counted. there was subject of much litigation. the number of ballots in question were not significant at all. pennsylvania was decided by more than 80,000 votes. at the end of the day, it did not have an impact one way or another but it was a specific court case related to the covid environment in 2020. host: virginia, this is ray, a republican, good morning. caller: good morning. am i on? host: you are on with al schmidt. caller: al seems like a very honest fella. i can tell you my outlook on the 2020 election. i think i can explain why so many people got upset. i really got upset, but i have a brain and i was not going to --

somewhere. first off, from the time donald trump came down the escalator, they were after him. they come up with every kind of falsehood, everything they could against him. even going into the election, everybody in washington, it seemed like, was against him. >> you can watch this program in its entirety if you go to our website c-span.org. up next a discussion with them a credit congressman on the bidens -- this is live coverage on c-span. >> speaking to appease saudi arabia and its defective ruler come the biden administration

has concluded need to reevaluate its relationship with the kingdom. following that there cutting oil production for 2 million barrels a day, it will drive up the cost of fuel weeks before next month's midterm elections, it could characterizes rule as election interference. it goes much deeper than oil cuts, the u.s. saudi arabia -- relationship has been unhealthy, one-sided for years if not decades. the u.s. has turned a blind eye as they spread radicalism undercut u.s. interest for years. will that change now? what can and should president biden do rebounds relationship with saudi arabia? should they consider -- continue to provide security to riyadh, support the war in yemen, or take stronger measures and bring

u.s. troops home from the kingdom? two discussion -- to discuss this we are proud to have with us congressman ro khanna, we are also delighted to have the c-span audience with us today. if you're watching this on zoom you can watch the q&a function to ask a question. i will try to get to those questions throughout the conversation. if you're watching on c-span you consummate your questions by tweeting at us. or go to the facebook or youtube pages and submit questions in the comment section, go to the quincy institute for responsible statecraft. let me introduce our painless to get the discussion started. first of all we have represented ro khanna, who represents california 17th district located

in the heart of silicon valley. he is a deputy of the congressional progressive caucus. representative is committed to advancing policy of diplomatic strength and restraint. he has introduced legislation in response to the studies that would cut arms sales to the kingdom. after that we have bruce, a senior fellow at the brookings institute, serving 30 years in the central intelligence agency, serving overseas in the bureau, as well as eight years and national security council at the white house serving 4 of them presidents. he is author of eight books, most recent one, titled jordan and america and enduring friendship. finally we have a research fellow from the quincy institute and a expert on religious and political authority in the

middle east and north africa. she is considering a book on the strategic use of religious authority in the arab monarchy sent 9/11 -- sense 9/11. let's go the first question to you congressman, you have been a long-term advocate of tougher palsy of saudi arabia. particularly putting an end to the war in yemen and the u.s. support for that work. these efforts, despite strong support in congress have been thwarted by the white house post -- both by trump into certain extent the biden administration. do you think things will be different this time around my full of what the saudi's have done with oil cuts and the did next -- the direct challenge to president biden saudi arabia has no committed. rep. khanna: thank you,

appreciate being on this panel and everyone appreciating -- participating. this is a moment like khashoggi, after his murder, the bipartisan war powers resolution demo -- gained a lot of momentum. before that people were not paying a lot of attention to the humanitarian crisis in yemen. we passed war crimes resolution, the first time has passed in the history of congress. then we started to ignore some of the saudi atrocities, this is galvanized congress again this is the direct slap in the face of americans. this is reeking of ingratitude given the supplies and arms we supply. the timing of it is suspect. it is a slap in the face -- to

try to engage. i believe there will be consequences. this is a miss calculation strategically from the 70's. i think the -- from this audis. i think the congress will take action and there is broad support to take action. >> bruce, we see in congress, the congressman is leaving some effort to take action, what is the menu of things that the president of the united states as a whole can do? is it the right move by the president to say i want congress to lead on the tougher than the president doing it himself? what are the various things he can do? should be led by congress or the president? bruce: thank you for having me on the panel today, i agree with the conner smith this

is a moment like khashoggi -- with the congressman this is a moment like khashoggi. we have seen a pattern of behavior ever since he ascended to the throne, starting off with the decision to go toward yemen. he is assured of sport on the hill comely he is assured of support from the democratic party, and assured of the support of the press, he needs to lead. cutting off arms sales is a good step come when you look at the provision of spare parts and minutes, we need to look at contractors. one of the things we learned last year in afghanistan is that united states government can compel contractors to leave a country. we can compel them to leave saudi arabia as well. that will ground, effectively, the royal saudi air force come at least significant parts of it.

