, marry Saudi Arabia for life without demanding concessions from the Saudis on all of these things that are important to the United States beyond what's happening in Israel? A deal would be great. They should recognize Israel yesterday. Progress on the Palestinian front, absolutely, but I would say no to a defense treaty between the US and Saudi Arabia.

Brian Lehrer: Here's Eddie in Manhattan, an Egyptian American, he says, calling in. Hi, Eddie, you're on WNYC. Thank you very much for calling.

Eddie: Hi, Brian, thank you for your show. You have a great show. My dad is Egyptian. He immigrated here in the '70s. I just wanted to go back into the history of the Arab Spring because I think your guest glossed over what democracy looks like in Egypt. After the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood was voted into power. I think people forget what democracy would have looked like in Egypt had el-Sisi not been installed as a dictator. They were trying to change the constitution to become more theocratic. I think it would have largely resembled probably the Taliban's rule in Afghanistan, they're going to roll back women's rights in the country. My family is Coptic Christian, and they were really scared about the rise of power of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In addition to that, there's a really high rate of adult illiteracy in Egypt. A really shocking percentage of adults can't read and so cannot get independent information, and there were widespread reports at the time of Morsi in the Muslim Brotherhood, giving out free food in exchange for votes. Just largely and blatantly bribing people for votes. It's not so simple as to say democracy is always good when there is complicating factors like ignorance largely bred by illiteracy. When democracy results in predictable oppression of women of minority rights. Not to say that Egypt is a leader of human rights now, but the alternate universe of democracy was not necessarily an optimistic one either and I'll leave it at that.

Brian Lehrer: Would you say that your family's community, or let's say the Coptic Christians as a group in Egypt are safer under Sisi? Why would that be?

Eddie: I'm not sure that they're safer under Sisi. I would say that they are less safe after Morsi. There was a number of widespread attacks on churches in Egypt in the last decade. I think that probably was fed into by the rhetoric of the Muslim Brotherhood. There's a higher rate of immigration from the Coptic community out of the country. I don't think they're better off now. I think that they're just noticeably worse off after the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Brian Lehrer: Eddie, thank you. Oh, go ahead. You can finish the thought if you want.

Eddie: Yes. This is not to say that I don't think Sisi's a good leader. I think he's cracked down on the press and so on, is subjectively a bad thing also. I think we probably don't even know behind the scenes. I would imagine some American foreign policy experts were also quite motivated to depose the Muslim Brotherhood. The United States foreign policy does not tend to favor Muslim theocracies. The situation in Egypt is complicated as it is around the world. I don't really agree with the guest's position that we can impose our will, that democracy is objectively the best for all people everywhere when there are lots of complicating factors.

Brian Lehrer: Eddie, thank you very much for your call. My guest is former congressman and human rights advocate, Tom Malinowski. Eddie raises maybe one of the most difficult questions you could pose for humanity. If we assume that democracy is the best form of government because it's pro-people, but then the people elect democratically a government that with the majority of popular support does hateful, even murderous things, then where does that leave us?

Tom Malinowski: Actually, I would say democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others.

Brian Lehrer: Except all others.

Tom: [laughs] I agree with a lot of what the caller said about what happened in Egypt at that time. Yes, the Muslim Brotherhood government was awful. One of the lessons is that it's not just democracy the country needs. It's the rule of law and respect for human rights. I would never say that elections solve everything. Sometimes they create problems, but the answer is not absolute military dictatorship where, Brian, you, and I would be put in prison and tortured just for having this conversation. I'm sure the caller wouldn't believe that either. While we can't solve a problem like Egypt by dictating a solution from the United States, I don't think it makes sense for us to subsidize the torture and the repression, especially when we're not getting much for it in terms of our national interest. That's really all I'm saying here.

Brian Lehrer: Here's a different challenge, I think, to your view of what US foreign policy toward Egypt should be. Jack in Union County, you're on WNYC. Hello, Jack.

