← Iran: The Latest
Iran: The Latest
The holes in Trump's Iran ceasefire: Israel, Lebanon and the Strait of Hormuz
00:41:23
Loading summary
Transcript74 lines
- [00:04]
Veneesh Shiraney
The telegraph.
- [00:09]
Darina
Activecampaign is the marketing automation platform built for big swings and big dreams. Generate ideas in seconds, import your brand and create full campaigns with simple prompts. Get started for free@activecampaign.com hi, I'm Darina,
- [00:26]
co founder of Quo. If you run a business, you know the team that responds first wins the customer. You've probably opened your phone to a bunch of missed calls and no voicemails. Those are missed opportunities and exactly why we built Quo. Quo is the business phone system that helps your team handle every call and text right away. Join over 90,000 businesses that win more customers with Quo. Try Quo for free at quo.com business that's Q-U-O.com business.
- [00:59]
David Blair
The reality is that Trump started a war which he doesn't have the power to stop. At least not completely.
- [01:06]
Pete Hegseth
A short time ago, the United States military began major combat operations in Iran.
- [01:14]
Veneesh Shiraney
Today, President Trump says Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in the attacks.
- [01:25]
Pete Hegseth
The Pentagon is weighing a takeover of that island as a way to force the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
- [01:31]
David Blair
Does anyone really think that someone can tell President Trump what to do? Come on.
- [01:38]
Veneesh Shiraney
I'm Veneesh Shiraney and this is Iran. The Latest. It's Wednesday, April 8, 2026. Well, this would have been the 40th day of the war, but thankfully we have potentially good news to discuss on today's podcast. Following apocalyptic threats by Trump to Iran. Iran, a ceasefire has been agreed. Is this the end of the war? Maybe. At today's daily White House press briefing, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth sounded triumphant.
- [02:07]
Pete Hegseth
Iran has been a threat to the United States and the free world for 47 years. Chance of death to America, targeting our people, killing Americans, lying and blackmailing their way toward a nuclear weapon. So they thought, no longer. Not on our watch. Other presidents marked time and kicked the can down the road. President Trump made history. From the strike that took out Qasem Soleimani to tearing up the disastrous Obama Iran deal, to the precision campaign that obliterated Iran's nuclear sites in Operation Midnight Hammer, to the decisive military victory we just achieved in Operation Epic Fury, no other president has shown the courage and resolve of this commander in chief. President Trump forged this moment. Iran begged for this ceasefire and we all know it as the president Truth this morning, a big day for world peace. Iran wants it to happen. They've had enough. Operation Epic Fury was a historic and and overwhelming victory on the battlefield. A capital V. Military victory. By any measure, epic fury decimated Iran's military and rendered it combat ineffective for years to come.
- [03:35]
Veneesh Shiraney
America is claiming this is a big day for world peace. However, for now, the ceasefire is only for two weeks and there are a lot of unanswered questions in and competing statements. Will it last? What guarantees and concessions have been offered by each side? And what about Israel's role in all of this? To discuss everything, I'm joined by our chief foreign affairs commentator, David Blair and foreign correspondent Achtar McCoy. Obviously, the devil is in the detail on all of this, and we'll get to that in a minute, but both sides are portraying this ceasefire announcement as a massive victory. I wanted to do a quick tally from a Western perspective. So, on the one hand, America has killed Iran's longtime hardline leader, Ali Khamenei. They've heavily degraded Iran's conventional military, and they have forced the regime to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to global shipping. But on the other hand, the strait was actually already open before the war. And while previously closing it off completely was a massive taboo, it hadn't been done since a couple of days during the 80s. Now, Iran knows that it can close it with just a few drones or missiles, and it can also charge tolls to any ship that wants to go untouched. There's also no sign that Iran's nuclear program has been any further set back by military activity in this war than it had been already during the 12 Day War last June. Instead, we have a probably more hardline regime in power, including the likely vengeful son of assassinated Khamenei, who arguably have more motivation than ever to pursue a nuclear weapon. Plus, of course, we've got an enormous amount of damage done to Iran, the Gulf, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, the global economy, food supply chains. So let's just start with your initial impressions. What did you think when you heard this ceasefire news? Who's come out on top here? David, kick us off.
- [05:26]
David Blair
My first thought was straight of Hormuz. As you rightly pointed out, before this conflict, it had never been closed before, except for a couple of days in the 1980s, but there'd been no sustained closure ever since the global oil industry was created 80 or so years ago. And now that you have a situation where America or the President has retweeted approvingly an Iranian statement which says that, yes, the strait will be reopened, but ships using it have to do it by, quote, coordination with Iran's armed forces, which means the Revolutionary Guard. That is a change from pre war. And it is a change that could be of enormous significance and it's one in Iran's favor. So that was my first thought.