we should appeal to british and french counterparts, britain and france are part of nato. they are in war supporting ukraine. they should be part of this effort as well. it will take a broad effort, i think those are terry to military steps are very good places to start. that does not mean we we give up our relationship with saudi arabia. it means we would demilitarized most of our relationship with saudi arabia. we can still look to saudi arabia for support on issues like ending the war in yemen. an urgent responsibility which unfortunately the cease-fire has not elapsed. thankfully full-scale war has not begun again. without a lot of encouragement, it could easily go in that direction. i think those areas of the united states should take action and the president should leave the action. after all -- lead that action.

after all this is a public human relation of the president of the united states. after saying he would treat mbs as a pariah committee electorally went to judah and met with them. it is as one person wrote, a gut punch from the saudi crown prince. >> i would go back to the lead up to all of this and why the president would go on the trip that was so heavily could lies before and after. bruce mentioned the war in yemen. this is a war that has gone on for several years, the united states has unfortunately supported that war effort even though there have been promises to put an end to it. biden himself last february said this war must and. there was a truce, that truce has lapsed, if the united states were to take some of the measures mentioned. no more spare parts, not allowing the planes of saudi arabia to bomb yemen, what would

that mean for that war? will it help the plum get a second chance? or would it encourage others to go on the offensive, and instead of ending the war we see a different kind of intensification? >> thank you so much, for this meeting and my fellow panelists talk about this today. one of the crucial thing to keep in mind here, although the future what happens in yemen is obviously of crucial importance given the scale the humanitarian devastation there, it is important that the u.s. focus on our own interest here. it is a question of why does the nine states you to help saudi arabia -- the united states help saudi arabia rates this war -- wage of this war. it needs to be returned to the

hands of the yemenis. they need to figure out how they're going to address this and how they will work out power-sharing in the future. as long as this remains a toxic -- proxy conflict for iranian evolvement and saudi involvement. eventually they will need to look at power-sharing because they will run out of resources. one crucial point that needs be made when picky about what it is congress can do, i agree with his point, biden looks weak your, this also important that whatever biden does, extends past his term, we saw trump or similar figure take power at whatever point in the future and maybe jump right back into bed with this audis. whatever -- the saudi's. whatever is done would go up in

smoke. one crucial point about the yemen resolution it would be implemented with a simple majority. some of the other legislative solutions proposed would have to be filibuster proof. i do think it is very crucial to keep in mind we have the yemen war powers resolution that is waiting to be brought to the floor. many thanks to represent of conifer their relation -- representative khanna. this is not just about being involved in the region in fighting saudi arabia's dirty wars, this is -- many presidents have usurped that authority in congress needs to reassert that constitutional power. >> very good, thank you, annelle . that brings me to the congressman again.

they have talked extensively about the saudi influence in america, and you have been a proponent of increasing transparency of how foreign governments influence the government by -- saudi arabia spent nearly $300 million on public relations firms and lobbying since 20 -- since 9/11. they are registered under fara to represent saudi american united states. this has created another khashoggi moment, and political momentum exist in congress to do something to correct this relationship. do you think also there is a momentum to start looking deeper, as you have and through the act at the foreign lobbying taking place in washington? rep. khanna: yes.

this should be a bipartisan concern. foreign influence is not just a saudi arabia, there are other countries that have lobbying that is influencing decision-making. many times they hire former members of congress, former members of congress at influential committees to turn around and lobby the united states on behalf of foreign interests. that should not be tolerated. i worked with representative mike gallagher to try to ban former members of congress from lobbying for foreign governments. we should then -- ban former senior staff from doing that. there needs to be much stricter disclosure of ethics requirements. that is one of the factors that has tilted u.s. policy in a direction, overly lenient to the

