US Senate Democrat Chris Murphy on Iran War

Summary

Podcast Summary: Amanpour – US Senate Democrat Chris Murphy on Iran War

Podcast: Amanpour (CNN International)
Date: March 4, 2026
Host: Christiane Amanpour
Episode Theme:
Amanpour brings together leading voices to examine the rationale, fallout, and lack of clarity behind the US-Israel war on Iran. Senator Chris Murphy delivers a blistering critique of the Trump administration's policy and communication, while Saudi Arabia’s Prince Turki Al Faisal and Britain’s Sir John Sawyers provide Middle Eastern and European perspectives on the conflict, its risks, and the shifting alliances.

---

1. Main Theme and Purpose

The episode scrutinizes the US and Israeli military campaign against Iran, highlighting the absence of clear objectives, public support, and exit strategy—all while Iran escalates its regional retaliation. Christiane Amanpour probes Democratic Senator Chris Murphy on Congressional oversight, the administration’s coherence, and the dangerous regional ripple effects. Perspectives from Saudi Arabia and the UK round out an urgent discussion about the war’s logic, legitimacy, and possible endgame.

---

2. Key Discussion Points & Insights

A. The Incoherent Rationale and Plan for War

[02:58–06:07]

• Murphy describes confusion within the administration over the war’s purpose and goals, citing mixed messages from President Trump and Secretary of State Rubio:

  "Donald Trump has one story and Marco Rubio has another. Rubio says we got dragged into the war by Israel... Trump says no, in fact, we dragged Israel into this war... It's really unclear to me, even after having sat in the briefing yesterday, why we entered the war and what the goals are."
  (Murphy, 03:21)

• Suggests the war may be ongoing for “months, if not the better part of this year,” with no visible exit strategy.

B. Regime Change or Just Endless Bombing?

[04:49–06:07]

• While regime change rhetoric dominates, Murphy notes that neither the US nor Israel seems willing or able to support an actual regime transition.
• Without support for Iranian protesters, sustained bombing appears as the only strategy, leading to a potential endless conflict:

  "That seems to be the administration's plan right now. That's a recipe for almost endless war in the region. That... would be shocking to the American people."
  (Murphy, 05:37)

C. Public Support and Political Fallout

[06:07–07:24]

• American public support for the war is low—about 30%, and likely to fall as casualties and economic costs mount.
• Murphy predicts severe political consequences for President Trump:

  “This is going to become maybe the most unpopular military engagement in the history of the country... nobody in America wants this war.”
  (Murphy, 06:53)

D. The Fate of Iranian Protesters

[07:24–09:44]

• Trump and Netanyahu have called on Iranians to protest, but Murphy sharply criticizes the lack of real support:

  “If we are going to encourage the Iranian people to come out on the streets and then pull the rug out from under them, not give them the support that they need... There could be a slaughter afoot because the Iranian people think that the United States has their back.”
  (Murphy, 08:20)

E. White House Incompetence and Changing Rationales

[09:44–10:38]

• Murphy labels the administration “incompetent and incoherent,” noting a pattern of changing war rationales and a lack of preparedness:

  “Every single day, Donald Trump gives a different rationale for the war... This is just what happens when you have a senile old man surrounded by a bunch of incompetent sycophants making decisions as serious as war in the Middle East.”
  (Murphy, 09:51)

F. Lack of Planning for Succession in Iran

[10:38–13:08]

• Amanpour and Murphy lament the lack of a post-war plan, warning the successor to the Ayatollah may be even worse:

  “The most likely outcome is what Trump just told reporters... this is going to end up with the Iranians being even more capable and more lethal.”
  (Murphy, 12:03)

G. US Interests and Congressional Inaction

[13:08–17:35]

• Murphy argues the war is against American interests—risking greater extremism, economic pain, evaporating regional support, and undermining Israel's future security.
• He asserts Congress must debate authorization and threatens to block Senate proceedings until such a debate occurs:

  “Our leverage as Democrats in the Senate is to just say simply this. We're not going to vote to proceed to any other legislation... until we have a debate on an authorization of military force.”
  (Murphy, 16:48)

H. Evacuations and Administrative Failures

[17:35–20:15]

• Amanpour and Murphy ridicule the lack of U.S. plans to evacuate citizens from the region:

  “You have children, you have people who just were like MAGA trolls online holding significant positions... Of course... the hotline says, do not call us. We have no plans to help you because you got 22-year-olds who are in charge of this business.”
  (Murphy, 18:56)

---

I. White House Messaging – Carolyn Levitt Statement

[20:31–24:28]

• Levitt lays out new official war aims:
  1. Destroy missile industry
  2. Annihilate Iranian navy
  3. End regime proxy warfare
  4. Guarantee Iran “can never obtain a nuclear weapon”
• Asserts operation is a “resounding success,” citing destruction of “more than 2,000 targets,” no Iranian ships in major waterways, and claims of diplomatic outreach before choosing war.
• Blames Iran for rejecting peace and resistance to “generous” U.S. offers.

---

3. Regional Perspective – Prince Turki Al Faisal (Saudi Arabia)

[28:22–42:14]

• Expresses skepticism that bombing will stop Iranian activity; predicts a long conflict due to Iran’s preparation and stockpiles.
• Lays out three “apocalyptic” regional agendas: Israel’s Greater Israel, Iran’s Messianic vision, and US Christian Zionism – warning the Gulf states are caught between all three:

  "We're facing two agendas, both of them apocalyptic... and the third agenda... is the Christian Zionist agenda..."
  (Prince Turki Al Faisal, 29:14)

• Denies the claim that Saudi Crown Prince MbS encouraged the US to attack Iran, suggesting Israeli disinformation.
• Justifies Saudi moves for self-reliance in defense, recounts the US' lack of support in past Iranian missile attacks.
• On US bases: Indicates Gulf states are rethinking reliance on American protection; Saudi Arabia expanding homegrown military industry and pushing for a pan-Gulf defense command.
• On regime change: Dismisses possibility of Iran’s collapse; stresses only the Iranian people can effect such change, but sees no short-term prospects.
• On Israel-Saudi normalization: Now “off the table”; stresses Netanyahu is driving the conflict for domestic reasons, including stalling scrutiny over Gaza/West Bank actions and Israeli constitutional changes:

  “Forget normalization... Netanyahu has been trying to do this in order to get away from the murky and terrible conduct that he led Israel into...”
  (Prince Turki Al Faisal, 41:05)

---

4. European Perspective – Sir John Sawyers (UK former MI6 Chief)

[43:22–58:28]

• Critiques the US-led war as “unnecessary,” driven less by security threats and more by Israeli interests in regime change for Iran.