- [06:21]
Akhtar McCoy
I tuned to Iran state television, Iran state media, and what I can tell you is they are claiming victory on the streets. I mean, Today is the 40th day since Ali Khamenei was killed. So the scale of the celebrations was not, were not as much as you would expect them because it's the morning time. But, but what they would tell you on state media, on state television, that they won the war. And they say, they claim that American officials have agreed to ceasefire to 10 points that they proposed. And all of those 10 points, I don't see anything different. These things were before the war started on February 26, when they were meeting, I don't know, in Geneva. It's just the same thing. They agreed the same thing. Just thousands of people were killed, thousands of homes were destroyed, hundreds of children were killed. And we are back in the same position without Ali Khamenei in the top.
- [07:16]
Veneesh Shiraney
These 10 points, I want to get into those in detail. Let's just quickly recap how we got here because this is a classic case of Trump whiplash where one thing's happening one hour and then another thing the next hour. So we left off yesterday's podcast with that frankly abhorrent post by Trump threatening to wipe out Iranian civilization if the regime didn't agree to a deal by midnight gmt. I'm going to come back to that post later because I know both of you have thoughts. Yesterday evening, Pakistan's Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif posts on X calling on both sides to agree to a two week cessation of hostilities. He doesn't use the word ceasefire, but he says to allow diplomacy to run its course. I earnestly request President Trump to extend the deadline for two weeks. Pakistan, in all sincerity, requests the Iranian brothers to open the Strait of Hormuz for a corresponding period of two weeks as a goodwill gesture. Few hours later, and this is now 90 minutes before his civilization ending deadline at 10:30pm GMT, Trump posts on Truth Social Based on conversations with Pakistanis. They have requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran. And subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the complete, immediate and safe opening of the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks. This will be a double sided ceasefire. The reason for doing so is that we have already met and exceeded all military objectives and are very Far along with a definitive agreement concerning long term peace with Iran and, and peace in the Middle east. We received a 10 point proposal from Iran and believe it is a workable basis on which to negotiate. That was then backed up at 11:42pm GMT. We get a statement from Tehran which Trump tweets out on Truth Social won't read the full thing, but he says in response to the brotherly request from PM Sharif, that's Pakistani Prime Minister. And considering the request by the US for negotiations based on its 15 point proposal, as well as an announcement by POTUS about acceptance of the general framework for Iran's 10 point proposal as a basis for negotiations, I declare on behalf of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, if attacks against Iran are halted, our powerful armed forces will cease their defensive operations for a period of two weeks. Safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz will be possible via coordination with Iran's, with Iran's armed forces and with due consideration of technical limitations. And that was by Abbas Aragchi, the Foreign Affairs Minister. So there's a few things that you guys have drawn out there already. So We've got this 10 point proposal plan and we've got the IRGC effectively having to agree for any ships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Come back to the straight. But this 10 point proposal that both of them mention and Trump seems to agree to, what exactly is in it? Akhtar?
- [09:43]
Akhtar McCoy
I mean, as I said, there is nothing new. If you compare it to what they were discussing, they were negotiating before the war started, guarantee that Iran will never be attacked again, Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz. And number three is acceptance of Iran's uranium enrichment and lifting all primary sanctions on Iran, lifting all secondary sanctions against Iran, ending all UN Security Council resolutions against Iran, ending all atomic, the United Nations Nuclear Watchdog Board of Governance resolutions, paying compensation for Iran because of the damage of the war and withdrawal of all US Forces from the region. End of war on all fronts, including Lebanon. That's not happening. We have seen it today. So there isn't anything new that we didn't know about before the war started.
- [10:37]
David Blair
Well, and there's an awful lot in there which the Americans surely cannot and will not agree to. The Americans are not going to withdraw all their forces from the region. The war in Lebanon is going to continue because Benjamin Netanyahu is waging that war quite independently from the Americans. And I can't imagine the Americans are going to allow Iran to enrich uranium given that the status quo is that Iran, in fact is not doing that because its plants were destroyed, not in this war, but in the previous war, last June. And there are various other things. So when you read out the demands actar which are now a basis of negotiation, it makes me think actually the chances of a final peace deal are very, very slim.
