0:06

If Josh Paul was at work right now, he'd

0:09

be busy. Really busy.

0:11

He spent the last 11 years as

0:13

a diplomat. Simultaneous

0:15

wars in Israel and Ukraine meant

0:18

a whole lot of late night emails and early morning

0:20

conference calls.

0:22

But last week, he quit. This

0:25

was a sudden decision.

0:28

I resigned because I don't believe that US

0:30

provided arms should be provided into a situation

0:33

where we know they are going to cause massive civilian

0:35

harm.

0:36

You're talking about to Israel? Right.

0:38

And Israel's use of them, particularly in Gaza.

0:43

Josh resigned with a barn burner of

0:45

a letter, which he posted on LinkedIn.

0:48

He said he knew that working with the American

0:50

government was not without its moral

0:52

complexity and moral compromises,

0:56

but that right now, the American response

0:58

to the war against Hamas was

1:01

making the world materially

1:03

worse. This is

1:05

where I need to explain that Josh is

1:07

not a run-of-the-mill diplomat. You

1:10

worked in the State Department, the Bureau of Political

1:12

Military Affairs. Is

1:15

it

1:15

fair to say that's like a nice way of saying you

1:17

were a government arms dealer?

1:22

I suppose that's true to an extent. I

1:24

was certainly not...

1:25

Josh's job was to facilitate the

1:27

transfer of weapons internationally.

1:30

It's not like he had truckloads

1:32

of missiles he was selling. It's

1:34

more like he decided whether or not American arms

1:36

manufacturers could legally provide things

1:38

like jets and tanks outside

1:41

American borders.

1:43

Every international sale,

1:44

it went through his team. As

1:47

you might imagine, Israel gets

1:49

a lot of American weapons. In

1:51

fact, they receive more than half of the global

1:54

allocation of grant assistance. In the

1:56

days after Hamas's October 7th

1:58

attack, Josh says... Israel

2:00

asked for a whole lot more weapons. His

2:03

bosses were inclined to send them. No

2:05

questions asked. Josh

2:08

was not. So he left. So

2:12

suddenly you find yourself with time. You

2:15

normally would have been getting into work at 7.30 and,

2:18

you know, processing these arms deals around

2:20

the clock. Are you relaxed?

2:23

No, on the contrary. I was saying

2:26

to a friend yesterday that it's strange.

2:28

I feel like I left my job last

2:30

week and yet this week I have more responsibilities

2:33

than I've ever had. I

2:37

have heard from so many people both

2:39

within the US government around the world who

2:42

have been supportive and have asked, you know, what more

2:44

they can be doing to help press

2:46

on these issues. And I have,

2:48

you know, committed myself to replying to each

2:50

and every one of them. It's a full-time job.

2:55

Today

2:55

on the show,

2:56

why Josh resigned from the State Department

2:59

in protest and what

3:01

his decision says about

3:03

America's role in this new Middle

3:05

Eastern war. I'm Mary

3:07

Harris. You're listening to What Next. Stick

3:10

around.

3:25

Labor strikes, climate

3:27

change, your crappy office printer.

3:30

What do they all have in common? Come on,

3:32

it's all about the money. Economics is

3:34

everywhere and everything, fueling our lives,

3:37

even where we least expected. If you're

3:39

a fan of What Next and are curious to learn something

3:42

new and exciting about economics every week, check

3:44

out the Planet Money podcast from NPR. Planet

3:47

Money is a different kind of world where

3:49

the complex economy actually makes sense,

3:52

where human stories supersede abstract theories.

3:55

And the show answers some of life's burning

3:57

questions like, will AI take over our

3:59

jobs?

3:59

Is fancy vodka just fancy

4:02

marketing? And why are Christmas trees so

4:04

expensive? You can tune in every

4:06

week for entertaining stories and insights

4:08

about how money shapes our world. So

4:11

as soon as you're done with this show, listen now

4:13

to Planet Money from NPR, wherever

4:16

you get your podcasts.

4:20

This podcast is brought to you by Progressive

4:22

Insurance.

4:23

Most of you listening right now are probably multitasking.

