← Christiane Amanpour Presents: The Ex Files
Loading summary
Transcript31 lines
- [00:03]
A
This is a Global Player original podcast.
- [00:08]
B
It's just one miscalculation after the other. I honestly don't know whether he knows whether he wants to escalate or negotiate.
- [00:15]
C
Right now, there is a war with no winners going on. The only way this war could be a win is if the regime falls.
- [00:23]
B
What Trump was threatening was really, really catastrophic. And as Senator Murphy says, a potential war crime. I've been in a war zone. Electricity, whether it be in Iraq, whether it be in Sarajevo, wherever it might be, it is terrifying stuff.
- [00:38]
C
His base is going nuts. This is not what they voted for.
- [00:46]
B
Hi, everybody. This is the latest episode of the X Files with me, Christiana Manpour in
- [00:51]
C
London and Jamie Rubin in Costa Rica.
- [00:54]
B
And you know what? We thought maybe we could move on, but no. We are now fully into the fourth week of this war, and minute by minute, things change. And it's not just small changes. These are huge, huge changes. President Trump has put out another truth social, you know, post about what he's going to do next. The real question we're going to try to explore today is will Trump escalate or negotiate? And can the Straits of Hormuz be reopened? He's now saying, not the 24 hours that would have expired already, but in five days, should Europe help? And what will the global impact, not just economically, be of all of this? So let's get started. Jamie, over the weekend, there was mass cris and panic because President Trump said that he would give Iran 48 hours to open the Straits of Hormoz or else there would be a mass destruction. He basically said, I will order the destruction or obliteration, in his words, of all Iran's power plants, starting with the biggest, he didn't name it. But the biggest, of course, is at Bushehr, and that's a nuclear power plant. And then he's pulled back. What do you make of his, you know, his latest post, which gives another few days to this threat?
- [02:08]
C
I think he is, as you said, in a quandary. The only power he has now is to threaten escalation. All the things done up to now have not forced Iran to capitulate, has not forced Iran to commit unconditional surrender. So we're down to the question where President Trump is going to decide whether he supports what I call the former neocons who want this war to go on for a long, long and want to make Iran regime, even if intact, far weaker than it was before the war. And to do that, he's got to eliminate their ability to control the world's oil prices through the Strait of Hormuz. To do that, he's going to have to escalate. So I think he doesn't want to escalate. Look, getting in the mind of Trump is not a place anyone wants to be right now. But if I were in his mind, I think he's looking for a reason to end the war. He sees that it cost a lot more than he expected, and he's going to try to use the threat of escalation to get Iran to stop the threat to the Strait of Hormuz, not begin to use the nuclear material in its enrichment facilities. And that's what he hopes to negotiate, not directly with the Iranians, but through a third party. That's my best guess.
- [03:31]
B
Okay, so I just differ slightly because I honestly don't know whether he knows whether he wants to escalate or negotiate, because it just changes all the time. And sometimes there's pressure from Israel, sometimes, obviously the markets are what is causing him to make his most dramatic pronouncement since Iran showed that. Actually, yep, it does have that power over the Straits of Hormuz. And in their words, they say, no, it's not closed. We're letting the people and the ships in who we want to. And by the way, they're taking a jolly good toll for it. They're making a lot of money letting those ships in. And, Jamie, can we just please have a moment to appreciate the irony and the, I guess, the corner that Trump is backed into because of the world energy prices, oil now and gas. And that is, not only have they given the Russians a sanctions holiday on their oil, which is now filling their coffers and filling their war chests, but they're also now giving the Iranians a sanctions holiday on the oil that's already on tankers waiting to be bought. Just imagine for one moment the logic of that. They're going to war with Iran in a massive way, but because of the unintended consequences, and apparently what they didn't even plan for or really understand would happen, they are allowing that Iranian oil to be bought despite the massive sanctions. Sorry, for me, that's an example of the poor planning. And if you read Ronan Bergman and Mark Mazzetti and the other group of New York Times reporters who dropped a new article today, it's just one miscalculation after the other. In combination with the Mossad, David Barnea, who's the head of Mossad, thinking that this was the time to do all this, including toppling the regime, going to Trump saying this was going to happen. There was some pushback and some doubt in the Trump close circle, but he went with it anyway. Jamie, I just want to read you this because I said a lot there, but Chris Murphy, senator from Connecticut, Democratic senator, has said that Trump's latest, as we record, giving another few days to this threat to bomb all Iran's power plants. Remember, that's what he said if they don't open the Straits of Hormuz. Senator Murphy has said A, Trump isn't announcing a pause on strikes. He's saying he's postponing a possible war crime, which are strikes on Iran's civilian energy infrastructure. B, also, this isn't a message to Iran. It's a panicky message to the markets. Quote, no war escalation until markets close on Friday.