70's. -- to the saudis. >> you mentioned the trip, how the president was reluctantly convinced to go. it took 18 months for his advisors to mention to get to a yes on the issue. it has clearly backfired quite tremendously. there is a narrative out there, one audience member, justin alexander asks, the thoughts on the report that mbs sharply reduced opec plus's production because he was unhappy with biden's visit. rather than this argument that there is something more

profoundly unhealthy about this relationship? >> i think the ground prints -- crowned prince was irritated the president of the united states called him a pariah. then changed his tune and came over. whether something happened during the visit i do not know. the readout we got from the visit has been somewhat mystifying. the administration said it was not about oil prices. of course it was about oil prices. it was about israel. saudi arabia has not joined the aber him records, has adjusted its policy -- abraham accords, it adjusted its policy. we need to look at padma behavior since 2015, when the -- pattern of behavior since 2015 when the king ascended to the throne and started the war in yemen.

he told john brennan that the war would be over in a few weeks. he wrote in his memoirs that he said to himself, what is this guy smoking? no one goes into a war in yemen and ends in a few weeks. we had the tragedy of the just -- tragedy of general khashoggi, and then the beginning of the biden administration. bill burns, the current director of central intelligence was quick to go to the president about it. the present acted forcibly -- forcefully. imagine this, the most pivotal countries in the region, a linchpin being destabilized by another ally. the jordanians have not highlighted the saudi role, there are hundreds of thousands of workers that might lose their jobs.

it is an extraordinary moment, no we have this, this is a blatant active interference in the american electoral process. coming as does a month before the election is bound to increase oil prices even if the actual amount of oil is not $2 million off the ground. just a perception of it. the buy demonstration needs to act, needs to act forcefully. one other thing i would say, the congressman is right. saudi arabia is not alone in this business. the president of the united arab emirates, crown prince of abu dhabi, mbs's mentor was in moscow this week public clear appearing on television with a russian dictator. that is another example of one of our allies choosing to join russia instead of choosing to join in support of ukraine. i would hope that we would have

reconsideration of our relationship with the emirates. why would we sell them 35 jet fighters? the last thing the persian gulf needs is a new advanced stage weaponry of f-35's, that is an arm sailed like should be given second thought of the wisdom of going forward with. >> very interesting. as you mentioned the timing of this, clearly seems to be designed to have an impact on the midterms. i would love to hear your thoughts, as well as the congressman if he believes that surprise in the increase. earlier on the talk was there would be potentially a one million barrel cut. then suddenly became 2 million. was that something deliberately done to shock the market, push up oil prices as much as possible, in order to undermine president biden? bruce: one thing we know from

the pattern of his behavior, he loves drama. the more dramatic the better. in many ways he is much like his other mentor, donald trump. 2 million barrels is much more shock to the system than one million barrels. and the timing, i cannot overstress the drama that the timing has produced. mbs wants donald trump back. they fared very well in the trump administration. the trump administration, as donald trump said protected mbs after the khashoggi event. the midterms are the first step towards bringing trump back into the white house. if the democrats lose the house

and the senate there will be one step closer to getting their man back into the oval office. >> i would love to hear thoughts on how -- if there has been a break in the manner the saudis use oil policy under mbs. annelle: absolute, this is nothing bruce has mentioned several times, we have seen quite a difference in the way the saudis approach oil policy. since the 1970's oil embargo there's been a lot of calls for the need for energy independence. the nine states are no longer be subject to the whims of a country like saudi arabia. this is very true. until 2015, when he came into power, we did see saudi arabia prioritize priced ability. it is something they alone have the capacity to do. they are able to ramp up or ramp

down production. something the united states cannot do. in part because the u.s. oil industry is run by private companies that are beholden to shareholders to maximize profit. because it is run by the saudi state, it can be used for political objectives. for decades the political objective was price stability, is part of why the u.s. saudi relationship has weathered so many stressors. including after 9/11 when 15 of the 19 hijackers were saudi. . we see a huge shift we see the willingness of the price of oil to be allowed to shift wildly, mbs pursuing ace price war with russia in early 20 -- a price war with russia during early 2020 when it cratered.