  “This is an unnecessary war. It was not required... The rationale, to the extent that there is one, is that it secures Israel for decades to come...”
  (Sawyers, 47:14)

• Warns of dangerous, chaotic scenarios if the Islamic Republic collapses, likening the possible outcome to Syria or Libya, with specters of failed states and refugee crises.
• Doubts US willingness to support Iranian protesters or a “no-fly zone.” Cautions against “unwise” encouragement for Iranians to rise up without robust, realistic aid.
• Highlights the difference between American and Israeli calculations: US wants a stable Iran; Israel appears to prefer chaos.
• Warns of NATO escalation after Iranian missiles land near Turkey, and the wider regional impact—including Gulf countries’ alarm.
• Expects the US administration to eventually define victory as the destruction of Iran’s missile and nuclear capacity, then seek a quick exit:

  “I think that will end up being the goal of the US administration... we'll wake up one morning and find it suddenly being finished. And I think that would be a sensible thing to do.”
  (Sawyers, 55:23)

• Emphasizes the tragic fate for Iranian protesters, who are left unsupported and exposed to repression.

---

5. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Sen. Murphy on Administration Coherence:
  "This is about as incoherent, incompetent and confusing a rollout of military action overseas as I've ever seen." (03:51)
• On American Public Opinion:
  "Nobody in America wants this war." (06:53)
• On Fate of Iranian Protesters:
  "There could be a slaughter afoot because the Iranian people think that the United States has their back. But Donald Trump, I don't think, has any intention to go that far." (08:20)
• On Administrative Competence:
  "You have children, you have people who just were like MAGA trolls online holding significant positions... Of course... the hotline says, do not call us. We have no plans to help you..." (18:56)
• Prince Turki on Regional Realities:
  "The dangers of expanding and widening the conflict exist at the moment, and there has to be a stop to it. Unfortunately, I don't think that the bombing campaign... is going to put a stop to that." (28:45)
• Sir John Sawyers on Dangers of Regime Change:
  "Just as dangerous is the possibility that the regime might corrode or collapse... you could have a situation like the one we faced in Syria..." (47:52)
• On Encouraging Uprisings:
  "It was as unwise of Trump to call on the Iranian people to rise up as it was unwise of George H.W. Bush to call on the Iraqi people to rise up..." (50:06)
• On the Risks Ahead:
  "Once you start a conflict like this, you may think it's only going to last four or five days or four or five weeks. But it has a habit of the reverberations spreading much more widely." (53:14)

---

6. Key Timestamps

• 00:00–02:58 – Amanpour’s introduction and framing.
• 02:58–17:35 – Interview with Senator Chris Murphy.
• 20:31–24:28 – White House press secretary Carolyn Levitt outlines official objectives.
• 28:22–42:14 – Interview with Prince Turki Al Faisal.
• 43:22–58:28 – Interview with Sir John Sawyers (MI6, UK).
• 58:33–End – Cultural collateral damage.

---

7. Overall Tone

The tone is urgent, analytical, and deeply critical of US and Israeli strategic planning. With pointed skepticism from both Democratic policymakers and international experts, the episode voices alarm about “rolling rationales,” political expediency, regional escalation, and the profound dangers facing both civilians and the region’s stability.

---

For listeners seeking to understand the rapidly evolving Iran conflict, this episode provides a sobering, multidimensional examination of the motives, missteps, and strategic stakes that define the current war.

Transcript

[Christiane Amanpour]

Foreign. And welcome to Amanpour. Here's what's coming up. Conflicting rationales, moving goalposts and still no day after plan as the latest US Israel war on Iran expands. I asked Senate Democrat Chris Murphy, has the US Got into something it doesn't know how to get out of? Then Saudi Arabia, one of America's key Gulf partners risks being drawn into the fray. Prince Turki Al Faisal, the Saudi former intelligence chief joins and the former British intelligence chief Sir John Sawyers also as fractures appear between Washington and close allies. Welcome to the program everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. Israel is conducting yet another wave of strikes across Iran and Lebanon while the US Says its heaviest attacks are still to come. Here's Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

I stand before you today with one unmistakable message about Operation Epic Fury. America is winning decisively, devastatingly and without mercy.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Chilling. But five days in, the Trump administration is trying to project a clear and unified message after failing quite spectacularly to answer basic questions about the mission, including its objective justification, day after plan and exit strategy. It's being called a war of choice by many since there was no imminent Iranian threat, according to experts and analysts. It was launched without approval from Congress and with most Americans opposed according to polls. Tehran meantime is widening the scope of its retaliation. And every hour US allies in the region are at greater risk of being drawn in. Earlier NATO ally Turkey reported that the NATO air defense systems shot down an Iranian missile that was headed for its airspace. Inside Iran, civilians are paying the highest price. More than 1,000 people have been killed according to a U. S based human rights group that includes 168 children killed in a strike on a girls elementary school. In the opening salvos, this video shows the lines of graves where they have now been buried. Israel and the United States say they are investigating this incident. The Democratic Senator Chris Murphy is on the Foreign Relations Committee and he was amongst a group of senators the whole chamber briefed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Tuesday evening. He joined me earlier from Capitol Hill to just ahead of the Senate vote on whether to authorize this war. Senator Murphy, welcome back to the program.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Yeah, thanks for having me.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Can I just ask you because there has been I think an attempt to have a different kind of unified messaging, a unified rationale. Certainly from the Pentagon we heard Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth say America is winning decisively, devastatingly and without mercy. What is your understanding of the progress of this war on Iran?

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Well, first of all, I have no idea why we entered this war because Donald Trump has one story and Marco Rubio has another story. Rubio says we got dragged into the war by Israel. He's effectively said that, that this was a defensive action because we worried there was going to be an attack on the United States. Donald Trump says no, in fact, we dragged Israel into this war. They have lots of different goals. They seem to be targeting the nuclear program, the missile program. Trump seems to be talking pretty regularly about regime change, cheerleading the Iranian people to come out into the streets. It's really unclear to me, even after having sat in the briefing yesterday, why we entered the war and what the goals are. It looks as if it's pretty open ended that we may be at war with Iran, bombing Iran for months, if not the better part of this year. This is about as incoherent, incompetent and confusing a rollout of military action overseas as I've ever seen.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Can I just stop you there and pick up on what you just said? Months or the better part of the rest of this year? That's 11 months, to be precise. Israel, as we know, has done that in Gaza for two years after October 7th. You think that the United States is capable of bombing a country for a whole nother year?