- [11:23]
Veneesh Shiraney
These are maximalist demands because these are
- [11:25]
David Blair
extraordinary demands from Iran which America can't possibly agree to. I mean, there's some, there's some elements where it says, you know, for example, the demand for the lifting of sanctions, I mean, the Americans could conceivably agree to that, but of course in return they would expect absolutely no uranium enrichment and they would want limitations on Iran's missile arsenal as well. So the question will be, would Iran agree to that? So really, until there's a final peace agreement, we can't start giving a conclusive verdict on who won or who came out ahead or who lost. And actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that the chances of a final peace agreement are pretty slim and that this whole process is extremely delicate. We might have a ceasefire that's holding today, tomorrow, maybe for a few more days, but I don't think we'll be at all surprised if say, in two weeks time the whole thing broke down again. So this is very fragile because the gap between the two sides is vast and nothing, no point of substance has been resolved so far.
- [12:30]
Akhtar McCoy
Yeah, and American Vice President J.D. wanz also just said that this is a very fragile ceasefire.
- [12:36]
Veneesh Shiraney
Yeah, Iran's Supreme National Security Council, they put out a statement as well, didn't they, which was quite a bit more hawkish than what we heard from Abbas Aragchi. They called this an undeniable historical and crushing defeat of the US forced criminal America to accept its 10 point plan and emphasized that this does not signify the termination of the war. Our hands remain upon the trigger and should the slightest error be committed by the enemy, it shall be met with full force. I mean, this is obviously typically bombastic talk. Hard to know how much of this to believe, but does it suggest that there are elements in the Iranian regime that perhaps weren't ready to stop fighting?
- [13:12]
Akhtar McCoy
I mean, this statement you just read is for the domestic audience, for the Islamic Republic supporters. They won't be applying that when they talk about Americans. It's just to tell the Iranians, the Islamic Republic supporters, that Americans were defeated and then we are ready. But what's happening behind the scene is just something completely different.
- [13:32]
Veneesh Shiraney
Well, let's talk about what is happening behind the scenes. Axios put out some reporting that the reason this has happened now is that Mojtab Al Khamenei, the new Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei's son, gave the green light for negotiations to go ahead. And this is based on sources, Israeli sources and regional sources, and an unnamed security sources. I wonder what you make of that, Akhtar, that Majdabakhamenei has finally decided to come to the negotiating table.
- [13:56]
Akhtar McCoy
I mean, he is the Supreme Leader, so he has final say over everything. And these reports that are coming out of media, I don't know, like, if it's something very obvious, you don't need to like, I mean, if someone is in the top of everything, you would be going to him to get, to get a permission of doing. And that's how the Islamic Republic system works. Like there is, there are like competing sources of centers of power, but everything should be everyone, everything should be answering and getting orders from the top authority, which is the supreme leader. So it's not really surprising if he was ordering the talks or not. But I would also suspect that because at the moment the Iranian, the Islamic Republic, the Iranian government is more militarized than it would than it was before the war started. Now, most of civilian posts that were previously would be like a civilian officer in their fields with the IRGC generals. And there is also another point that we have not seen Mushta Bar Khamenei since he was selected as the Supreme Leader. So there are some suspicions, speculations. But the Islamic Republic system is created in a way that if the supreme Leader is dead, the rest of them would still be talking and now the rest of them are just the IRGC generals.
- [15:08]
David Blair
When we think ahead to the shape of a possible settlement, just supposing one is reached in the end, peace agreements tend to formalize the verdicts on the battlefield. So let's examine what the verdicts on the battlefield is. First of all, Iran is not enriching uranium. Not because this war achieved that, but because the previous war destroyed its uranium enrichment plants.
- [15:33]
Veneesh Shiraney
The 12 day war from last year.
- [15:34]
David Blair
The 12 day war from last year. So any viable peace settlement is probably going to have zero enrichment for Iran and essentially Iran will have to agree not to rebuild its nuclear program. Second point, Iran has de facto control over the Strait of Hormuz. That's the verdict. That's the outcome of this conflict. So that in some form will probably have to be in some peace agreement. Thirdly, Iran retains a missile capability. It must be vastly diminished, both because they fired off so many of their missiles. And because America and Israel will have destroyed lots on the ground, but they retain a missile capability of some kind. So that fact will probably be reflected in a peace agreement. But America will insist on there being limitations on the range of Iranian missiles. And what you can imagine is, again, the status quo is formalized at the moment. Iran has missiles capable of hitting any country in the Middle east, but no further. They can't fire missiles into Europe or America. You can imagine that range limits might be agreed that simply codify that reality. So you can see how the military outcome is probably going to dictate the diplomatic outcome as well. And that when you hear these 10 points, the thing to test in your mind is how much do they actually conform to the reality on the ground as it exists today? Because that reality is probably what's going to be in any peace agreement. Just supposing one has reached at all and it's quite possible that we don't have one and we go back to war.