Jack: Hi, Brian. I wanted to ask Representative Malinowski on that point about democracy. What Tom is saying sounds a lot like George W Bush with this march toward democracy at all costs in Iraq, and that didn't turn out so well for the American treasure or American lives. I'm wondering whether there's value in the enemy of my enemy being my friend in this world, or are we going to insist upon purity of principle around the world?

Tom: Can I reply?

Brian Lehrer: Oh, yes, I'm just waiting.

Tom: Sure. I think, again, these are arguments against a straw man because I don't think I'm insisting on purity of principle. I do think America should stand for something. I don't think we stand for democracy best by invading foreign countries. I don't think Iraq really was about democracy. It was a terrible mistake. Also, we're not a perfect country, but at the same time, over the course of my lifetime, I have met so many people around the world who are struggling peacefully for basic values of freedom and human rights. They do look to the United States for help because we're the only country in the world, despite our flaws, that has had the ability, and at some moments, the intention to help them.

If I were to tell them, "Well, we did this thing in Iraq and therefore we can't help you," they would think I'm crazy. I'm in Ukraine right now where every single person I meet in a country that is fighting for the most basic fundamental values of freedom, the right to life, would say that without the United States, their country would be extinguished and their freedom would be gone. How can you say in response to that, especially when our interests align with their aspirations for freedom, that we shouldn't even try to help? Of course, we should, and then we should debate the best way to do so as we do in our still democratic society.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, if you're just joining us, we've used the first part of this conversation with former New Jersey congressman and longtime human rights advocate, Tom Malinowski. We've used the first portion of the conversation to talk about US foreign policy toward Egypt, and then a little bit writ large with the hook of the corruption allegations against Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey and the relationship of those corruption charges to the possibility that he corrupted US foreign policy toward Egypt and therefore

toward the Middle East, toward democracy, toward human rights in exchange, allegedly for some of the bribes that he took.

We're going to turn the page when we come back from a break and talk about what Tom Malinowski is doing right now. As he referenced, he's in Ukraine. He also has an article on Politico that suggests a possible ending scenario for the war that brings both peace and justice. Stay with us.

[music]

Brian Lehrer on WNYC as we continue with former New Jersey congressman and longtime human rights advocate, Tom Malinowski. Among many other things, he was in the Obama administration and the Clinton administration. He was President Clinton's National Security Council senior director, one of the senior directors. He was Chief Washington Advocate for Human Rights Watch. He was President Obama's Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. He's now a senior fellow with the McCain Institute Think Tank. In that context, he is in Ukraine right now and he's got an article on Politico called Here Are Three Ways to End the War in Ukraine, one might actually work. Do you want to walk us through the two that you think are possible that you're not as in love with, and the third that might actually work?

Tom: Sure, but I hope we get back to what's happening right now. Because we are in a very critical situation both in Ukraine and in the US Congress.

Brian Lehrer: Well, you can start right now or you can start our Ukraine section with that and we will get back to the US Congress.

Tom: Sure.

Brian Lehrer: Go ahead. What is happening right now in Ukraine that you want to focus on?

Tom: Let's step back because we have a decision to make as a country and I want to make sure everyone understands the stakes. We're at a point where mostly with their courage, but also with our help, the Ukrainians have beaten back a Russian invasion. They've taken back about 50% of the territory that Russia seized in 2022, destroyed about half the Russian Army in the process. They've done this without the United States having to put a single one of our soldiers at risk at a cost to American taxpayers. Because they are asking us for ammunition, basically at a cost to American taxpayers of the equivalent of basically one New York Giants football ticket per American per year.

They need that help if they're going to have any chance of winning. Right now, that possibility which would be a real possibility if we continue to help them, is jeopardized by the complete breakdown that we have seen in the House of Representatives. Most Americans still support Ukraine. Every single poll demonstrates that. Most members of Congress still support Ukraine. If we had a vote in the US Senate on more help to Ukraine, it would win four to one. In the House, it would win three to one with all the Democrats and about half the Republicans.