[Senator Chris Murphy]

So this is what I heard yesterday, though. Donald Trump has talked about regime change and certainly Israel is talking about regime change. And of course this has to be a regime change operation because they specifically targeted the ayatollah and many people surrounding him. It doesn't actually seem like we care too much about who runs the country. Our intelligence services acknowledge that it'll be hardliners that will still be committed to provocation in the region and rebuilding a missile program and rebuilding a nuclear program. And it doesn't appear that we are going to support the Iranian people in their efforts to overtake the regime and start a transition to democracy. So if that's all true, the only way that you can stop Iran from restarting its missile program, restarting its nuclear program, restarting its drone program, is to be constantly bombing Iran. Every time they try to start a new drone factory, you bomb that factory. That seems to be the administration's plan right now. That's a recipe for almost endless war in the region. That's, I think, would be shocking to the American people. But I don't really know any other way to read their strategy or their explanation of their strategy.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Senator, do you think if you've looked at the polls right, you know what the American people are thinking? What are they thinking? You know, often When a country goes to war, people rally around the flag, et cetera. Are they doing that? What are, what are your polls telling you?

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Well, I mean, people have no idea why we're at war with Iran. The president did, you know, absolutely no work at explaining the American people why this was a, you know, even back in the Iraq war days, though, that was never, you know, that ended up being a very unpopular war. The president explained it to the American people. Donald Trump hasn't told folks why we're doing this. It's going to be increasingly unpopular. It's already supported BY Only maybe 30% of the American public. But as prices continue to go up, oil prices, the price of groceries go up, as more Americans get killed, and we were told in no uncertain terms yesterday in the briefing that more Americans are going to die. This is going to become maybe the most unpopular military engagement in the history of the country. And a president whose approval ratings are already around 30% are going to plummet into the 20s and the teens. This shouldn't be about politics, but nobody in America wants this war. And even fewer who just back the president on whatever he does because he's their guy are going to be along for this ride in the long run.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Senator, you mentioned the Iranian people, and of course, we all watch what happened in late December, early January. The demonstrations, the brutal crackdown, the killing of thousands of Iranian protesters. The president clearly, and so did Netanyahu, call on them to rise up. That's the prime minister of Israel, and that help would be on the way. The president and Netanyahu again asked them and called on them to do that once the war had already started on Saturday. What did you hear from Secretary Rubio about the commitment to helping the Iranian people, if indeed they do take America up on what it's urging them to do, and that is protest and try to overthrow their regime.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

So it appears to me that we are not willing, that the Trump administration is not willing, based upon the comments that they have made to us, to support the Iranian people in their efforts to depose this regime and start a transition to a democracy. And that is unforgivable, given the fact that, as you mentioned, Donald Trump has told the Iranian people to get out into the streets. But if they go out into the streets, they are going to be slaughtered. The Iranian military is still very powerful. We maybe have taken out their missile capability, but we haven't taken out their ability to wage war domestically on the streets of Iran. And if we are going to encourage the Iranian people to come out on the streets and then pull the rug out from under them, not give them the support that they need. And by the way, an air campaign doesn't help them in, you know, peaceful protests. That would have to be American ground forces. It seems that we are readying to leave the Iranian people out to dry, that we're gonna tell them, get out on the streets, and then we're gonna give them no support. Reminiscent of Hungary during the Cold War, Iraq in the 1990s. There could be a slaughter afoot because the Iranian people think that the United States has their back. But Donald Trump, I don't think, has any intention to go that far.

[Christiane Amanpour]

That would be a terrible betrayal. Senator, the president has stood up in public over and again, urging them and promising them help is on the way. I know that Hegseth yesterday said, this is not about regime change. So what's changed, do you think?

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Well, I don't think anything has changed. They're just incompetent and incoherent. I mean, I think every single day, Donald Trump gives a different rationale for the war. This is just what happens when you have, you know, a senile old man surrounded by a bunch of incompetent sycophants making decisions as serious as war in the Middle East. One day they say the Iranian people get out there, take over the government. The next day they say, actually, we don't care who's in charge of Iran. If you want to go out there and try to take out this regime, Iranian people, you're on your own. I think the rhetoric will flip another six times between now and next Monday. That's just what you get when you have, you know, I mean, people who just aren't up for the job. When you have a talk show host running the Department of Defense, well, you know, you have.

[Christiane Amanpour]

That's pretty, you know, direct in their face. But to be frank, a lot of people are wondering who's thinking what because of what you describe in the, you know, in the center of the White House and the Pentagon and the State Department. In a press briefing yesterday, actually, with Chancellor Merz, one of his key European allies, he spoke to what you also talked about. They don't really care or know what or have a plan for who might take over. At first, he was asked about Reza Pahlavi, the son of the late shah, who's positioned himself as a leading opposition figure. Trump sort of brushed him aside and said it would be better to talk to and to deal with somebody from the inside. But then he said this. Listen to his Worst case scenario.

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

I guess the worst case would be we do this and then somebody takes over who's as bad as the previous person. Right. That could happen. We don't want that to happen. That would probably be the worst. You go through this and then in five years you realize you put somebody in who was no better.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I mean honestly, it beggars belief. I mean I literally cannot believe it.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Yeah, I mean that's the, that's actually the most likely scenario. I mean the Ayatollah was an evil human being, but he was a old man who didn't have functional control of the country. His obsolescence was not coincidental to Iran's diminishing influence in the region. And so what have we done here? We've taken out an 80 year old guy who really had little control over the Iranian infrastructure, who was losing influence in the region. And we've given the IRGC the ability to put someone in charge of who's much more competent and perhaps is able to, as MBS did in Saudi Arabia, take a very diffuse leadership system and decision making system and consolidate it. I mean the most likely outcome is what Trump just told reporters in that press conference, that this is going to end up with the Iranians being even more capable and even more lethal. And again, the only way to stop that from happening is to run a 24 7, 365 day a year trillion dollar bombing campaign over the skies of Iran. That is something we can't afford as a country and something the American people don't want.

