War

Woodward explores the tense deliberations between the U.S. and Israel regarding a planned Israeli operation in Rafah. President Biden warns Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu about the potential geopolitical consequences of aggressive actions, cautioning that they could jeopardize alliances with Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Jake Sullivan presses Israeli officials to prioritize humanitarian aid and hostage negotiations over military action. The chapter also recounts an emotional hostage situation involving Hersh Goldberg-Polin and Abigail Edan, highlighting the human cost of the conflict and the U.S.’s role in navigating these delicate issues.

Biden engaged in cautious discussions with Netanyahu as Israel prepared a military operation in Rafah. Biden warned that an aggressive move risked unraveling the coalition formed to defend Israel against Iran’s recent missile attack, emphasizing that the Saudis and other allies would be wary of further escalation. The chapter also touches on the sensitive hostage situation, with Biden and his advisors engaging in negotiations through Qatar to secure proof of life for Israeli American hostages held by Hamas. Meanwhile, President Biden met Abigail Edan, a young girl who survived a traumatic hostage ordeal, and spent time with her and her family in the Oval Office.

Avril Haines, the director of national intelligence, discussed Putin’s weakened but potentially more dangerous position as the Ukraine war dragged on. Although Russia’s economy and military capabilities were significantly strained, Putin’s resolve appeared undeterred, and he continued to source weapons from allies like China and North Korea. This shadow war of economic sanctions and arms blocks was intended to limit Russia without escalating direct conflict. Haines warned of the delicate balance, emphasizing the risks associated with cornering a nuclear power. President Biden’s strategy reflected this caution, aiming to weaken Russia but also to prevent escalation by avoiding putting Putin in a position with no options for retreat.

Former President Donald Trump navigated the challenges of his New York trial over alleged falsification of business records related to a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. Trump’s former attorney, Tim Parlatore, who disagreed with Trump’s campaign-focused legal strategy, believed that the decisions of Trump’s legal team were largely responsible for the conviction. Parlatore explained that a different invoicing method could have avoided the legal issues entirely, a realization that frustrated Trump. Despite the conviction, Trump’s campaign seized on the event, raising substantial funds and framing the trial as a politically motivated attack. The jury unanimously convicted Trump on 34 counts, marking him as the first former US president with a criminal conviction.

Chapter 66 explores the intense personal and political pressures on President Biden and his son Hunter amid Hunter’s criminal trials in 2024. Facing charges related to drug use and tax issues, Hunter endured continuous scrutiny, with some Republicans characterizing his struggles with addiction as indicative of broader issues within the Biden administration. President Biden’s anguish over the relentless attacks on Hunter affected him more deeply than political matters, and he blamed himself, saying that Hunter’s troubles were a consequence of his presidency. Despite the strong bond between father and son, the Biden administration’s lawyers urged Hunter to keep a low profile. Meanwhile, Hunter, who was determined to rebuild his life, felt isolated and cornered by public attention. After Hunter’s conviction on gun charges in June 2024, Biden publicly respected the verdict but privately expressed frustration, while Hunter contemplated his future.

This chapter examines the deteriorating relationship between President Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in 2024, highlighting Biden’s growing frustration with what he viewed as Netanyahu’s self-serving and aggressive leadership. As Israel’s attacks on Gaza escalated following the October 7 Hamas attack, Biden struggled to influence Netanyahu’s strategy, particularly regarding humanitarian impacts. Despite US pleas for restraint and threats to limit arms shipments, Netanyahu pressed forward with massive, indiscriminate military actions in Gaza. Biden’s concerns extended beyond policy; he believed that Netanyahu’s actions were politically motivated to maintain power, especially as opposition figures like Benny Gantz called for new elections. Biden’s internal conflict was evident as he navigated his moral opposition to Netanyahu’s tactics while preserving US support for Israel’s security amid Middle Eastern tensions.

The 2024 US presidential election climate became increasingly tense as fears of terrorism and concerns over national security played central roles in the political narratives. Senator Lindsey Graham underscored the potential vulnerability of the Biden administration to a terrorist attack, which he believed could shift public opinion sharply in favor of Trump. Meanwhile, Trump amplified anxieties surrounding the southern border, asserting that an influx of young men from countries like Iran and China posed a direct threat. As Trump’s rhetoric intensified, especially toward his legal adversaries, Graham expressed worry over the volatility of the political environment, seeing it as fraught with unprecedented risks and potentially destabilizing events that could impact the election’s outcome.

Chapter 68 examines General Mark Milley’s experiences post-retirement amid mounting public hostility, much of which was sparked by former President Trump’s criticisms. Milley, who retired in September 2023, was highly regarded for upholding constitutional order, particularly during Trump’s presidency, a stance that Trump has publicly condemned. Since leaving his role as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Milley has faced repeated threats, which he attributes to Trump’s rhetoric. The chapter also recounts earlier events in which Trump sought to take punitive actions against retired officers critical of his administration. Milley, along with then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper, faced challenges in tempering Trump’s impulsive inclinations to involve the military in both domestic and international conflicts, an approach that Trump continued to promote during his 2024 campaign.

By mid-2024, questions about President Biden’s age and fitness for another term had escalated, with physical and cognitive symptoms becoming increasingly noticeable. While Biden was described as deeply engaged and policy driven in private meetings, especially on foreign policy, his public appearances sometimes presented a contrasting image, marked by slowed responses and occasional lapses in memory. Supporters close to Biden affirmed his sharpness behind the scenes and emphasized his unique policy convictions, though critics speculated that his age undermined his political standing. Biden’s physicians publicly affirmed his fitness, attributing physical limitations to manageable conditions. Public perception, however, remained skeptical, with most Americans expressing concerns about his ability to serve effectively into his eighties.