4:26

Yep, while you're listening, you're probably also driving,

4:28

cleaning, exercising, or maybe even

4:30

grocery shopping. But if you're not some

4:32

kind of moving vehicle, there's something else you can be doing

4:35

right now. Getting an auto quote from Progressive

4:37

Insurance. It's easy and you could save

4:39

money by doing it right from your phone. Drivers

4:42

who save by switching to Progressive save nearly $750

4:44

on average, and auto customers qualify

4:48

for an average of seven discounts. Discounts

4:50

for having multiple vehicles on your policy, being

4:53

a homeowner, and more. So just

4:55

like your favorite podcast, Progressive will be with

4:57

you 24-7, 365 days a year, so you're

5:00

protected no matter what. Multitask

5:03

right now. Quote your car insurance at progressive.com

5:06

to join over 28 million drivers who trust Progressive.

5:09

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. National

5:13

average 12-month savings of $744

5:15

by new customers surveyed who saved with Progressive

5:17

between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential

5:21

savings will vary. It's not available

5:23

in all states and situations.

5:27

My understanding is that in your last

5:29

role, you were basically deciding

5:32

about these weapons transfers,

5:34

specifically whether they advanced US

5:36

national security goals. What

5:40

kind of arms were you dealing in

5:42

here?

5:43

We are talking about everything from bullets,

5:47

bullets to bombs, right? Bullets to

5:49

fighter jets, everything from firearms

5:53

for police units around the world and special

5:55

forces units around the world

5:57

to radio communications to

5:59

tanks.

7:59

very focused on re-energizing

8:02

American manufacturing and American exports. And

8:05

I think one thing they discovered quite quickly

8:07

is that the US government doesn't actually

8:09

have that much ability to impact the

8:12

manufacturing base. It's a technical society

8:15

and there's only so much the government can do. The

8:18

exception to that being arms transfers.

8:20

And so the Trump administration placed a high

8:22

priority on arms exports.

8:26

And so that is really when the work truly

8:29

began ramping up for the Bureau of Political

8:31

and Military Affairs. And I don't think has ramped down

8:33

since.

8:34

I did read one article that

8:35

really praised your team for pushing

8:38

arms out the door to Ukraine,

8:41

like making decisions suddenly in hours

8:44

as opposed to months.

8:45

Was that a new thing?

8:47

So yes, I

8:49

mean, the administration worked much more expeditiously

8:53

on Ukraine than it has before.

8:55

I will say that there is a difference between once

8:58

the decision has been made,

9:00

how fast things move, which is what was

9:02

happening in the Ukraine instance, where there were

9:05

still lengthy policy discussions

9:07

as opposed to, for example, in the current

9:09

situation with Israel, where everything

9:12

is moving faster. It's not that there is a

9:14

lengthy decision and then we move quickly. It is

9:17

that there is no debate and that it's just

9:19

move quickly.

9:20

How did you hear about what had happened on October 7th

9:22

in Israel? I, it

9:25

was a Saturday. I opened my laptop

9:27

in the morning and looked online, see what was going

9:29

on in the world. And my jaw dropped. You

9:32

know, I think I was, everyone was shocked,

9:35

I think, and rightly so,

9:37

by the horror

9:39

that was inflicted by Hamas on that day.

9:41

Yeah.

9:42

Did you immediately spin forward

9:45

to what this would mean for

9:47

your work?

9:48

It took me, you know, a couple of days to

9:50

gather my thoughts. And on the Monday

9:52

that followed, I actually sat

9:54

down and wrote an email to colleagues that said, you

9:57

know, maybe, maybe this is too soon. I recognize.

13:53

arms

14:00

transfers here. I'm wondering if you could

14:02

explain that a little bit, because I think

14:04

what you're referring to here is the new conventional

14:07

arms transfer policy that said transfers

14:09

won't be

14:10

authorized if they are more likely than

14:12

not to be used to violate human rights.

14:15

Is that right? That's

14:16

an important part of it. The conventional arms

14:18

transfer policy is only a policy document,

14:22

by which I mean that unlike laws or regulations,

14:25

it does not have to be followed.

14:27

It's just a piece of paper and

14:29

it says, here's some guidance. It

14:31

is just a piece of paper. It's a piece of paper that I think everyone

14:34

in the arms transfer business takes very seriously.

14:36

And

14:36

I've never seen it just set aside

14:38

in the way that it is being set aside

14:41

now in this context.

14:42

And particularly given that the Biden administration's

14:45

language in there, as you just quoted, is directive.

14:48

Typically for previous administrations, the

14:50

conventional arms transfer policy has talked

14:52

about a framework and said that human rights must

14:54

be one of the aspects that is considered.