[Christiane Amanpour]

It's, it's really hard to listen to this because it goes against all the things that the administration told us, that the Israelis told us. I want to just go back to what you said at the beginning. I think you said that, you know, and Trump and Rubio had different things to say about who's wagging the dog, so to speak. Is this Trump being rolled or rumbled by Netanyahu or is it Trump going willingly along with Netanyahu? Is this in the best Israeli interest or the best American interest? What's happening right now? Because we're hearing that some of the causus belli is delineated by the, by the administration is based not on fact. They do not have the Iranians intercontinental ballistic missiles to reach the U.S. they hadn't been deemed to have restarted in a significant way. Their nuclear program after the destruction which Trump said had obliterated it in the summer. So they do have these regional ballistic missiles. What can you tell us about in whose interest this is well, it's certainly

[Senator Chris Murphy]

not in American interests, especially if at the end of this process, somebody emerges in Iran that's even worse than the Ayatollah. It's not in our interest that we are evacuating US citizens right now from 14 different countries without a plan. It's not in our interest that ultimately extremism is going to grow because of our decision to take out the holy leader of the Shia people in the middle of the month of Ramadan. It's not in our interest to for prices to go up in the United States at the pumps, at the grocery store because of this war. No, there's nothing about this war that's in our interest. I frankly don't think it's in the interest in the long run of Israel either. They should be working on midwifing a Palestinian state into existence. That is the only way that Israel lives in peace with the Palestinian people. Constant war, constant provocation leading to tens of thousands of civilians dying in Gaza, the West bank and in Iran ultimately just stirs up a hornet's nest which is going to be a perpetual problem for Israel. This is in neither of those, those countries interests, ours or Israel's. I don't know who led who into war here. There are definitely people around Donald Trump who want this war. Maybe Netanyahu pushed him into it. Maybe Trump was trying to distract from rising prices and the fact that he's probably at the middle of the biggest child sex scandal in the history of the country. I can't see inside that room. I just know that this is a really bad outcome. Whoever pushed, whoever else into it for the United States and Israel.

[Christiane Amanpour]

So that latter reference was to the Epstein files and the ongoing investigations. But let me ask you, because you are a member, a senior member of Senate, the Congress has a responsibility and the tools to actually authorize war or not. Why haven't you done it? I know there's going to be some kind of vote on the War Powers act or whatever, whatever form that takes. What is the best outcome that you think that you can do to actually exert your own responsibilities?

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Well, Congress has to have a debate on an authorization of war. I don't actually think that that would pass. I don't think Trump would be able to get enough Republicans to proactively vote to go into an open ended war with Iran because the American people on the right and the left would rise up against it. And it is the responsibility of the leaders of the Senate and the House, and they are Republicans, to bring that debate before the Senate if they don't. Our leverage as Democrats in the Senate is to just say simply this. We're not going to vote to proceed to any other legislation. We're not going to let any other bill come before the Senate until we have a debate on an authorization of military force that would potentially end this war because it would fail. A war powers resolution, which is what Senator Kaine has brought before the Senate, is insufficient. I will vote for it. I supported Senator Kaine, but the presumption cannot be on the opponents of war to bring a war powers resolution that says the President has to stop. No, the presumption is on the proponents of war to not start a war unless they have a proactive authorization from Congress. So we shouldn't proceed with business as usual in the Senate until we have a debate on an authorization.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And finally, to go back to one of the words you used to describe the administration, one is incompetent. My own question is the, that there appears to be a lot of surprise within the administration about Iran's response. Even though Iran telegraphed up and down for weeks that American interests in the region would be targeted. And so indeed they have been. Allies of the United States have been targeted. But also the panic that I read as panic of the American authorities telling their American citizens to, to leave the region, but, oh, we won't help you, we can't help you. You have to do it on your own, was to me, a very fundamental signifier. And then we see this State Department hotline as of yesterday, I think it's been changed now. But as of just a few hours or a day ago, this is what people calling the State Department hotline would have heard. If you are calling about the crisis

[Senator Chris Murphy]

in the Middle east, please press 1.

[Christiane Amanpour]

If not, press 2.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Please do not rely on the US

[Christiane Amanpour]

government for assisted departure or evacuation at this time.

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

There are currently no United States evacuation points. Please continue to check the embassy's website

[Carolyn Levitt]

for updated information in the event of ongoing military action.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Oh, what does that say to you?

[Senator Chris Murphy]

I mean, again, I know we're used to covering administrations that make mistakes, that are basically competent. I mean, the underlying story here is a White House and a Department of Defense that have no idea what they're doing on an hour to hour basis. You have children, you have people who just were like MAGA trolls online holding significant positions in the American national security infrastructure. And so of course, the day that the Iranian bombs and missiles start falling on American targets in the Middle east, the hotline says, do not call us. We have no plans to help you because you got 22 year olds who are in charge of this business. I know it's hard to hear for Americans, but that's the reality. And apparently they are now scurrying to try to get some Americans out, but they're going to have a hard time because they frankly should have gotten Americans out before the bombing. Everybody knew what was about to happen. It wasn't like this was a big secret. Carrier groups were poised to strike. They could have spent that week ahead of the strikes getting Americans out of harm's way. And now you may have American civilians, not just American soldiers, dying because of the gross incompetence of this administration. That should make people in this country furious.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Senator Murphy, thank you very much indeed for joining us.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Thank you.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Now, I said earlier that a new messaging plan has been ordered by the administration. And now the White House press secretary, Carolyn Levitt, is speaking. So let's listen in for a bit.

[Carolyn Levitt]

Developing nuclear bombs. After years of endless appeasement and empty statements from politicians on both sides of the political aisle in this town, President Trump is finally the man of action. President Trump is holding, holding these monsters accountable and permanently extinguishing their nuclear ambitions. Future generations of Americans will look to this moment as the moment where the specter of a nuclear armed Iran ended. At the beginning of Operation Epic Fury, launched last weekend, President Trump laid out clear objectives to the American people on what the US Military seeks to accomplish through these major combat operations. Number one, destroy the regime's deadly ballistic missiles and completely raise their missile industry to the ground. Number two, annihilate the Iranian regime's navy. And so far, we have destroyed more than 20 Iranian ships, including their top submarine last night using a torpedo. For the first time Since World War II, there is not a single Iranian ship underway in the Arabian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz or the Gulf of Oman. Number three, Operation Epic Fury will ensure the regime's terrorist proxies in the region can no longer destabilize the region or the free world and attack our armed forces. And thus far, Iran's proxies are hardly putting up a fight. Number four, this mission will guarantee that Iran can never obtain a nuclear weapon. It's safe to say that thus far, Operation Epic Fury has been a resounding success. American forces have struck more than 2,000 targets, destroying hundreds and hundreds of ballistic missiles, launchers and drones. As the Department of War said this morning, we expect to have complete and total dominance over Iranian airspace in the coming hours. Clearing the skies for our brave warriors to continue achieving these noble and long sought after objectives. There's been a lot of misreporting and intellectual dishonesty from the American media on why President Trump decided to launch this operation. So let me remind you, Operation Midnight Hammer, which took place last June, obliterated Iran's three major nuclear sites. Yet the terrorist Iranian regime has remained fully committed to rebuilding its nuclear program. How do we know this? Because Iran has pursued this path of war and violence, despite President Trump dispatching two of his top and most trusted negotiators to engage in exhaustive and good faith negotiations to try and reach a deal. And the world knows this president's preference is always peace and diplomacy first. Look no further than the eight additional global conflicts he has ended in the past year. Proof. Unfortunately, the terrorist Iranian regime refused to negotiate in good faith. They chose this path of violence and destruction, and they are reaping the consequences of their horrible decision. The regime did what they always have done. They'd lied. They delayed. They tried to string the United States of America along. They wanted to buy themselves time to continue building ballistic missiles and other deadly weaponry that could harm our US Personnel and troops in the region and to continue aggressively pursuing their unacceptable nuclear ambitions. US Negotiators offered to lift crippling sanctions on Iran and even provide nuclear fuel to Iran at no cost to support a civil nuclear power program. They additionally had the opportunity to accept U.S. support as an investor in potential projects to develop peaceful nuclear energy together under a mutually agreed upon framework. Yet in response, Iran would have to forfeit their enrichment capacity once and for all. But Iran rejected. They accepted none of these generous and unprecedented offers by the United States.