There has been a complete breakdown in the Republican party in the House with first a weak speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy, who was afraid to put the question of Ukraine to a vote because he was afraid he would lose his speakership if he did, and then, of course, he did anyway. Now no Speaker, which means the House of Representatives is not functioning at all. A leadership battle in the Republican party that is likely to bring to power a new speaker who will also not want to risk dividing his party with a vote on Ukraine. We've got to focus on this. Again, most Americans I think want us to do the right thing and help people in Ukraine who are not just fighting for their freedom and security. They're very, very much fighting for our freedom and security as well, but we have to [unintelligible 00:31:39]

Brian Lehrer: Can you linger for a minute on that thought and make that case because I know there are polls that indicate that American support, not just on the far pro-Putin right, but in general, is starting to decline in terms of continuing to send billions, and more billions, and more billions to fight a war in Ukraine that seems to be in long-term stalemate and is just going to keep drawing on American taxpayers when they don't perhaps see the endpoint of what you just laid out. If Putin wins in Ukraine, is he really going to go on then and attack Poland and try to rebuild the whole Soviet Empire? Even if he does that with a few more countries, how does it threaten America's national security? Can you make that case a little bit or those cases?

Tom: Absolutely, but first just a factual point. It's so important for us to remember that, yes, we've spent billions of dollars. 60% of what we have spent to help Ukraine is being spent inside the United States. We are sending them old weapons off the shelf and then we are spending the money to purchase new weapons for the US military which actually creates economic opportunity inside the United States. This talking point that we're sending billions, and billions of dollars to Ukraine, I think people need to have a little bit more nuance on that. In terms of our national interest, would Putin continue if he conquered Ukraine?

Well, he says he would. Is he trying to reconstitute the Soviet Empire and threaten countries that are members of NATO? Well, he says that that's what his intention is. In the last 10 years, he's pretty much done everything he said that he's going to do, including things that sounded crazy to most Americans. That's number one. If he conquers Ukraine, there will be a threat to NATO and we will be faced with a situation that's much more dangerous and much more expensive than what we face today. The Ukrainians are fighting to protect us from that. They are the ones spilling blood. All they want from us is ammunition. Number two, there are other great powers in the world that are watching this.

The leader of China has said that he wants to reunify with Taiwan "by force if necessary." There's no question that China is watching the situation to see whether the United States and our allies really do have the staying power to support an ally under attack. If we give up on Ukraine after a year and a half of actual progress where our side is winning the war, how credible would our promise be to defend Taiwan, to defend Japan, to defend South Korea? We would be much more likely to face a war with China in one of those places in the next few years that would be a huge threat to our national security, to the lives our troops, and to the economy that we all depend on. I cannot think of a more clear national interest case than the one that exists for helping Ukraine, again, with money and ammunition, not with American lives.

Brian Lehrer: Let me ask you now as the clock is ticking down our time, to jump to that scenario that you laid out in Politico which begins with the United States giving the Ukrainian military whatever it needs to advance as far as possible in the current counter-offensive. Then at an appropriate point next year, Ukraine will declare a pause in offensive military operations. Want to pick it up there?

Tom: Of course, so how does this war end? That's a good question that everybody is asking. The best way would be for Ukraine to win outright. If the counter-offensive succeeds, they retake all their territory including Crimea, that would be great and we should give them everything that they need with our allies to make that possible. We also have to be realistic that it may not happen because the Russians have established these very tough defensive lines and the Russians have one big advantage over Ukraine. They're bigger, they've got 150 million people, Ukraine only has 30. Putin can keep mobilizing troops. He doesn't care about sacrificing the lives of young Russians.

Ukraine is a democracy and open society. They can't do what Russia is doing. They can't send hundreds of thousands of their people to their deaths on the battlefield. The alternative that that I've suggested is that if the Ukrainians make this decision, no one should push them to do it, at some point perhaps next year, they essentially freeze the conflict. They say we've taken as much ground as we can in this phase. They shift their focus to defending the territory they've liberated and to joining NATO and the European Union as a strong democracy at which point we should offer NATO membership. That would give Ukraine the security, the long-term security they crave.