14:57

Civilian casualties must be one of the aspects that has been

14:59

considered. The Biden administration conventional

15:01

arms transfer policy is the first to say

15:03

definitively

15:04

that the transfer of arms will not

15:07

be authorized, quote unquote, when

15:09

there is this more likely than

15:11

not concern, which there is in

15:13

this case. And so I think that is my

15:15

deep disappointment with

15:18

the Biden's approach here is that it is not abided

15:20

by its own policy. I mean, you're really,

15:23

it's

15:24

quite the thing to say that the

15:26

Biden administration just made this rule

15:28

and is violating it within

15:30

months.

15:30

Yes, it's again

15:33

deeply disappointing. And I think

15:35

not only for me, but I think for many who worked

15:37

on the document.

15:43

To the break is Josh's resignation

15:46

having any impact.

16:00

Do you left your role last week?

16:02

Can we talk about what's happened in the days since?

16:04

Like, first of all, I wonder if you're hearing from

16:06

people inside the State Department

16:09

right now.

16:10

Yes. I'm hearing from people not only inside

16:12

the State Department, but honestly

16:14

across government, including from uniformed military,

16:17

including from officials in

16:20

other government agencies and in

16:22

Congress, one person is

16:25

someone who used to cover

16:28

Israel issues in a Defense

16:30

Department element

16:33

capacity and said

16:36

that that was the hardest job I ever had because

16:38

there was never any debating. It

16:41

was, you know, whatever you want, here you go.

16:44

And I found that difficult, this person said, from

16:46

a U.S. national security perspective. Others

16:49

have said that

16:51

they are encouraged

16:55

by my decision to

16:57

resign. They cannot follow me because of their own

16:59

personal circumstances, which

17:01

I fully respect and understand. I'm

17:04

myself trying to figure out where I go next to health insurance,

17:08

but that otherwise they stand

17:10

with me and they agree with me 100%.

17:13

You know, you've characterized the U.S. government's initial

17:14

response to the war in Israel as impulsive,

17:17

almost reflexive. But

17:19

it seems to me that

17:20

in the last few days, there has been some

17:23

tempering of that impulsivity, limited,

17:26

but some. Has it seemed like that

17:28

to you?

17:29

It has. I

17:32

am obviously not inside government right now.

17:34

So I am, you know, actions

17:36

matter more than words.

17:38

And I don't know what the actions are that

17:40

are occurring right now. But

17:43

there has been certainly a tempering

17:45

in the public posture. And

17:48

I am hopeful that there

17:50

is a more active debate going on

17:52

now inside of government than there

17:54

was when I left. And I think that is because,

17:56

you know, myself,

17:59

sure. many others as well, have

18:02

spoken out. And I think the administration does

18:04

feel some pressure. I think it helps

18:06

when they begin to hear in numbers from

18:08

Americans around

18:10

the country, across the country, of their concerns,

18:13

of their disagreement. This is ultimately

18:16

a political decision, and it is

18:18

political pressure that will

18:20

impact it. AMT.

18:21

Yeah. I mean, I see the tempering

18:23

in, for instance,

18:25

a Washington Post article that reported that

18:28

President Biden is arguing

18:30

against a rush to a ground invasion

18:34

with Israel. But I guess I wonder

18:37

if you think the

18:39

tempering works

18:41

if the arms spigot is still open.

18:43

AMT.

18:45

Oh, I'm sure the arms spigot is still open. I know

18:47

that the arms spigot is still open. I

18:52

have no doubts. And I don't

18:54

think that this pressure is going to turn

18:56

off the arms spigot, certainly not in the short

18:58

term, and probably not in the medium

19:01

to long term either. AMT. So does it matter? AMT.

19:04

Yes, it matters deeply. I think that

19:07

there is a sea change within

19:10

American

19:11

public opinion on this topic.

19:15

And I think there is a disconnect from

19:17

the political class

19:19

when it comes to it. There was a poll out last week that

19:21

I believe said 53% of

19:25

Americans oppose arms transfers

19:28

to Israel in this context. I think if

19:30

you did the same poll of Congress, you

19:32

would get probably 427 to eight in favor. And so I think

19:34

over time, there

19:41

will be a change, there will be a shift. Again, I

19:43

don't know that it's going to come in time for

19:46

the people of Gaza in this round.