that drove the price of oil below zero dollars. that prompted outrage from donald trump and senator ted cruz who talked about maybe was time for u.s. troops get out of saudi arabia. things are fundamentally different now under mbs. the characterization of him as someone who is interested in drama, is on point. it gets to this of, is it finally going to reevaluate this relationship? we can no longer count on the saudi's for the priced ability they once provided. the question there is can we afford to do so? we do remain dependent, unfortunately, on fossil fuels. i will stop there. >> thank you. congressman, several the audience member's have asked questions about whether a

tougher stance with just drive the saudis into the arms of russia or china. you have been a leader on capitol hill for several years now. asking for a different relationship, in which pressure on saudi arabia and it of her attitude at times is necessary. we have seen in the run-up to this visit that the administration made the argument, yes, perhaps this is a bit of a sacrifice of american values. fist bumping this ground prints -- crowned prince. it was necessary because of geopolitical imperatives. if we do not do this saudi arabia will move closer to russia and china. as a key proponent of a different approach to saudi arabia, how do you answer the criticism? rep. khanna: they are already moving closer to putin. the reality is they have 70% margins on the barrel of oil they sell.

made almost $100 billion in 2022, putin does not have that margin because he is selling at a discount to china and india. this increase in price, and decreasing production is partly driven to help putin. the reality is they cannot switch over to putin or china in terms of their weapons. in terms of the technicians that are needed to fly planes overnight. it is a process that would take years, if not a decade. we have had so much joint defense arrangements with the saudi's, that would multiply under the trump administration. i do not think they have full appreciation of it can allow the production is done in saudi, they have access to sensitive technology. we have far more leverage in the situation than people realize. there is a lot we can do to make

sure that the saudis are being reciprocal and are not committing human rights violations. it would require them to have a relationship with the nine states. at the -- united states. it is a red herring to say they will get their arms from china and russia. >> as you pointed out they are already moving, aligning oil production with vladimir putin against u.s.'s explicit wishes. how much worse could it get? let's say the argument has some truth, he thought exterminate. --a thought experiment. what could they do, importing all of their arms and relying on security from russia that cannot handle the current war they are in or china that shows no interest in providing security

for any other stay outside of its on borders? rep. khanna: i think they are at the level of cuts that opec could stomach. there is opposition within opec for those 2 million cut. i do not think they can have cuts that are drastically beyond what they did. they did the shock value cuts already. at some point other opec countries will change if they go further. they may have more cosmetic meetings with xi jinping or putin. they will try to have agreements and try to get away with as much as they can while there is no consequences. if there starts to be consequences in the united states they will have to have a different cost-benefit tank elation. -- calculation. >> very interesting. frank asked a question.

in the context of if there is an effort to impose consequences of the congressman pointed out, it also do something to ensure oil prices do not go up. would there be, with a drop of sanctions of venezuela or iran have the necessary counter impact compared to what the saudi's have done? bruce: the saudis imposed a oil embargo on the unit states in 1972. we all memo that -- the united states in 1972. we all remember that. most of the cut off of oil from other countries, as a consequent of american sanctions. if we do not have sanctions on iran we could import more from iranians. we could diversify our supply. same is true with venezuela.

i understand that oil sanctions is sending a signal of the disapproval of the behavior of the iranians and others. if you think of it purely in our own self interest terms, we are shooting ourselves in the foot with all of these sanctions. we should find more sophisticated ways of going against them. this is perhaps a particularly important time to think about that, while iranians are demonstrating against their government. we could lift sanctions not to help the government, but is send -- to send a signal to the iranian people the united states is with you and we want to see you take over your economy. we support your efforts. if you can change your leadership in tehran this is what will happen. to encourage that we will do

even sooner than that. we should stop hindering the flow of oil. after all, that is what we say we want from the middle east. affordable oil at prices we can live with. i think it is time, to think that just about our relationship with saudi arabia. given events going on and around, broader thought -- in iran, broader thought about we want for the region. all this talk about security is all about iran. the by demonstration, like its predecessors seems to be -- the biden administration, like its predecessors seem to be preoccupied with iranian paranoia. i think it is exaggerated. >> with nord stream 2 was blown up or sabotage, secretary blinken said this was an

opportunity for europe to reduce its dependence on russian gas. are you saying that beyond imposing set -- consequences on the saudis in terms of arm sale there is an opportunity to reduce dependence on saudi oil. as a result diversify with oil producers or as some people have asked in the q&a, this is an opportunity to move away from oil to a larger extent. if we do not we will still be in some form of situation where oil producers will have this influence on us. i will poses question to all the panelists. you are on mute.