[Christiane Amanpour]

The view from the White House. As we said, they're trying to come up with a consolidated message. Unfortunately, there's a bit of blame the messenger involved there, but we've been monitoring very carefully the rolling rationale for this war and the lack of exit strategy. And now you're hearing it from the White House. How they're trying to consolidate. One thing to be said is that according to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Iranian response with its missiles has been significantly degraded. It's significantly dropped, according to the US Chiefs of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. So stay with us. We'll be right back after the break. Hey, everyone, it's Audie, and I've got another special episode of the Assignment for you. I was at the podcast festival known as On Air Fest that was in Brooklyn just last week.

[Carolyn Levitt]

And for this, I knew I wanted

[Christiane Amanpour]

to bring along a friend because we're going to talk about work, spouses and mine for a very long time was Ari Shapiro of npr.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

You heard us on the radio being very serious. And during the eight minute segment when our mics are off, we would cackle about the latest thing that we had found on Reddit or on Instagram or whatever was bubbling up in the culture.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And we never really got to laugh

[Senator Chris Murphy]

like that with each other and finish each other's sentences on the radio in quite that way.

[Christiane Amanpour]

No. Listen to the assignment with me, Audie Cornish. Streaming now on your favorite podcast app.

[Carolyn Levitt]

I'm CNN tech reporter Claire Duffy. This week on the podcast Terms of Service, I often hear questions about how to keep our parents and grandparents empowered with access to technology to help us out with ways to protect our older loved ones. Online, I have Tazeen Khan here with me. She is the founder and CEO of a nonprofit called Cyber Collective which helps make people Internet street smart. These scammers do a lot of high volume rinse and repeat scrubbing through these lists to see who has a vulnerability, who never changed their password. The biggest one is slowing down. If you're getting an email or a text message from UPS and you don't have a package that you ordered and you're not expecting anything from UPS, probably shouldn't click that link. Listen to CNN's terms of service wherever you get your podcasts.

[Christiane Amanpour]

We turn now to the havoc raining down on America's allies in the Gulf. The US has closed its embassies in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Lebanon and is telling Americans to leave now. After an outcry over a State Department over telling Americans not to rely on the government for assistance, the State Department now says the US Is committed to helping. Meantime, as Iran continues to target energy infrastructure, the price of oil and gas is rising. Qatar's biggest gas producer has decided to stop production and exports are effectively halted for now. China is warning now the war is threatening global energy supplies. Oil. Overnight, Saudi Arabia intercepted and destroyed two cruise missiles as well as nine drones. That's according to their state media. The CIA station in Riyadh was also hit this week and the US Embassy was struck by two suspected Iranian drones. The kingdom has condemned Tehran's, quote, flagrant behavior and says it, quote, reserves the option to respond. Prince Turki Al Faisal is Saudi Arabia's former intelligence chief and a former ambassador to Washington and London, and he's joining us now from Riyadh. Prince Turkey, welcome back to the program. We always seek your wisdom and your knowledge, even though you're not a government official. So let me ask you what you think Saudi Arabia is going to do and why you think Iran is targeting Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states.

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

Thank you very much, Ms. Amanpour. It's always good to be back with you. I watched the first section of your show and it was very informative. On the American side of what is happening, the Kingdom has plainly stated its rejection of all of the Iranian activity that is taking place in the area, not only against Saudi Arabia, but against the whole Gulf states and even farther afield. As you mentioned in your former section of the event, even Turkey has been at least a missile went into its airspace. So the dangers of expanding and widening the conflict exist at the moment, and there has to be a stop to it. Unfortunately, I don't think that the bombing campaign that the Americans and the Israelis have begun is going to put a stop to that. Whatever information I have, which I glean from published accounts and statements from officials, is that the Iranians are pretty well stocked with missiles and drones and have been preparing for this kind of eventuality, not only by the time of the last conflict in June, but even from before that. So we're in for a long haul, if you like, not just on the American side, but also on the Iranian side. One thing I must make clear, Ms. Amanpour, is that here in the area, we're facing two agendas, one, both of them apocalyptic, one from Israel, which is the Greater Israel agenda. This has been talked about by Netanyahu and by other Israeli officials. Israel wants to expand from the Nile river to the Euphrates. And the other one, of course, is the Iranian agenda, which is the return of the absent imam who disappeared something like seven or eight centuries ago, and he will come back and make the world a peaceful place and, and prepare for the coming of Christ. The third agenda that is affecting us and which has impact in the United States and in other places is the Christian Zionist agenda, which wants to see a return of the Messiah and the existence of Israel in their theology and their terminology is necessary for that to happen. So where are the, if you like, in the middle of these three agendas that are operating to expand their vision onto the rest of us. And the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, of course, works with its Gulf allies to try to put a stop to all this bloodshed and carnage that is taking place.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I just want to pick up on what you said about the apocalyptic visions because you've mentioned, you know, from the Israeli perspective, from the Iranian perspective, and from the American perspective, and and in fact, this week, there have been reports and complaints by many American officers and soldiers through their chain of command about being told that US Troops war on Iran is part of Armageddon. So that's what they have been told in some of their. In some of their units and in some of their bases by their commanding officers. So that goes to what you just said. But I want to ask you this. The Washington Post has reported that your Crown Prince, mbs, was privately urging Trump to actually attack Iran. Now, Saudi Arabia denies this, but what do you think? There's no love lost between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It's clear that everybody, including Gulf states, including the US And Israel, thought that Iran had been pretty fatally wounded and crippled by all the activity against it over the last year. Do you think it would have been a message from MBS to go ahead and do this?