The June 2024 presidential debate marked a crisis for President Biden’s re-election campaign as he visibly struggled on stage, appearing frail and often incoherent. Former President Trump, his opponent, seized on these difficulties, fueling concerns about Biden’s capacity to serve another term. Panic among Democratic leaders and donors intensified, with some pushing Biden to reconsider his candidacy. Secretary of State Antony Blinken had a candid conversation with Biden, urging him to consider his legacy and decide whether he was prepared for another four years in office. Although Biden affirmed his determination, acknowledging both his accomplishments and his deep personal investment in defeating Trump, he appeared open to a thorough assessment of his options.

On July 13, 2024, an attempted assassination of former President Trump took place at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania, with Trump narrowly escaping serious injury after being grazed by a bullet. Although the event rattled Trump and impacted his family, he publicly used it as a rallying moment, calling for resilience and unity. At the Republican National Convention, Trump initially presented a more conciliatory message but soon reverted to combative rhetoric, framing the election as a battle for the nation’s survival. Shortly afterward, President Biden, following a poor debate performance and increasing pressure regarding his age, announced his withdrawal from the race, endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee. This unexpected endorsement of Harris unified the Democratic Party, mirroring Biden’s desire to prevent factional discord.

In July 2024, CIA Director Bill Burns detailed mounting global security risks, with a primary focus on potential ISIS-K terrorist attacks on US soil. Intelligence indicated a significant threat from ISIS-K, with incidents already averted in Europe and a recent deadly attack in Russia illustrating the group’s growing reach. Burns was also deeply concerned with increased instability in the Middle East, specifically the volatile Israel-Gaza conflict and the potential for broader regional conflict. Domestic risks of “lone wolf” radicalized individuals, coupled with sophisticated threats from adversaries like Iran and North Korea, added to Burns’ “interrupted sleep.” He noted potential dangers arising from the intersection of artificial intelligence with advanced weaponry, raising profound concerns for national security.

In July 2024, as President Biden’s withdrawal from the race directed media attention to Vice President Kamala Harris, the Trump campaign quickly shifted focus to target her with renewed criticism. Trump and his communications director, Jason Miller, aimed to portray Harris as unprepared and radically liberal while contrasting her perceived incompetence with Trump’s touted leadership. During a rally, Trump mocked Harris’s racial identity, sparking criticism from both parties and minimal response from Harris, who dismissed the remarks as divisive. Trump’s campaign continued to refine their messaging, branding the election as a critical choice to restore order and stability under Trump’s leadership.

On July 25, 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris met with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Harris underscored her support for Israel’s security but warned that anti-Israel sentiment in the US was growing due to the Gaza conflict. Netanyahu assured her of efforts to improve conditions in Gaza, despite acknowledging issues with sanitation and the humanitarian crisis. After the meeting, Harris criticized Israel’s actions more strongly in public, calling for a ceasefire and denouncing civilian suffering. Netanyahu felt that this public shift could endanger hostage negotiations and was frustrated by the mixed messaging from US leadership, particularly when contrasted with Biden’s more supportive tone in a separate meeting. This dual approach—Harris’s tougher stance in public and diplomatic tone in private—reflected a new level of American complexity in dealing with Israeli Palestinian issues.

This chapter explores Trump’s ongoing relationship with Vladimir Putin and how his campaign planned to leverage foreign policy experience in the 2024 election. An aide recounted multiple phone calls between Trump and Putin, which remain largely secretive. Trump publicly claimed that he could end the Ukraine war before taking office by applying pressure on Putin and Zelensky. Campaign advisor Jason Miller emphasized that Trump was well aware of the “pressure points,” suggesting that Trump believed he could influence international relations independently. Intelligence officials, including CIA Director Bill Burns, expressed concern over Trump’s uncritical stance toward authoritarian leaders like Putin. Burns described Putin as a master manipulator, and former National Intelligence Director Dan Coats reflected on the “enigma” of Trump’s behavior toward the Russian leader, hinting at concerns over undue influence or manipulation. Through these interactions, Trump appeared to cultivate a narrative of decisive foreign influence, despite warnings from intelligence professionals about his untested approach.

Tensions in the Middle East escalated sharply in late July 2024 as Israeli actions against key militant leaders sparked renewed conflict. After a deadly Israeli strike in Beirut on Fuad Shukr, Hezbollah’s top commander, which also resulted in civilian casualties, President Biden angrily questioned Prime Minister Netanyahu’s methods, concerned about Israel’s global image. Hours later, Israel assassinated Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, prompting Iran to vow retaliation. These moves derailed a months-long, delicate negotiation for a ceasefire, drawing condemnation from international figures and heightening anti-Israel sentiment. While Netanyahu defended Israel’s stance as a response to direct threats, officials like Jake Sullivan and Antony Blinken scrambled to prevent regional escalation. US defense measures intensified, with two aircraft carriers and additional fighter squadrons deployed to support Israel. Sullivan emphasized that despite Israeli action, the US remained committed to stabilizing the situation through a ceasefire as the only sustainable solution.

In the Epilogue, Woodward reflects on his experience of documenting the Biden administration’s national security efforts, contrasting it with his work on past administrations marked by corruption and misuse of power. He observes that Biden and his national security team—including Jake Sullivan, Tony Blinken, Lloyd Austin, Bill Burns, Avril Haines, and Mark Milley—have approached their responsibilities with a high degree of collaboration, experience, and integrity. Woodward highlights that Biden’s administration has prioritized intelligence-driven decisions, especially concerning the Ukraine conflict and de-escalating tensions in the Israel-Gaza situation. Although acknowledging the presence of setbacks, Woodward ultimately suggests that Biden’s team may be remembered for its stability and commitment to the national interest.