why don't we go with the congressman in the meantime. rep. khanna: in terms of balancing the relationship? >> in terms of, instead of just thinking what are the costs that can be imposed on saudi arabia to make sure there is consequences for their action as you presented. is this also potentially an opportunity to reduce our dependency, a, on saudi arabia and b, on oil as a whole. diversifying our various energy sources. rep. khanna: obsolete shows the volatility of oil and why we need -- absolutely, it shows our volatility with oil and what we need a moonshot with energy long-term. the nine states under president biden -- united states under president biden -- is projected

to go to trial .6 million in between 23, -- this idea that we are not producing oil is actually false -- factually false. it is a commodity that has high volatility. the more we diversify, the better. that is why we need a moonshot in renewable energy. it will deprive petro states of the leverage they have. this should help inform a foreign policy that prioritizes more rapid element of renewable -- development of renewable energy. >> do you agree? annelle: yes. there is a notion that united states could drill its way out of the problem come ec that talking point that we need to

tap into -- you hear that talking point that we need to tap into more oil resources. united states cannot set the rise of oil the way saudi arabia does. we cannot ramp up or scale down our production capacity. partly the nature of oil, does not come out of the ground as easily as saudi oil does. it is privately controlled, the companies have to maximize shareholder profit. the notion that ramping up american capacity would protect us from the decisions of oil producers abroad is patently false. we will always remain dependent on other countries as long as we remain dependent on oil. it is crucial that we shift away from fossil fuel dependence. what is interesting, this notion of, some climate change activists that are concerned as

i am, say it is great the price of oil will be high. that will help encourage a shift towards alternatives. that is true, at the same time when the price of oil is high it does help encourage additional investment by oil companies. additional exploration, new production facilities, which just furthers the ongoing info structure that depends on oil. eventually the price of oil will come back down. which again will be a breath of relief or americans -- for ordinary americans powering their home or going to the gas station and maintain the cycle dependence. i agree with representative khanna it is long past time to invest in alternatives. luckily we saw some of that in legislation the summer. we have accomplished has fallen short of what was accomplished earlier in terms of investment in alternative energy.

>> you answered primitively a question exactly about that topic. thank you. bruce, you want coming quickly before you move on? bruce: i will say this simply. the existential threat to america is not if iran gets a nuclear weapons. it is climate change. anything that can help reduce or slow down climate change is very much in our national interest. as every american who lives on the east coast discovered recently, i'm changes coming at us head on -- climate change is coming at us head on and the result can be devastating. this could be a good way to diversify as well as take action to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. >> thank you, bruce. we have several questions. john hoffman, asking what about the mri the -- the dimension of

all this? there seems to be a pattern were most of the attention goes to saudi arabia because mbs loves drama. the mri already -- emerati are working hand in glove, but get far last -- less attention. we have seen them and their relationship with russia. they are in favor of this cut as well. is there a distance between them? will a tougher policy in saudi arabia be ineffective unless it is also coupled with a different approach to the emirates? bruce: the difference is, mbz, is a far more clever, thoughtful practitioner of international

affairs than his saudi counterpart. mbz only likes drama, but he also makes what is truly stupid decisions. going into yemen was a stupid decision, killing jamaal khashoggi was not a threat to mbs. he may be an irritant, but he was not a threat. the latest decision, who in the world would back putin in the war in ukraine, when is obvious to everyone in the world that putin is losing the war in ukraine. he will find himself without a job in moscow and lots of time to spend with his family. although i suspect as i how putin's and will come -- end will come. i think it is time to take a good hard look at the relationship with saudi arabia, emirates, and bahrain.

the emirates and bahrain have been clever in using the abraham accords help the old a relationship -- build a relationship with the israelis. that is all great and good. that does not mean they should be rewarded with f-35's, for example because they decided to open up a relationship with israel. it is mind-boggling to me that we would be introducing this new advanced system of warfare into a region that is already plagued with so much violence and instability. the last thing you need to do is pour gasoline on a fire. that is what we are doing with some of the farm -- arms sales. >> congressman, same question to you, you mentioned early on with the settings have done here, is created a new khashoggi moment, perhaps.

would you say that is also true in the sense that there is political momentum and willingness to also review, reevaluate the relationship of the uae, there has been a partner with the saudi's on 11 different things we -- a lot of different things we object to including the war in yemen. rep. khanna: my understanding is the uae, at least directly stop having engagement in the bombing of yemen. they still are engaged, but they also have been more responsive than the saudis. bruce has pointed out that mbz is a more sophisticated actor and they do not benefit as much from the u.s. relationship. they certainly should not be left out of the conversation. we need to have a frank understanding that they are part of opec, part of the decision.