Every Ukrainian I speak to, they have different views about how the war should end, but what they all say is, "We want this to be the last time we have to fight Russia." They're willing to do it now, but they don't want their kids and their grandkids to have to do it. The most important thing for them is long-term security that comes with being members of NATO. For that to happen though, there has to be at least a pause in the conflict because we're probably not going to let them into NATO while they're continuing this offensive operation. That's an option and again, we shouldn't force them to do anything, but I would argue that we should present that to them as a choice that they could make. We would be willing to do our part if they were willing to do theirs.

Brian Lehrer: A listener writes this question in a text message, "Why is it always the United States' taxpayers rather than Germany, England, France, all the other countries? We don't have to be the savior of the world."

Tom: Agreed.

Brian Lehrer: Maybe speak to that listener about in terms of money, what the European countries or anybody else are contributing.

Tom: I would say to that listener, and this may be surprising to him, that there are 20 countries in Europe that have spent more money per capita, per citizen, helping Ukraine than the United States. We're number 21 right now. Germany has done more, France has done more, the UK has done more, Poland has done more, the Netherlands, Norway, all of these countries have actually done more relative to their size. This isn't one of those situations, and I agree this has happened in the past a lot where the United States bears most of the burden. But without us, there's no way that this can continue because we're the biggest and most powerful country in NATO. We need to stay in the fight, so that our allies stay in the fight, so that the Ukrainians can stay in the fight in a way that ultimately comes back to protecting our freedom and our security.

Brian Lehrer: The EU, all those countries combined, I'm guessing, I don't know the numbers, have approximately the budget of the United States government?

Tom: Yes.

Brian Lehrer: They're, of course, more in the line of fire by being over there, should be funding the Ukrainians at least as much as the United States, no?

Tom: Collectively, they've contributed about as much as we have and they've pledged twice as much as we have. They've committed twice as much as we have. On top of that, this is hard to quantify, they've taken millions of Ukrainian refugees, and of course, they're paying for that on top of the military aid they're giving to Ukraine, the economic aid they're giving to Ukraine. They've suffered economically more than us. Gas prices have gone up way more in Europe. Inflation is much higher in Europe than it is in the United States, in part because of the Ukraine war, and yet they are holding fast because it's the right thing to do.

All we are asked to do, I keep coming back to this, is to provide some ammunition and to spend some money that amounts to, I worked this out, about a $100 per American taxpayer per year. That's a couple of tanks of gas. That's a football ticket, a concert ticket, what have you. Isn't that worth it? As long as our allies are doing their part to help these people who are fighting for their freedom and holding back an aggressive world power that's trying to undermine the peace of the world.

Brian Lehrer: We have two minutes left. Last question. Turning to congressional politics. Am I reading right that you have ruled out a rematch against Republican Congressman Tom Kean Jr. who defeated you last year in the 7th Congressional District in New Jersey?

Tom: Correct.

Brian Lehrer: Tell us why, and tell us what you think the path is for Democrats to take back the House potentially which they lost very largely in the New York metro area.

Tom: I think Democrats will take back the House. Look, the contrast is so stark. Look at what we were able to do in the last Congress with a very narrow Democratic majority. We passed the infrastructure bill. We passed the Ships Act to bring advanced manufacturing back to America. We kept our promise to enable Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices for our seniors. We passed a climate bill that's going to make America, not China, the leader of the world in clean energy. We came together across party lines to help Ukraine beat back this Russian invasion. We passed bills to help our veterans, and I could go on and on and on. Look what's happened with this Republican House of Representatives that just has devolved into a complete dysfunctional circus.

The Republicans aren't even able to elect their own Speaker. I just think Americans want Washington to work for them, and we're never going to agree with 100% of what the Democrats do or what the Republicans do, but I think we want grownups, we want adults who are serious about governing. Who are serious about results. Not a bunch of attention-seeking social media stars who bring the place to a grinding halt as the Republicans have done in the House. Certainly, my constituents in the Seventh District weren't bargaining on that when they voted for a Republican member of Congress.

Brian Lehrer: We'll see what happens next year. Former New Jersey Congressman Tom Malinowski, now a senior fellow with the McCain Institute Think Tank, joining us from Ukraine. Thank you so much for giving us so much time.

Tom: Thank you.

 

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.