19:48

But if that shift begins with

19:50

pressing Israel

19:51

to do better

19:53

with what we are providing it,

19:55

rather than just saying, here you go,

19:57

have at it, I think that is an

19:59

important.

19:59

really important shift.

20:01

What would course correction look like right

20:04

now from the US in terms of foreign policy?

20:07

So first of all, I think course correction would

20:10

look like following, as we've discussed, our

20:12

own policies as regards other transfers.

20:14

I think it would also involve holding Israel

20:16

to not a special standard, but to the

20:18

same standard that we hold all

20:20

our allies and partners.

20:23

For example, in how we look

20:25

at human rights, potential for human rights

20:27

violations and how

20:29

lay-e vetting is applied.

20:31

And then more broadly, I think

20:33

it would require us to really

20:35

take a sharp look and probably

20:38

a radical re-envisioning of

20:41

US foreign policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian

20:43

conflict. Some people have criticized

20:45

me and said, oh, I'm trying to empower

20:47

Hamas or I'm against Israel. I

20:50

think I'm actually making a really pro-Israel

20:52

discussion that the current path

20:55

has not led to peace or

20:57

security for people in Israel. At

20:59

the same time, it has not led to peace or security for Palestinians.

21:03

And I think that's what we all want, is

21:05

for everyone to live in happiness

21:07

and peace and security to just live their lives,

21:09

raise their families without concern, without

21:12

the humiliation of checkpoints, without the fear

21:14

of rockets.

21:15

And the current path is not leading there.

21:18

You mentioned criticism you've gotten.

21:21

And I know that some conservative

21:23

journalists have heard you telling your story

21:26

and said,

21:27

you have a martyr complex.

21:29

I wonder if you've read

21:30

that criticism and what you make of

21:32

it.

21:33

No, no, I haven't read

21:35

that. Look,

21:38

I made a serious decision about

21:41

my own career that has consequences for me

21:43

because

21:43

I felt it was the right thing to do. I

21:46

think the argument was that, you know, I

21:48

don't know, that you're

21:51

making yourself the center of the story, I guess.

21:54

Yeah. I mean, look, I've never

21:56

been in a situation like this and I

21:58

didn't anticipate the situation

21:59

in. I

22:01

do have a megaphone right now. I

22:03

won't have it for long. I recognise

22:05

what news cycles are like.

22:07

And I do intend to use it while

22:09

I have it on this issue because

22:10

I think it's really important and I want

22:13

civilians to stop getting killed in Gaza. So

22:16

what I would say is, you

22:18

know, look, this is for me has been

22:20

a week beyond imagining. It's

22:21

a transient week. It will pass. While

22:23

I've got it, I'm going to speak up on these issues. But

22:26

once it's gone, I cannot wait to not

22:29

be in the spotlight.

22:31

Do

22:32

you think about what you do next? You have such

22:34

an interesting skill set.

22:36

Yeah, thank you. The problem is that it's really

22:38

only applicable within government for the most

22:41

part. And I don't know that I'm

22:43

going to get any officers to come back into

22:45

government ever again. So

22:47

I don't know. I don't have anything

22:49

lined up. As I say, you know, in the past,

22:51

I've been focused on this issue.

22:53

But beyond that, I need

22:55

to step back and think about where I go from here and

22:58

what I do from here.

22:59

Yeah, it's funny, you said that you made this kind of

23:01

deal with yourself when you took the job with

23:03

state, where you were like, I'll leave

23:06

if this pushes me past a boundary.

23:08

Did

23:09

you always kind of have a

23:10

resignation letter in your drawer just in case?

23:13

I did under the previous administration. I threw

23:16

it away at the start of this administration. And

23:19

I guess had to rewrite it.

23:21

But yeah, I've always been ready

23:24

to leave if I felt that I

23:27

could not stay. I'm

23:28

saddened

23:31

that these are the circumstances in which that happened.

23:33

Because as I think may have come across in

23:36

our discussion, there's a lot this administration is

23:38

doing that I think is right.

23:44

Josh, I'm really grateful for your time

23:46

and your honesty. Thanks for coming on the show.

23:49

Thank you so much for having me.

23:51

Josh

23:54

Paul is a former State Department official.

23:58

And that's the show. For a fan of what we're

24:00

doing here at What Next, the best way to support

24:02

us is to join Slate