- [17:14]
Veneesh Shiraney
Yeah, it's worth. Just going into a bit more detail, Our senior foreign correspondent, Memphis Barker has put out a piece looking at how ships now transit the Strait of Hormuz. So you mentioned they're required to inform intermediary companies that are linked to the irgc, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, of the ship's cargo destination and ultimate owner. Iran then charges a toll of at least $1 per barrel, apparently with the rate rising according to the perceived friendliness of the national operator. Fees must then be paid, and I think this is really interesting and not something we've got into on this podcast. Fees must then be paid in Chinese yen or a cryptocurrency. The average rate for a single oil tanker is $2 million, about 1.5 million pounds. If everything is approved, IRGC boats provide an escort into and out of the toll booth. And this is a sort of new route that goes a lot closer to the Iranian coastline than it did previously. Memphis also adds that some analysts believe it could make the Iranian regime as much as $500 billion in five years. These are staggering amounts of money. I mean, this is a gift to the Iranian regime, isn't it? That just didn't exist before.
- [18:14]
David Blair
It's extraordinary. But is that system really going to survive? The real question, which we'll know the answer to quite soon in the next two weeks, is does Iran attempt to just carry on with all that? Is Iran still going to exclude any shipping linked to America or any American ally from the Strait? Or if it lets them through, is it going to insist on charging them and doing all this, if it insists on preserving that whole system, I can't see how we can avoid some kind of relapse into conflict, because, as you say, that would be such an extraordinary game for Iran that I can't imagine America being able to tolerate that.
- [18:55]
Veneesh Shiraney
Akhtar, from what you know, is Iran militarily still able to enforce a closure of the Strait of Hormuz? Will they be able to keep enforcing it for months, potentially years to come? Do they have the military assets to keep doing that?
- [19:06]
Akhtar McCoy
I mean, that doesn't need military assets, just need threats and a few mines and a few rockets and a few bullets. I mean, I think they would have
- [19:13]
David Blair
a few bullets, yes. Posing. All you have to do is pose enough of a threat to shipping through the strait that insurance companies either pull their coverage or raise the premium to an unrealistic level. So it depends very much on the perception of the threat. Now, personally, I refuse to believe that if you gave the American military, which is designed to win a global war against China or Russia or both, the task of securing 24 miles of water, that they couldn't do it. I mean, I think they could do it. No doubt there will be huge risks. It will require great political will. There'll be casualties and all the rest of it. But I can't really believe that it's beyond their capabilities. But so far, Donald Trump has not summoned the will to give that order, presumably because he judges the risks are too great. And until he does, or unless he does, then Iran has an opportunity to formalize the new status quo that it has imposed upon the strait. Now, whether it will be quite as elaborate and as extortionate as the one that Vinicius just described, no one can tell. But they're certainly going to try and preserve whatever they can.
- [20:30]
Akhtar McCoy
And that is their most important, their biggest weapon, the Islamic Republic have, has just closed their strait. And even if they don't have the missile to it, the Persian Gulf countries where Americans have bases or Israel, you just need enough equipment to just close that, and that's your biggest weapon, and they have it.
- [20:49]
Veneesh Shiraney
And I guess speaking to that risk of the perception of risk that you were just talking about there, David, I was hearing on the radio this morning that there's a chance that boats will flee the Strait of Hormuz. They'll get out, but you won't get much going back in because no one wants to be trapped if conflict re erupts, which, as you mentioned, is a very real threat. Akhtar what state has Iranian relations with the Gulf countries that it was previously friendly with? What state has that been left in?
- [21:17]
Akhtar McCoy
Previously, before the war started, the Iranian government has had relations with all of those Belgian Gulf countries. But since the war started. So the Iranians saw that American forces were using their countries, their bases in their countries, to fire missiles and everything and flew from their bases to bomb Iran. So now that relationship would be a bit complicated. But they are still friendly with Oman. They are signing some sort of deal with Oman to monitor the threat of Hormuz, but with the rest of the Belgian Gulf countries, the President says they are friendly with them, they're friendly countries. The Iranian government only problem with them is that they allow their space, their countries, to be used by American forces to fly and bomb Iranian cities.
- [22:05]
Veneesh Shiraney
And will that have ramifications going forward, do you think?
- [22:08]
Akhtar McCoy
I mean, I don't think so, because they say, okay, we are Muslim friendly countries. Their only problem with those countries would be that they would be pushing for them. They would be negotiating, talking or whatever like. Or influencing them to close down American bases in their countries. That would be the most, the biggest thing that the Iranians would want from the Persian Gulf countries.
- [22:29]
Veneesh Shiraney
Is there a chance of the Americans pulling out of any of those bases? We've seen there's a huge amount of damage has been wrought to American bases across the region.