- [06:12]
C
Discuss, discuss. Look, I think the first point to discuss is what you mentioned about the new article in the New York Times. And this is extremely important because Israel's technical capabilities often create a situation where people think Israel is all powerful and all smart. David Barnea, the head of Mossad, has made a massive blunder equivalent to the blunder that Mossad and the intelligence community in Israel made before October 7th. To think that Iran's regime was going to fall with these steps that they've taken is a massive strategic calculation. And what it's a reminder of is that Israel is very good at small technical tactical operations, assassinating someone in a clever way, figuring out how to track all of the Hezbollah operatives with the pagers, as they did in Lebanon last year. These are extraordinarily capable technical things. But Israel's leaders still make the intelligence community leaders make massive miscalculations. October 7th was a massive miscalculation about what Hamas could and couldn't do in Gaza. And Israel paid a heavy price. They've now made another one. They were playing into what Bibi wanted. They said, we can assist in the overthrow of the regime. And that created a rationale to go to war for no good reason, for no urgent need. And now it's blowing up in their face because the Israelis had come to Trump and said, look, we can overthrow the regime. And that's why in the early days, that's all Trump really talked about, how we can overthrow it. This terrible regime has begun. I'm the first president who ever did this. So I want to stay on that for a moment. And love your reaction, too, because this shows you how no matter how smart people seem to be, no matter how technically capable they seem to be, they can make massive blunders.
- [08:16]
B
Yeah. And it's, It's. It's actually frightening because now what you have are essentially three sets of leadership, Israel, the United States and Iran, who are on a trajectory towards escalation. And honestly, we do not know where this is going to end. The big hope, including amongst some Iranians, is that this continues to weaken the government and that eventually, somehow, there will be an uprising that eventually topples it. Now, we have spoken endlessly about this, but this is still a hope in some quarters. The other fear now is that if it doesn't do that, it will instead solidify and consolidate all power in Iran around the hardliners who externally will say, if they're not toppled, we won because we survived. And internally will go after those who they already have identified as protesters and they'll keep the crackdown on. They're still doing it right now. They have their loyalists in the streets right now. And it'll be very, very difficult for the Iranian people in terms of if they stay in power. So at least in the short term, we don't know what will happen in the long term because the economy there will still be terrible. And that is something that the Iranian people legitimately react to, as well as wanting a completely different regime. But, you know, it was Nowruz this last weekend, and it was terrible for a lot of Iranians, including in the diaspora, because there was no real space to celebrate with abandon, as normally happens in Nowruz. No real ability inside Tehran and Iran to go around to their families, to have dinners and lunches and family visits and big shopping sprees and massive spring cleanings. All the things that people do on New Year there. They did. People did celebrate a little bit inside, but, you know, there was some scarcity in the bazaars as well. Of course, prices are sky high. But more to the point, people are now getting afraid. So all those wonderful voices that we heard at the beginning bravely saying, yes, come on, let's take this to the end, are diminishing in these, at least those who are willing to speak out, even under an anonymity, in just, you know, in their voicemails to us, to New York Times, to others, and they're getting really sc. Especially this threat by Trump over the weekend to knock out all their power plants, because that means literally nothing. They'd be in the dark. They'd be. I've been. I've been in a war zone with no electricity, whether it be in Iraq, whether it be in Sarajevo, wherever it might be. It is terrifying. Stuff, plus hospitals, unless they're fully kitted out with generators. But even that, you know, you have to have the oil to pump, you know, to fill them up and all the rest of it. The doctors were afraid that they wouldn't be able to keep treating their patients anyway. What Trump was threatening was really, really catastrophic. And as Senator Murphy says, a potential war crime. And then, Jamie, I wanted to ask you because the biggest power plant is Busheh. I, with my team at CNN in 1995, we went down to Busheh while the Russians were helping the Iranians build that power plant. It was started under the shah, but it was, you know, then it stopped, and then it started again under the Islamic Republic. And it is a nuclear power plant. What would happen if that one was targeted?