i do not think it is unreasonable to focus first and foremost the attention on the saudis as we have. >> interesting. thank you. we have an interesting question from david who raises, i think a very important point. pointing out that over the course of the last couple of years the united states has increasingly seen by friends and non-friends alike as a less liable -- reliable partner. we saw this happening in the trump years pulling out of agreements. with biden citing the political polarization or the democratic system of some that would supersede the natural or normal norm that countries are expected to adhere to the agreements they sign. given that, is there an argument

to say that the saudis may feel the unreliability of the night states, the political polarization from their pure self-interest -- united states, the political polarizations and their pure self-interest means they have to closer to russia or china even if we impose consequences or not impose consequences on them? annelle: i do think it is reasonable that countries behave in their own self-interest. as the united states is dealing with the fact that we are an increasingly multipolar world. russia demonstrating itself, but china absolutely much more powerful. the united states will have to be engaged in a given kind of policymaking than the hegemonic military power we have enjoyed since the fall of the ussr. it is not unreasonable that

countries might start to diversify their security partners. might start to hedge a little bit, not wanting to antagonize big powerful countries. it also means the u.s. needs to update our policies. in the past when we had such overwhelming power and could extend a massive security guarantee that made sense to maintain something like our relationship with saudi arabia through thick and thin, now we need to reconsider that. they are behaving in ways that undermine our national interest, rational on their part, but in ways that hurt u.s. interests. we need to reconsider our laser ship with them as well. moving forward -- our relationship with them as well. moving for the united states needs to figure how do we navigate a world where we are no longer the superpower and having to deal with the reality of other powerful systems. >> bruce, do you want to comment on that as well?

bruce: yes. i think we cannot underestimate the disruptive impact of the trump administration. no other american president has seriously proposed we leave nato. no other american president seriously proposed we withdraw all of our troops from germany. he violated the iran joint conference of plan of action. if there is an example of a president -- president does not live up to prior commands it is donald trump. i think that should be an additional piece of worried here. this saudi move was definitely intended, not only to benefit putin, but to benefit donald trump. it is bizarre that the former president has a policy of

sympathy for autocrats and dictators. and was the opponents of elected governments like the merkel, trudeau governments. will take a while for the disruptive behavior of 4 years of the trump administration to be washed out of the system. that is of course assuming he does not have round two in 2024. we need to get back of having more of a bipartisan consensus about the basics of american foreign policy. i am hopeful that on this issue, the war in ukraine, and not supporting russia, therefore not helping it with reducing oil production. we will see some republicans and coming over and joining what i

think is a very unanimous democratic view. that we have to have a change in this relationship, a fundamental change in this relationship. >> if i could stay with you for a moment, a very interesting question from the chat. most of our conversation so far has been the impact would be on u.s. saudi relations and potentially the impacted have with saudi with russia and china. if the united states were to finally get tough and impose consequences on saudi arabia, would be the signal be for the rest of the arab world? what impact would have on the relationships with the u.s. with other countries in the region and perhaps also the relationship between those countries and saudi arabia itself? we will start off of bruce. then go to the congressman. bruce: sure.

let's make sure i'm not muted. >> you are ok. bruce: it is not widely discussed, but there is in fact a widespread resentment in the region of the role saudi arabia plays. because they have so much money. they throw their money around or they do not throw that money around. countries that definitely -- desperately need their foreign assistance like jordan and ahmad have to come begging hat in hand. if they see the saudi's in bad odor in washington you will see many distance themselves from saudi arabia as well. one other point. >> how would countries in the region distance themselves with saudi arabia? what would that look like? >> it could be much greater criticism of the saudi role in

yemen. while the cease-fire was a step in the right direction it failed to roll the -- to lift the blockade in yemen. it allowed more fuel and commercial air flights outcome the fundamentals of the blockade remained in place. this is what the cooties -- hooties were asking for when they said they would not signing up for a re-extension. the fundamental blockade had to come to an end. the war in yemen is very unpopular with people of the arab world, the muslim world in general. it is adjusted, the beginning of the war the saudis, mbs pressed pakistan to send troops to fight. the prime minister realized it would not be a popular movie pakistani people -- move with the pakistani people. he said he had to ask the parliament, knowing that they