- [22:36]
David Blair
I can't imagine they would. And there was an interesting intervention by Anwar Gargash, the deputy UAE Foreign Minister, the other day where he said, you know, we were attacked by Iran to the tune of thousands of missiles and drones. And that means that we, the uae, are going to double down on our alliance with America because we see this as the only way that we can be adequately protected against what we now regard as an implacably hostile neighbor. So Iran's difficulty is that it has alienated at least one of its Gulf neighbors. And I suspect others may feel the same way. And they may also lead countries like Saudi Arabia, for example, and the UAE to take whatever steps are required to break Iran's stranglehold over the Strait of Hormuz, not in the sense that these countries would force open the Strait of Hormuz, but that they would develop alternative export routes. So the Saudis already have their pipeline, which goes right the way from east to west across the country and allows oil to be exported via the port of Yambu on the Red Sea. The UAE already have a pipeline which bypasses the Strait of Hormuz and goes to Fujairah, both of those pipelines only have a fraction of the capacity that you would need to replace the Strait of Hormuz. But you can imagine that in this new world that they're all living in, would they perhaps invest the money that they would need to, to upgrade those pipelines to increase their capacity and give themselves a way of bypassing the Strait? They might do that. So you can see how Iran can overplay its hand. And Iran has a tendency to do this kind of thing that they may by exerting all the leverage that they have over the Strait, they may actually lead America to have stronger alliances with the Gulf states, and they may lead the Gulf states to do whatever they need to do to get around the Strait of Hormuz. Now, of course, that's speculative and we're talking about the very long term and it may never happen, or if it happens, it may take years. But it's worth remembering that the overall strategic picture could change in a way that would be very unfavourable to Iran.
- [24:53]
Veneesh Shiraney
We're going to take a short pause now. Coming up after the break, what might happen at the peace talks on Friday.
- [25:05]
Boost Mobile Announcer
Boost Mobile is now sending experts nationwide to deliver and set up customers new phones.
- [25:09]
Wait, we're going on tour?
- [25:11]
We're delivering and setting up customers phones. It's not a tour, not with that attitude. Introducing store to door switch and get a new device with expert setup and delivery.
- [25:18]
Don't delivery available for select devices purchased@boostmobile.com
- [25:21]
Darina
ActiveCampaign is the marketing automation platform built for big swings and big dreams with intelligent suggestions. Powered by AI and your data. Generate ideas in seconds. Import your brand and create full campaigns with simple prompts. Send personalized messages backed by real time feedback, smart segmentation and effortless reporting that tracks every win. Let's three to find what's possible together. Get started for free@activecampaign.com youm're a pro
- [25:51]
Boost Mobile Announcer
at running your life. At committing to your workout. At showing up every day. At Bombas we're pros too. Pros at making socks. Our sport assortment has specialized socks for whatever sport you're committed to. Running, hiking, golf, Pilates and so much more. Made with sweat, wicking yarns, blister fighting details and targeted art supplies. Bombus Sport is pro level socks from the Pros of Socks. For another pro you go to bombas.com audio and use code audio for 20 off your first purchase. That's bombus.com and use code audio.
- [26:26]
Veneesh Shiraney
Welcome back. You're listening to Iran the latest I'm in the studio with David Blair, our chief foreign affairs commentator, and Akhtar McCoy, our foreign correspondent. So we've got talks this Friday in Islamabad, Pakistan, representing the Iranian side as the speaker of Iran's Parliament, Mohamed Gallabaaf, who we've heard quite a bit of recently. And representing the American side, J.D. vance, the Vice president. Akhtar, what do we know about Gallubaaf and what kind of position, stance, attitude he might bring to these talks?
- [26:53]
Akhtar McCoy
He is the former Air Force commander of the irgc. Previously, the negotiations would be going through the Foreign Ministry or Supreme National Security Council, but since the war started, mainly these are the IRGC generals who are talking with Americans, if they are.
- [27:08]
Veneesh Shiraney
Okay. So that's quite interesting in and of itself that he's the one going as opposed to Aragchi.