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

I doubt it very much. You know, the kingdom's leadership has consistently always held to their public positions in private sessions with other officials, including with Mr. Trump. And when the Crown Prince was in Washington, I'm sure they discussed all these issues and he laid things bare on that issue. At that time, of course, the conflict in Iran had not yet started, but definitely it must have arisen in the discussions. And, you know, American media seems to contradict itself. I think a couple of weeks ago, there were reports that Saudi Arabia was aligning itself with Iran against Israel. And now we see they're saying that Saudi Arabia is urging America to bomb Iran. So I think there is disinformation being spread, unfortunately, I think, by Israeli spokespeople or officials in order to show that it is not just Israel that has been urging America to take action against Iran.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I want to ask you about what appears to be some surprise in the region, maybe in Saudi Arabia, in Qatar, some anger about the response by Iran. This is what President Trump said yesterday. Take a listen.

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

Amazingly, they're hitting countries that were, you know, let's call them neutral. Right. They lived together for a long time. They. I think they were surprised.

[Sir John Sawyers]

I was surprised.

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

I think it. And now those countries are all fighting against them and fighting strong, strongly against them.

[Christiane Amanpour]

From an intelligence point of view, I mean, Iran did basically say that it was going to hit out at these places that host, you know, American bases and hold them responsible as well. Are you surprised at the extent of Iran's retaliation?

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

Well, I am surprised at the president's surprise. Respectfully, I would recall that the Crown Prince and other Gulf readers have been urging America not to undertake military action against Iran because all of us believe that that action will not remain confined to Iran, that Iran will retaliate against American presence in the area which is present in all of the Gulf states and as far away as Turkey, apparently. So if he was surprised, I don't think Saudi or other Gulf leaders were surprised. They'd been warning the Americans not to undertake military action and suffer the consequences.

[Christiane Amanpour]

You know, for a long time Saudi leaders and other Arab leaders in the Gulf states have told their people that you're hosting American bases because it's in your interest, because it will protect you as well. Now you are being attacked as Iran signaled you would be. And I don't see much defence coming to you all. Yes, defense to Israel. But do you feel you are being defended? Is hosting American bases a long term viable situation anymore, do you think? Can you all trust America and its defensive posture for you?

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

Well, that's why I can talk about what I see is happening in Saudi Arabia. That's why Saudi Arabia has been trying to buttress and expand its military capabilities in order to be able to defend itself and developing military industry in the kingdom so that we don't have to go to the outside world like America or Europe to purchase weapons and so on. But we also work with our Gulf states partners in order to try to form some kind of common command. And that's been a long time coming. And I'm sure the present situation will hasten the formation of some kind of pan Gulf defense command to protect the Gulf states. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. You know, in the last Trump administration, back in 2019, if you remember, we were bombed by Iranian missiles at that time. And Mr. Trump at the time did not offer any support at that time. So it is no surprise for the Kingdom that he is not coming to our help, if you like. As far as I can see, I don't know what is happening on official circles, but definitely the whole issue of more bloodshed and more destruction is anathema to the kingdom.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I want to ask the kingdom is

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

on a course of social and industrial and commercial development. We want to continue on that route instead of having military conflicts in the area.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I want to ask you because let's face it, Saudi Arabia is the guardian of the Sunni faith, called the guardian of the two holy mosques. Iran is pretty much the guardian of the Shia faith. There is a clash between you two. Do you believe that the assassination of the so called supreme Leader can collapse the regime, collapse the raison d'? Etre? Do you believe that it can eventually lead to the uprising of people in Iran because Trump has moved back from regime change.

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

Well, I would put it another way. You know, the kingdom has Shia citizens as well as Sunni citizens. Iran itself has Sunni citizens as well as Shia citizens. So I would not put it so starkly as a difference between Sunnah and Shia. But definitely, I don't think that the system in Iran will collapse anytime soon. As I said, the Iranian leadership has been preparing for an eventuality like this because of what they have continued to hear from Mr. Netanyahu in the past 40 years. He has been calling for the destruction of Iran. And so the Iranians obviously, you know, took note of that and have been preparing themselves for such an eventuality. And as we see in the news already, they're in the process of electing a new so called leader to succeed Khamenei. They've already set up an interim leadership of three personalities from the leadership. So the system, I think the only way that the system will go, I think will be through the Iranian people. You know, it is they in the end who will decide what is going to happen in their country. And, you know, Mr. Murphy mentioned that, you know, President Trump promised support for the uprising that took place, et cetera, and then he backed away. And then what I found very startling, of course, is that Mr. Murphy was saying that maybe they should put troops on the ground to help the uprising against the ayatollahs. So even there is confusion on side as to what should be done.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Yeah, he didn't say put them. He said that's the only way it could because it's never happened from the air.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

But.

[Christiane Amanpour]

But I want to ask you a final and quick question. People are saying that Israel stands to be the biggest winner out of all of this. Do you think that's the case? And do you think that it makes normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia any closer?

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

Well, forget normalization, let alone what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank. You know, this is Netanyahu's war. You talked about the dog and the tail, who's wagging who? It is definitely Mr. Netanyahu, who, as you mentioned, seven trips to America and obviously he somehow convinced the President to support his views. And so Netanyahu has been trying to do this in order to get away from the murky and terrible conduct that he led Israel into, not just in Gaza, but in the West Bank. And internally, he wants to change the constitution of Israel to allow him to undertake whatever he wants to do without check. So that is why he has been pushing for this war is to drive people's attention away from what is happening on the ground in Palestine. And as I said, there is that agenda of a greater Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates. So you can imagine what that entails.

[Christiane Amanpour]

All right. Always really important to have your perspective. Prince Turki Al Faisal, thank you very much for joining us from Riyadh in Saudi Arabia. And we'll be back after this break.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

I'm Dr. Sanjay Gupta, host of the Chasing Life podcast. What if caregiving doesn't just take from us, but what if it gives something back as well?

[Carolyn Levitt]

Multitasking is the worst thing you could

[Christiane Amanpour]

do as a caregiver because the presence is the currency. That's all you can really give. You cannot control outcomes.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

At the end of the day, the presence.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And if you're multitasking, it's gonna muddy

[Carolyn Levitt]

up the whole thing.

[Christiane Amanpour]

We also don't consider care as productive in our country.