- [11:40]
C
Yeah, I mean, I can't imagine that the United States military would blow up the Bushehr nuclear power plant with all the attendant risks of radiation. That would be. As Senator Murphy points out, going after civilians in this way is a war crime. I don't believe that would happen.
- [12:01]
B
But not only that, why would they not do it? Look what the US Military's done already, you know, why would it not obey those orders?
- [12:10]
C
I don't think that's what Trump is going to do. Now, I could be wrong, and I've been wrong before with Trump. I think he is now looking for a way to use the threat of escalation to get the Iranians to stop the war. And what you've pointed out in your remarks is who are we dealing with? We're dealing with President Trump, who has these conflicting impulses. The Israelis who want to go to the end, and the Iranians who have a history of out negotiating themselves. Right now, there is a war with no winners going on. There are no winners in this war. The Iranians have, through the threat of to the Strait of Hormuz, have shown their power. And if they stay in power, they will still have demonstrated that power. They'll still be there. That means the United States and Israel didn't win. They weakened the regime. I still believe that's the best we can get out of this is a war with no winners. Where Iran is weaker, Israel gets not the victory that Mossad promised of a regime change. And Trump doesn't get the applause that he thought he was going to get. Remember, he thought this was going to be easy. He thought this was going to be Venezuela. So we're talking about a war with no winners. And now we have to have some Middle Eastern, probably Arab countries being the intermediary because the Iranians say they don't even want to talk to the United States. I don't know if that's true or not. That's what they're claiming. But either way, the outcome that seems most plausible to me is that Iran is weaker in missiles, in drones, in naval ships, in many other conventional military capabilities, but still has shown its power to shut down or damage the world economy. Trump can't get more than that unless he goes to ground troops to either take Carg island, to either take the nuclear material, all of which are huge undertakings with, with, you know, something on the order of 100,000 troops involved and a ground war that will break his coalition apart in the United States. So I think what we're in for is a cat and mouse type of negotiation, sometimes publicly, sometimes privately, where we end up with Trump using the threat of escalation to get this war stopped that he doesn't know how to stop now.