would vote unanimously against sending troops. american distancing from saudi arabia it also lead to distancing them some of their arab friends who are really uncomfortable with the way saudi arabia dominates the politics of the region. dominates the economics of the region. >> interesting. annelle: i think bruce is right. it would have repercussions throughout the rest of the region as well as sending signals to other american partners and the rest of the world that if you behave in a manner that directly contravenes u.s. interest there will be consequent is. another christian -- consequences. another crucial element is the signal to the u.s. weapons industry that has had a strangle hold on the logical process. when we -- political process. when we bring up things like reconsidering saudi arabia, there is concern about american

jobs that depend on that the u.s. weapons manufacturing industry, which is a false premise this is an industry that actually does not create that many jobs in contrast to something like investment in green energy. better health care, better education and for structure, all those are more labor-intensive and more preferable jobs americans would like to do rather than manufacturing weapons. to his points, the military-industrial complex has been able to frighten politicians or buy off politicians to frighten the foreign policies and steps and about what would be the repercussion of cutting back weapons sales to the saudi's. this a b for the mentally against u.s. interests. -- this would be fundamentally against u.s. interest, in fact

it would be against profit interests. it moves from the cycle where we continue to flood the region and the entire world of weapons. go back to the narrative that u.s. jobs depend on it, which is an correct. -- incorrect. our energy policy, our industrial production of weapons that we ship abroad. >> thank you, on the point that you raised, the arms sales, companies are making huge profits, the u.s. interest is not in the profit margins. congressman, they have been active and protective of the saudi u.s. relationship. one of our colleagues here at the quincy institute, asks a question about them. do you expect them to put a big fight against any effort on your end, your colleagues and, on a -- end on a pause on sales?

would they put a big big fight? or is a situation such that they feel like it would not be a good pr move to be on the side of mbs as he is trying to deliberately interfere in the u.s. democratic processes? >> i do not think they'll be putting up the fight in their own name, they are more subtle than that. they have former members of congress or lobbyist, or national security officials who will make the argument in terms of national security interests. more often being defunded or supported by -- funded or supported by these defense contractors. some of these jobs are in saudi arabia. the production of the weapons is being done in saudi arabia. it is shocking. most other allies do not have that kind of an agreement.

i do think the average -- outrage of the saudis being so directed turning down the president, and hurting the american people make it hard for lobbyist of defense contractors to argue against an action has consequent is. -- consequences. when you look at mbs they are hoping for a return of donald trump. they need to be thinking of not what happens in the next 4 years in america, i was you everything in my power to make sure it is not a return of trump. regardless, they need to think of the strategy in the next 10 to 15 years. regardless of the act -- outcome of the 2024 election there is a generation of people in congress do not come from a tradition of seeing out -- saudi's as a cold

war ally. they're reversing that by aligning with putin. they are eroding their goodwill in the congress that had accumulated over 40 years. someone who is more prudent, and frankly i think the saudi ambassador understands. what counsel saudi arabia, that what they are doing a strategically not in the interests of maintaining a long-term constructive relationship with the united states. >> we have not seen much of that type of long-term thinking. it does not seem terribly likely that that will happen anytime soon. it touches on a very interesting question that sean is asking, from asp in the chat. first of all, give me an assessment of how likely you think it is that the administration will do something

concrete that is meaningful and has consequences rather than more of the symbolic things? secondly, assuming that's nothing happens, is there, and will there be, should there be a pathway for saudi arabia to get back in the good graces of the united states to truly be able to move this forward in a -- relationship and a positive direction that is beneficial. what would that pathway look like? bruce, do you want to start? bruce: certainly. i would put the pathway straight through yemen. and end to the blockade, a end of saudi forces controlling -- same is true for the emirates. they are to give the island back to the yemeni people. that is a major part of the

pathway. what we can also look for, not a complete change in human rights policy, but some melting of the relationship. one last small point that is important to me. let mohamed anaya -- benia travel abroad and not live under threat of the government. he went out of his way to save american lives, we owe this man to help him when he is being tortured by his successor. annelle: i absolutely agree with bruce. one point of clarification, mohammed had been the crown prince when he became king in 2015 and then was supplanted by mbs. he has been in detention, as bruce said subject to torture since that time.