[Senator Chris Murphy]

Her book is called when youn Care, the Unexpected Magic of Caring for Others. Journalist Alyssa Strauss, the Magic of Caring for Others.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Listen to Chasing Life streaming now, wherever

[Senator Chris Murphy]

you get your podcasts.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Rifts are also opening up between Washington and its European allies, many of whom oppose the United States continuing offensive operations in Iran. Sir John Sawyers was foreign policy advisor to Prime Minister Tony Blair. He then served as UK Ambassador to the United nations and as head of the intelligence agency MI6. I asked him about the implications of Trump's fraying relationship with Europe and the apparent lack of planning beyond military strikes. Sir John Sawyers, welcome back to the program at this really critical time.

[Sir John Sawyers]

Thank you. Christiaan.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I want to ask you first, from the British perspective, Trump has now openly criticized in front of another European leader, Chancellor Mertz. Britain saying that we're not dealing with Winston Churchill. He's very angry that Prime Minister Starmer didn't allow UK Bases to be used in those first strikes by the Americans. Can I just play what Trump said?

[Prince Turki Al Faisal]

There would have been much more convenient landing there as opposed to flying many extra hours. So we are very surprised. This is not Winston Churchill that we're dealing with.

[Christiane Amanpour]

I mean, you know, dagger to the heart, evoking the great wartime leader. Obviously, then Prime Minister Star did change his position. So A, why did he change the position? And do you think it's legitimate to allow bases to be used? And B, can Britain recover? Can this prime minister recover from that kind of public attack?

[Sir John Sawyers]

Well, frankly, President Trump's not dealing with Winston Churchill and Keir Starmer's not dealing with Franklin Roosevelt. You know, you have two very different characters in the leadership positions. I think Keir Starmer took a careful look at the plans to the extent that he and the British officials understood them, and came to the conclusion that under British law, there was no legal basis for deploying our forces or for using our assets. In support of this. He's taken a slightly complicated decision that we would not support offensive action, attack on Iran. But as soon as Iran started attacking our friends and allies in the Gulf, the Omanis, the Emiratis, the Qataris and others, then we had defense obligations to those countries. And, of course, Iran also attacked the British base in Cyprus. So in purely defensive terms, he changed his approach in terms of allowing US Forces and indeed UK Forces to operate in a defensive fashion.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Okay, so do you think that stands? And it's a solid position. And again, can this prime minister, who's done his utmost in his best, bent over backwards to accommodate the very mercurial President Donald Trump and has sort of, kind of done pretty well. Do you think that this is a rupture now, or will they get over it? What do you think?

[Sir John Sawyers]

I think they'll get over it. I've heard, usually in private, sharp differences of views in the past between presidents and prime ministers. I don't think this is a major issue. And frankly, as the Americans have demonstrated, they didn't actually need access to UK Bases. It was just a convenience for them. Starmer faces political challenges from within his own party. He also is a firm believer in international law. You can question whether that's a sensible thing to elevate international law to such a high status, but that is nonetheless his position, his party's position. And look at the fallout as it affected Prime Minister BLAIR after the 2003 Iraq war. And that's in everybody's minds.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And that was actually going to be, you know, you're damned if you do, you're damned if you don't. Can I ask you about what's been described as the rolling rationales for this war and the rolling inconsistencies from all members of the administration, the senior members, from the president on down to what might be the exit strategy or any strategy?

[Sir John Sawyers]

Well, the first thing to say, Christiane, is this is an unnecessary war. It was not required because it was not as if it was to preempt an imminent threat against the United States or indeed against Israel. The rationale, to the extent that there is one, is that it secures Israel for decades to come. That's what the Israelis think, and they would like to see the end of this Islamic Republic in Iran, and they think they will be much safer as a result. And they might be right. But this will come at a cost. The very best outcome you can expect from the current conflict is that a successor leadership comes in and behaves differently from its predecessors. Now, that is what some in America are calling the Venezuela option. Not that I think it will be easy to find a Delsey Rodriguez in Iran. It's. Iran is a deeply ideological country or regime. I think just as dangerous is the possibility that the regime might corrode or collapse and lose control of parts of the country. And then you could have a situation like the one we faced in Syria for the last year or so where the country fragments into several different parts and local administrations crop up, often on an ethnic basis. There have been reports today of some activity in the Kurdish areas. We don't know exactly what it is yet. The Israelis, I think, struck some Iranian positions in Iranian Kurdistan in order perhaps to help provoke an insurgency, some unrest in the Kurdish area.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Okay. So CNN has been reporting that the CIA may be working to arm the Kurdish groups with, with the aim of fomenting such an uprising. Put additional internal pressure, as you've just indicated, on the Iranian regime, create a buffer zone. You know, all those kinds of things from an intelligence perspective, from a foreign policy perspective, from a geostrategic perspective. Is it in anybody's interest?

[Sir John Sawyers]

Well, it's a dangerous road to go down, you say. Whose interest might it be in? Well, I think the Kurds themselves in Iran would probably feel more free if they were not ordered about and told what they can, what language they can speak, what flags they can fly by Tehran. There's a parallel here with the Kurds in Iraq after the 1991 war when the Iraqis did have an area which was a sort of safe haven.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Well, that's only after the President then George H.W. bush, I was there, told them to rise up and the Shiites, then they got slaughtered because the Americans didn't come and help them. Exactly. Then they had to spend 20 years killing, giving them a no fly zone, which was great. But do you think Bush, sorry, Trump, is prepared to give the Kurds of Iran a 20 year no fly zone?

[Sir John Sawyers]

No, I don't think he is and I think he's been. It was as unwise of Trump to call on the Iranian people to rise up as it was unwise of George H.W. bush to call on the Iraqi people to rise up in 1991. So just getting back to your point about fragmentation, if the country dissolves into component parts. It'll be basically a failed state, an ungoverned state. And we've known from the last sort of 40 years what happens in failed states. It becomes a center for terrorism, for smuggling, for gun running, for drugs, for criminality of all sorts. And it does pose a threat to other countries. I think it's in America's interest, and it's certainly in the interest of Europe, that this deeply unpleasant regime in, in Tehran should nonetheless be replaced by a regime which still has authority over the country that you can hold it to account. Yes, we want to change Iran's behavior, but if you just dismantle the regime completely, you could end up with the sort of chaos that we've had to deal with in Afghanistan next door to Iran, or indeed in Lebanon and Libya and more recently in Syria. Now, I think there's a difference here between American interests and Israeli interests. Americans do need to be able to deal with a country the size of Iran one way or another. I think the Israelis are more willing to take a risk here. They've lived next to a failed state in Lebanon last year. They've had close to a fragmented state in Syria, and they've contributed to that fragmentation. I think the Israelis would be quite happy to see a collapse of the system in Iran and let other people deal with it. But I can assure you that our friends in the Gulf, the Saudis, the Emiratis, the Qataris, the Turks, the Pakistanis, for the reasons you give, are going to be appalled by that. And the other thing that happens when a failed state emerges is that authority collapses and the people flee. Now there are 90 million people in Iran. How many of those are going to flee to Turkey and try and make their way to Europe? How many million Iranian refugees is the United States prepared to accept as a consequence of this war? Those are unanswered questions because people are not looking down that road. Now it's not clear that this is going to happen, but there's a risk of this happening. And the very best you can expect is a sort of Venezuela type outcome. But there are plenty of other more dangerous outcomes coming from this.