- [14:31]
B
And the Iranians are also escalating that, that missile, intermediate range ballistic missile that was fired towards Diego Garcia, which is the US UK base. But first I want to tell you, you know, I've, I'm in touch with, with, with people in Iran and I asked them about the escalation and, and negotiations and they say some are reaching out, you know, to try to de escalate. But de escalation is actually in the hands of those who are, you know, threatening to escalate against us. So he means, you know, this person, the US and Israel. And he said we have no option, just to respond forcefully eye to eye. So this is where we are. Plus, as you said, all the known quantities, most of the known quantities, if you did want to de escalate, have been killed. I mean, Trump, you know, says that and they have been. There are only a few left who may or may not be able to negotiate. The Foreign Minister, the Speaker of the Parliament, Galibouff, who's also very hard line, but not, not that many frankly. And there's been an incredible article which really blew my mind over the weekend. I don't know the origin, so I'm not going to vouch for it, but very detailed information about how Khamenei, the assassinated, so called Supreme Leader, had left 31 sets of instructions for the 31 IRGC commanders in each of the 31 Iranian provinces in case of his death and in case of, you know, lack of communication, war, etc. That they were to, to this is how they were to escalate and they would be the ones to decide how to do it. And that's extremely frightening. Let me just ask you something because you know a lot about missiles. And, and even though Trump claimed in his causes belli that one of the reasons was so that an intercontinental ballistic missile didn't attack the United States, which apparently there isn't such capacity in Iran, I think everybody was freaked out when they saw an inter range ballistic missile fired towards Diego Garcia was intercepted. One of them also failed. And then the threat that, that put
- [16:40]
C
Europe in range, Europe has always been in range of Iranian missiles. That's what a defense system we once put in place, I think in Eastern Europe. But you know, ballistic missiles are now landing in Dimona, the city in Israel, near the nuclear facility. Ballistic missiles. So the Israelis are now feeling the pain. I think Israel has been shocked by the fact that Iran has, despite all of these attacks, remember tens of thousands of targets are being hit, but still missiles and drones are coming. And what it's going to show is that at the end of this, Iran will still have missiles and drones. Probably not that many missile facilities, probably not that many production facilities, but some and they can get through. And another big loser in this war. Remember, the whole region of the Gulf was thought of as an oasis of calm where there was tourism and everyone was safe in Dubai, in Abu Dhabi, in Doha. All of these places now have lost their status as a safe location in this world. So this is a war with many, many, many, many losers. The only way this war could be a win is if the regime falls. That's the only way I see as a win. And you and I have talked about this over and over again and we need to keep reminding people we are seeing no signs that the Iranian people are going to rise up in this context of a massive war where their people are getting killed, where their friends and neighbors are gonna need food and medicine. And remember, if there are attacks on infrastructure, that means a blackout. These are not the circumstances in which these people will rise up. And so we have many, many losers. And the only thing that we can hope for is intermediary finds a way to negotiate. Because remember the last thing I should say here, Trump is going to have to tell Israel to stop the war if he gets what he wants. And he's going to have to use the power that he now has over Netanyahu because they're not going to want to stop this war, they're going to want to keep it going. And the Iranians are going to say if the Israelis attack us, we're attacking the Strait of Hormuz. So it's a three legged chair that is very, very wobbly. And Trump is going to have to come down on Netanyahu and say, look what I've done for you. Don't mess with me now. I need this war over. We've achieved a lot, but it's not going to be seen as a victory in Israel because the military wants this thing to keep going.
- [19:13]
B
You know, I interviewed the former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who's pretty hard line. He's not a, you know, liberal peacenik, let's say. And he, he has a lot of difficulties and differences with Netanyahu domestically, but on this war he fully agrees. But he even said to me it was not an imminent threat, but we had to go before the threat was imminent. So it's all, you know, quite, quite complicated. But he actually did say that they thought that Trump would want to end it and would make Israel end it. But then everybody wants to know what is it that's driving Trump apparently? Does he or doesn't he care about the midterms? I guess he really does care about the energy prices. Because, Jamie, it's not just oil. It's liquefied natural gas. It's the cost of crops because no fertilizer is coming through, no urea, that key compound for fertilizer. And every price is going up everywhere. The head of the iea, the International Energy Agency, said overnight at a meeting in Australia that this current energy shock is, is greater than the 1973 energy shock which came with the Arab oil embargo combined with the Russian invasion on Ukraine and, you know, the blockage of, of natural gas from there. So this is huge, absolutely humongous. And it's going to have, you know, fallout for, for many, many years to come. You know, the Qataris are saying that just, just it'll take five years just to rebuild the part of their LNG facility at, what is it, Ras Lafan that the Iranians attacked the other day. And again, you know, it's if essentially in this mode of escalation, this chapter was caused by Israel when it attacked the Pars oil field or gas field, which is the world's largest in Iran. And Trump professed to be angry about that. And then everybody said, well, he knew about it and he thought this was a good tactic and instead it's boomerang. And I just say one more thing because I think it's vital for all those who hope in the diaspora and inside Iran that Trump is coming to the Rescue. Both he and Netanyahu have backed off any public support or encouragement for the people of Iran. And their intelligence is saying that at this time it doesn't look like they're going to be able to do it. And you know, Richard Haass, who you know well, a former State Department official, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, recently said in his latest interview or posting, the new doctrine is we break it, you own it.