he was a crucial ally and partner with ynez net states and counterterror efforts after 9/11 -- with the united states in counterterror efforts since 9/11. i agree with neutrality in yemen, is a point of instability in the region, remains where the world. this not only has a do with the fundamental morality of trying to address human suffering there. historically yemen has been a source of terrorist attacks against america and american targets. it is crucial that the united states gets out of fighting this war on saudi arabia's behalf. it is seen as a saudi u.s. war being waged against the people of yemen. as i pension before that is one benefit, the yemen war powers resolution. it would not have to be filibuster proof.

it would require a symbol geordie to pass -- simple majority to pass. i will think him for his leadership on front. you asked -- on that front. you asked if it would lead to a fundamental shift. i think it is unfortunate that the united states remains dependent on fossil fuels. that we are in this position, again at 50 years after the oil embargo yet here we are. i would hope that biden would live up to some of his promises, the promises the democratic party had made about transitioning away from fossil fuels. this is a huge opportunity for us to make good on some of the investments required to make that transition possible. >> thank you so much. congressman, final word to you. what we have heard primarily is that the path for saudi arabia to get back into the good graces

would be 3m and. -- through yemen. do you agree? what would you like to see put in place? an arms embargo being lifted. >> i agree and the president ran on that and that's why he called the saudi's a pariah state and to augie was a brutal murder. they can lift the blockade which is a concrete step and that's in a sort point on they say they are making progress. that has been at the heart of concern of so many in congress. beyond that, they need to reverse some of the production cuts. that's something the president will really look to and they

should not be blackmailing the american consumer at a time when we have an energy crisis. this is not a relationship that cannot be redeemed. it will be different than it was in the past. there are actions they can take and that's white much of the legislation, i don't view it as a threat is much as a consequence of the actions that they've taken. it's the largest humanitarian crisis in yemen and now jacking up american gas prices at a time when americans are facing the guest energy challenge in decades. they take a different turn in their relationship and that would have a different response from the united states.

both khashoggi and this decision are deep rooted in the relationship that will take significant time for them to recover from step >> thank you so much and we will end it with those words of wisdom. the wounds are deep but will not be easily healed. thank you for participating in this excellent conversation. we hope to have you all back soon, to all of you who are watching, if you have not subscribed to the quincy newsletter, go to the website and subscribed to the newsletter and you will get notifications of all of our future events and publications and we look forward to speaking to you all again very soon, thank you so much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> here's what's coming up this afternoon on c-span. at 1:30 p.m. eastern, treasury secretary janet young will call

a press conference of the international monetary fund and bank meeting being held in washington, d.c. at 2:30 p.m., liz cheney vice chair the january 6 committee talks about the constitution and defending democracy and she will speakat the university of notre dame . you can watch live coverage on the free c-span now video app or online at www.c-span.org. >> c-span's campaign 2022 coverage of the midterm elections with candidate debates from around the country, beginng ve tonight, from wisconsin, the incumbent democratic governor will face his challenger. at 9 p.m., congressman peter welch and republican gerald malloy debate fo the open senate seainermont and at 10 p.m., incumbent colorado governor faces his republican challenger. don't miss a single election

moment on c-span and take us with you on the go with c-span now, our free mobile video app and be sure to visit/campaign 2022 www.c-span.org/campaign 2022. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> american history tv saturdays on c-span2, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 12:30 p.m. eastern on the presidency, revealing the life of first lady martha washington from her surviving personal letters with laura fraser and catherine garrett. at 8 p.m. eastern on lectures of history, richard gamble talks about american churches and religions during world war i and he shares how pastors spoke

about the great work before and after the u.s. enter the conflict. exploring the american story, watch american history tv saturday on c-span2ind out for schedule or what on line anytime at www.c-span.org/ history. ♪ >> middle and high school students, is your time to shine and you can participate in this year's c-span studentcam documentary competition. picture yourself as a newly elected member of congress. we ask this year's competitors, what is your top priority and why? make a 5-6 minute video that shows the importance of your issues from opposing and supporting perspectives and don't be afraid to take risks. among the $100,000 in cash prizes is a $5,000 grand prize. vide be submitted by january 20, 2023.

visit our website at studentcam.org for rules, tips and resources. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? it's way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with 1000 committee centers to create wi-fi enabled location so students from low income families can get the tools they need to vance. comcast sports c-span is a public service along with these other televisn fighters, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> amid calls for her resignation, british prime mr. liz truss held a news conference to defend her leadership and describing her plan to lower the corporation tax.