- [27:12]
Akhtar McCoy
Yeah, yeah. And he is the parliament speaker. He was mayor of Tehran for two years. He's corrupt and he, he has more influence than the foreign, the foreign minister, of course. And he is very close to Mushtab Al Khamenei, the supreme leader, because Mushtab Al Khamenei trapped like he has saved Muhammad Baghr Koliboff from corruption, corruption scandals multiple times in his career. The biggest one was, I mean, one of them was when he went to Turkey. His family went to Turkey to buy some stuff for his grandson's grandchild. And it was, it became a big scandal because his stance is like, we should be resisting the Western influence and these things. He. That's what he's telling to people on television, but at the same time, his family. And that's when Mushtaba stepped in and rescued him in another corruption cases where he was the mayor of Tehran. And. But he comes from the military side of the Islamic Republic, from those generals who were in the Islamic Republic since the 1980s war with Iraq. And he doesn't mind using force. When students protested the closure of a newspaper in the 90s, he himself was on a motorbike, having a stick in his hand and beating students. So you wouldn't expect anything moderate coming from him. But, but since Halil Arijani was killed, he has been the man who is holding the Islamic Republic together. Even if, I mean, there is this new supreme leader, which we haven't heard of, but for the survival of the Islamic Republic, he was crucial to be there. And he put it together for the past few weeks. And for now, he is going to go to Islamabad on Friday to talk with American officials, with J. Divans, Trump's vice president. What will come out of those talks, we are not sure because Iranians are not talking about it. One of the points that some Iranian analysts, especially Hossein Shariat Madari, the editor of Chehan newspaper, was angry about, like why we don't know any details about this deal, these things that you agreed with Americans, this ceasefire or whatever it is they just gave. He was saying, you just gave us some subtitles, no information. And you won't get more information from Muhammad Barak Baghr Ghalibouf, if he is in charge of talking.
- [29:33]
Veneesh Shiraney
We heard J.D. vance speaking this morning. You guys alluded to him talking about fragile truce. Let's just hear a clip of that. He was speaking at a conference in Budapest, Hungary.
- [29:40]
J.D. Vance
Some of the people have responded favorably and have said the right things. And then you have some people on social media, within their system, who are basically lying about what we've accomplished militarily. They're lying about the nature of the agreement, they're lying about the nature of the ceasefire. And so you have just. Even within their system, and this is why I say this is a fragile truce. You have people who clearly want to come to the negotiating table and work with us to find a good deal, and then you have people who are lying about even the fragile truce that we've already struck. And that's just an interesting thing about their system. And if the Iranians are willing in good faith to work with us, I think we can make an agreement. If they're going to lie, if they're going to cheat, if they're trying to. Going to try to prevent even the fragile truce that we've set up from taking place, then they're not going to be happy. Because what the President has also shown is that we still have clear military, diplomatic, and maybe most importantly, we have extraordinary economic leverage. So the President has told us not
- [30:41]
David Blair
to use those tools.
- [30:42]
J.D. Vance
He's told us to come to the negotiating table. But if the Iranians don't do the exact same thing, they're going to find out that the President of the United States is not one to mess around.
- [30:51]
Veneesh Shiraney
David JD Vance, a known isolationist, and we have long assumed the person in the administration who is most against this war, he's been vocal in the past that he doesn't think a war with Iran is a good idea. And there's some very good New York Times reporting that we'll come on to later, that suggests that he was always the most cautious person in the room when they were discussing launching this war. What kind of attitude do you think he's going to bring to these talks.
- [31:15]
David Blair
Well, he never wanted this war, but ultimately he's not the decision maker. You know, the president is. And J.D. vance, like every member of this administration, knows, to use an English expression, which side of the bread his butter is on. You know, he will have negotiating parameters and instructions. He will know what Trump is likely to approve of and what he won't. So he will have, I would imagine, very little personal discretion over what gets agreed, if anything gets agreed. And again, I think we should emphasize just how wide the gap is and just how high the chances that this process will not get very far.
- [31:57]
Veneesh Shiraney
Meanwhile, across the region, it's not clear that this ceasefire applies everywhere. We have heard news of air raid alarms in Bahrain this morning, air raid alarms in Israel. Not clear exactly what's going on, but what's definitely happening, what's definitely continuing is Israel's war with Hezbollah in Lebanon. They've launched their largest coordinated strike on Lebanon since the war began this morning. They've ordered the entire city of Tyre to evacuate. They've bombed Saida. These are major cities in Lebanon's south. These are not Hezbollah strongholds. They're just cities in the south of Lebanon where Hezbollah has a presence, but there are plenty of other people living there. And, and by evacuating an entire city, what the implications, obviously, for Lebanon, which is already going through a massive Crisis, more than 1,400 people killed, more than 1 million displaced, huge consequences. Netanyahu is being slated for this ceasefire. He is being accused by all sides on the political spectrum of failing, basically that he wasn't part of the decision making process to end this Iran war, that he hasn't achieved any of his war goals. I think the Israel angle is interesting here. Where do you think they will continue to go from this? How long can they continue their war with Hezbollah and potentially with Iran if Trump wants to stop?