[Christiane Amanpour]

But I want to ask you because the latest is that NATO is now potentially implicated or drawn in. There was a missile that was fired towards Turkey, a NATO member and NATO Defense Forces, you know, anti missile, brought it down before it could enter Turkish space. I mean, some debris did fall on Turkish territory. Are you worried about that? Are you worried about ever expanding circles of this conflict?

[Sir John Sawyers]

I think this conflict has already expanded beyond what most people expected. I think the scale of the Iranian response has been greater than many anticipated, perhaps wrongly, they should have anticipated.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Yeah, I was going to ask you because they said it loud and clear.

[Sir John Sawyers]

Well, certainly they said it loud and clear. And they warned the countries up and down the Gulf that if you get involved in this, we're going to hit you. And you can see the rationale from the Iranian point of view. They want to build up as much pressure as they can through America's friends in the Gulf, through energy markets and so on, in order to get Trump to call an end to this assault on their country and on their regime. Now, I don't have any sympathy with the Iranian regime whatsoever. I think it's a vile and vicious regime. But I just think that the experience of the last 25 years, whether it's on our side in Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya, whether it's on other countries side, like Russia's experience, Ukraine is, once you start a conflict like this, you may think it's only going to last four or five days or four or five weeks. But it has a habit of the reverberations spreading much more widely. And there's a real risk in this case of that happening. I think in some ways the United States, in the confusion between various members of the administration, has rode back on its objectives.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Well, they've coalesced around a different objective. This is not the objective that we

[Sir John Sawyers]

were told the loose talk about regime change is, is gone. And they're now talking about.

[Christiane Amanpour]

You say loose talk, it was an actual war aim. President Trump said it many times. Netanyahu said it many times. They said it. That was a war aim.

[Sir John Sawyers]

I say loose talk because it was loosely said with no willingness to follow it up. The only way you can achieve regime change in Iran is by putting ground troops in. And I sincerely hope the United States doesn't follow its initial mistake of launching this war with a second mistake of putting ground troops.

[Christiane Amanpour]

So you think it's a mistake. If you think it's a mistake, which many do, many agree with, with you. Certainly a war of choice. Certainly one that meets, you know, Trump said, oh, they were going to hit us first. No evidence of that. Oh, they have reconstituted their nuclear program. No evidence of that. Oh, they have intercontinental ballistic missiles that can reach us. They don't. So lots of flimsiness, despite the horrendousness of the regime against its own people. So how do you think. And Israel has just said whoever Iran chooses as a successor to Khamenei will pretty much assassinate them or we will. How does this end?

[Sir John Sawyers]

So Mr. Hegseth has set out, in his own sort of emotional way, a commitment about missiles and nuclear. And now that gives the military targets they can hit and targets they can demonstrate have been destroyed. I think that will end up being the goal of the US Administration. And as the pressure on the economy, on global markets ramps up pressure on energy supplies, I think the President will feel that there's a time to declare, a time to finish this conflict. We'll wake up one morning like we did last Saturday, when we discover suddenly this has started. We'll wake up one morning and find it suddenly being finished. And I think that would be a sensible thing to do. My.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And yet it leaves the Iranian people, the majority of which of whom have wanted to see an end to this regime and thought that's what they were getting and have been in the streets to, to an extent, celebrating certainly the death of Khamenei and the rest. What do you think happens to them?

[Sir John Sawyers]

Well, we don't know exactly the mood of the Iranian people, except that it is very angry against their regime. The richness of the Iranian culture, strength of the Iranian economy has just been thrown away over the last 40 years. And I think there's a deep desire to see an end to the regime. But the idea that ordinary people, unarmed on the streets, without leaders, without a militia, can take over is pie in the sky. It's fantasy. So I don't think that's a realistic goal. I'm glad that the Pentagon have managed to wind back the goals, so it's

[Christiane Amanpour]

focusing on the crush. They can wind back whatever they want. They have encouraged people to take their fate in their hand, saying, we are giving you the conditions. You've just said it's impossible. You know, an unarmed people against a highly armed force.

[Sir John Sawyers]

Exactly, exactly.

[Christiane Amanpour]

So what happens to them? Do you think the regime goes after them again?

[Sir John Sawyers]

Well, it depends how far they stick their heads above the parapet. I mean, the regime has already warned them that anybody who protests will be considered an agent of Israel in the United States. You know, that's a pretty chilling warning to people about what will happen. And the terrible massacres of Iranian demonstrators after the last protests at the end of the. At the turn of the year. I think that's something which has sunk deep into the minds of the Iranian people. They know that they've got a terrible regime and that there isn't a means of overthrowing it, not a simple means. If the regime was to collapse, maybe there's a possibility of creating something new in its place. But as I understand it, the regime has up to a million people in their security forces, in the irgc, in the besieged militia and so on who seem to be willing to use force against the Iranian people. It's a rough ballpark figure, but it's about, I have confidence it's about right, that that is the right order of magnitude. And you know, the tens of thousands of people it seems were killed just earlier this year. So I think it's irresponsible to urge people to rise up when you're not offering them any support, any protection at all.

[Christiane Amanpour]

Sir John Sawyers, thank you very much indeed.

[Sir John Sawyers]

Thank you. Thank you very much.

[Christiane Amanpour]

And finally, precious cultural heritage under fire, as well as the civilians caught up in this war. The Golestan palace in downtown Tehran was damaged in the aftermath of a U. S. Israeli strike. That's according to Iranian state media. The magnificent mirrored halls are a symbol of Iranian culture dating back high hundreds of years. And it's a UNESCO world heritage site. It was also where the last shah was crowned in 1967. His seven year old son and heir Reza Pahlavi sitting by his side. Israel says an Iranian strike on the town of Beit Shemesh destroyed a synagogue and killed nine people. UNESCO is sounding the alarm, reminding all parties that sites like these are protected under international law tribulation trying to protect them themselves by sharing the coordinates of significant cultural locations. That's it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always catch us online on our website and all over social media. Thank you for watching and goodbye from London. Sam.