- [33:09]
David Blair
Well, the reality is that Trump started a war which he doesn't have the power to stop, at least not completely, because this axis of the conflicts in Lebanon, which Netanyahu has made clear he's going to continue, he's not bound by the ceasefire is one over which Trump has no direct influence, because America is not a participant. And it's one of the great risks that Trump was running when he started this war, that you would cause a conflagration that would spread and that you wouldn't be able to put out. And sure enough, that's exactly what has happened. As for how long Israel can carry on, well, it depends on so many different variables, one of which is will Hezbollah keep firing rockets at northern Israel? You know, Hezbollahs are vastly weakened. It's a shadow of its former self. But it's proved that it still has capabilities which the Israelis clearly take very seriously. And the history of conflicts in Lebanon in the past is that you may get a de escalation at some point, even a ceasefire agreement, but they're always fragile and they're always liable to flare up again. As for whether Netanyahu would bomb Iran unilaterally and independently of the United States, well, he's done it before. I mean, the June war last year, of the 12 days, 11 of those were Israel bombing on its own. America only became involved in the final 24 hours of that war. But it would be a really big thing for him to directly defy Trump and defy a ceasefire agreement to carry on bombing Iran. It would be a huge, huge. It would cause a crisis in his relationship with Trump, which I would imagine at the moment he would not be willing to risk.
- [34:52]
Akhtar McCoy
Yeah, and Israel bombing, still bombing Lebanon after the ceasefire would also harm that very fragile ceasefire. You just read the Supreme National Security Council statement of Iran's statement. They were saying if one of the points in this 10 point agreement is stopping war across all fronts, including Lebanon, but if Israel is still bombing Lebanon, I mean, Iranians, I mean, that ceasefire between Iranians and America would be in danger.
- [35:21]
David Blair
Yes. And you can see, here's another risk. Supposing Iran says, well, Israel's bombing Lebanon, so we are going to attack Israel, and then they fire missiles at Israel, Then Netanyahu will say to Trump, well, we've just had missiles coming at us from Iran, so we have to be able to hit back. And you can imagine Trump saying, well, fair enough, the Iranians have broken the deal and yes, you can. So that's yet another one of the many other risks that we've identified.
- [35:49]
Veneesh Shiraney
The New York Times, I alluded to earlier, put out a fantastic bit of inside reporting looking at the decision making that went into the launch of this war and specifically Israel's role in it. It's worth checking out and I will post a link to it in the show notes. But it basically outlines events which began with Israel giving a briefing to Trump in this situation Rome on February 11. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, the director of Mossad, and a couple of others coming down the line and basically suggesting that Iran was ripe for regime change and that a joint U. S. Israeli mission could finally bring an end to the Islamic Republic. They claimed several Things that we now know to be wrong. Iran's ballistic missile program could be destroyed in a few weeks. The regime would be too weak to close the Strait of Hormuz. Iran was unlikely to land any blows against American interests in neighboring countries, and that street protests inside Iran would begin again quite quickly. U.S. officials assessed that most of this was nonsense and that killing the Ayatollah and degrading Iran's military was doable. But that regime change and popular uprising was not. And I'm just going to quote a few of the people's in the room's reactions to the Israeli briefing. So CIA Director John Ratcliffe used one word to describe Netanyahu's regime change scenarios. Farcical Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it I'm going to swear here. So if you're listening with families bullshit. JD Vance expressed strong skepticism. There's no direct quote in the New York Times report. And General Dan Kane, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called it classic Israeli oversell plans, not always well developed. They know they need us and that's why they're hard selling. Obviously, Trump decided to go ahead anyway. And a lot of the New York Times report centers on the fact that no one ever turned around him and said this is a really bad idea. Even Dan Kaine, although he shared several warnings with Trump that a major campaign against Iran would deplete stockpiles of American weaponry. This is something we've come back to repeatedly on this podcast, particularly interceptors. Supplies are already running low due to the wars in Ukraine and Israel. And he also flagged the difficulty of securing the Strait of Hormuz and the risks of Iran blocking it. But Trump went ahead anyway. And I think the upshot is that this idea that everyone deferred to the president's instincts, that he'd got it right so many times to before that Venezuela had been such a brilliant victory, had gone so smoothly and happened so quickly that although they had their doubts, he was probably right on this too.
- [38:04]
David Blair
I would just add in fairness to Trump's entourage, I was struck by how blunt they were in telling him that what Netanyahu was saying was not completely reliable. I put it mildly that the scenarios that Netanyahu was offering for easy regime change and so on were nonsense. And I'm struck by how bluntly he was told that. Now it's true that none of them said, don't do this, Mr. President, but they would probably say, well, it's not really their job. You know, certainly General Kaine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, he would say, it's not really my job to tell the President not to do things. My job is to say, if you want to do things, these are the options and these are the risks and you decide. So in a sense, I think that Trump's team, my reading of it is that they don't come out too badly from this. They would have come out badly if they had accepted uncritically the Netanyahu version, but they clearly didn't. And then Trump, having heard all that, made his decision. I think you can criticize perhaps Rubio and conceivably JD Vance for not saying bluntly, don't do this. Although there's a hint that Vance probably did say that actually. But nonetheless, I think on the whole, the team probably did acted in the tradition of their predecessors in the American system.
- [39:37]
Akhtar McCoy
Yeah, I mean, Benjamin Netanyahu has been looking for a president, an American president for the past 20 years to just convince him and then go attack Iran. And they didn't look at, they didn't watch, they didn't consider the consequences of that.
- [39:53]
Veneesh Shiraney
Let's just end by coming back to Trump's post yesterday. And I know a lot of listeners will say it's just words. He says stuff all the time, he doesn't mean it or it's a negotiating tactic. And look, it worked. This is the President of the United States and everything he says carries weight. And I think it's right and fair to hold him account for it, just as we would any other leader. He threatened last night, a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. We now know that talks were well underway when he posted that. But the post was so the language was so strong that it prompted some people to speculate that he was thinking of using nuclear weapons on Iran. Akhtar, you wrote a really moving, wonderful piece saying that Trump will never be able to wipe out my civilization.
- [40:34]
Akhtar McCoy
I mean, when Trump or any other officials outside Iran says that they are going to destroy a civilization, they are not Talking about the 46 years old Islamic Republic, they are talking about the 7,000 years of civilization that existed. That they had things, they had poetry, they had irrigation system, while the countries that are threatening to destroy that civilization or just untouched wildness. And if readers think, okay, these are just words, I mean, words matter, words are very powers are the most powerful things.
- [41:07]
Veneesh Shiraney
Words do matter. And Trump, you know, posts a lot on social media and so we've got used to a certain level of noise But I do think still think that words matter. I wonder if you could just end this podcast by reading out a few paragraphs from your piece.
- [41:20]
Akhtar McCoy
Okay, I'll read a few lines of this piece for you. Gladly. Victory achieved through rubble is not victory. It is annihilation. Dressed in the language of liberation, the United States of America in its current independent form is nearly 250 years old. In that time, American forces have killed people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Somalia, Libya and dozens of other countries. Each time America arrived promising help, liberation or stability, and each time it left behind devastation. Nothing wonderful emerged from the ruins of Baghdad, Kabul or Saigon, only graveyards and grievances. Every conqueror who entered the Persian empire believing in permanent domination, eventually became a footnote in Persian history, remembered for destruction and unable to destroy what they encountered. God bless the great people of Iran. That's what Trump said in his post. But God bless the great people of Iran indeed. They will need blessings to survive what is coming. And then they will need memory, the memory of poetry memorized, of love songs sang, of verses cited across generation to rebuild what Mr. Trump destroys as they rebuilt after every conqueror before him. Civilizations built on love and poetry have always outlasted empires built on bombs and threats.
- [42:37]
Veneesh Shiraney
Hector Mukoy, foreign correspondent, and David Blair, our chief foreign affairs commentator. Thank you very much for joining us on around the latest. That's all for today's episode, but one last piece of news before I close off. The American freelance journalist Shelley Kittelson, who was kidnapped in Iraq last week, has been released. That's according to the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. That's all for today's episode. We'll be back again tomorrow. Until then, goodbye. Iran. The latest is an original podcast from the Telegraph, created by David Knowles and hosted by me, Venetia Raney and Roland Oliphant. If you appreciated this podcast, please consider following Iran the latest on your preferred podcast app. And if you have a moment, leave us a review as it helps others find the show. To stay on top of all of our news, subscribe to the Telegraph, sign up to our Dispatchers newsletter or listen to our sister podcast Ukraine. The latest we're still on the same email address battlelinestelegraph.co.uk, or you can contact us on X. You can find our handles in the show Notes. The producer is Max Bauer. The executive producer is Louisa Wells.
- [43:42]
Boost Mobile Announcer
Boost Mobile is now sending experts nationwide to deliver and set up customers new phones.
- [43:46]
Wait, we're going on tour?
- [43:48]
We're delivering and setting up customers phones.
- [43:50]
David Blair
It's not a tour, not with that attitude.
- [43:52]
Boost Mobile Announcer
Introducing store to door Switch and get a new device with expert setup and delivery.
- [43:55]
Delivery available for select devices purchased@boost mobile.com
- [43:58]
Vrbal Announcer
With Vrbal's last minute deals, you can save over $50 on your spring getaway. So whether it's a mountain escape with friends, a family week at the beach, or sightseeing in a new city, there's still time to get great discounts. Book your next day now. Average savings $72 select homes only.