- [21:50]
C
All of which is another way of saying that how much everyone loses and is losing from this war, lose in the Arab world, lose in Israel because they see that Trump won't go all the way, lose in the United States because we have alienated and destroyed our reputation for using our power wisely. And Iran the worst, obviously suffering the people there and the deaths that have been caused there. So this is going to go down, in my opinion, as one of the all loser wars of all time, which was never well explained. And now we just have to wait for a way for the three legged stool to stay standing up where Trump, the Iranians and the Israelis find a way to end this war. Because I don't think it can last too much longer. I just don't see Trump tolerating it. It's gone way beyond had expected. That's why he's putting posts out saying things are going well, we're negotiating, we're going to solve this problem. His base is going nuts, this is not what they voted for and instead he's getting support from the former neocons. That's what I find so ironic.
- [23:01]
B
Yeah, so look, we never know. And I'm not going to say a word about this. I have no idea how this is going to end and I have no idea how Trump is going to change his mind line from one minute, one hour, one truth social point post to the next. One thing we actually should now sort of adjust is that actually the base, if you just take the base and not the influencers who are big names like the Joe Rogans and the Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, they're still 100 behind Trump. Now it doesn't mean to say they're all 100 behind this war, but basically whatever Trump does, they like. Although a lot of those who are not his base in the Republican Party, you're correct to say do not like this. So the polls are not good for him in general in the United States. And the other thing I just wanted to say because we're going to go to a break now. When we come back, Jamie, let's talk about how he, before he's called this pause, and it's just a pause and a timeout. He's not said, we're not going to strike anything for five days. We're just not going to strike those big power plants for five days. This is going to continue. It's been continuing every, you know, every single day and night. People nowhere can get any sleep. I've been talking to people in Israel. They cannot sleep. People in Tehran cannot sleep. And it's a, it's a terrible thing. I'm talking about ordinary people. And by the way, you talked about the damage to Dimona. They had a hundred casualties, I don't mean deaths, but at least 100 people in Arad and Dimona were injured when this Iranian missile went in over the weekend, or a couple of them and the Iron Dome failed there. That's also a real issue that Israel is having to grapple with right now. And nobody had predicted this from Iran. When we come back, Jamie, let's talk about how Trump has been calling his European and NATO allies cowards for not coming to his aid. What should be done there. And then let's also talk about what we've sort of been alluding to, diplomacy. I interviewed one of your predecessors at the State Department, Nicholas Burns, who you know well, and he was saying that, you know, a massive layer of diplomats have been simply axed by Trump. So who do you go to for any, any nonpartisan diplomacy and advice? Let's take a break. We'll come back.
- [25:25]
A
It's sports. Greatest soap opera and we've got your VIP pass. Took all the drama. This is up to Speed. Your new Formula One podcast with me, Will Buxton, David Coulthard, Naomi Schiff and Jolie Sharp. Expect unfiltered race reactions, behind the scenes insight and blockbuster interviews, plus answers to the questions you've always wanted to ask, like, do F1 drivers pass their driving test first time? Spoiler. They don't. When the race weekend's over, we're here to keep you up to speed. Listen and watch today. Search up to Speed on Global Player up to speed.
- [26:13]
B
Okay, guys, we're back. Continuing this conversation because some aspects are really worth doubling down on. All this past week, the narrative here in Europe has been Trump attacking verbally European allies and NATO allies, calling them cowards, insisting they come and help reopen the Straits of Hormuz and trying to figure out how to get them to do it. And there's been some shifting from not wanting to be involved at all to saying, this is not our War. They're not sending assets really en masse right now, but there's been some shifting of trying to figure out how we do this. What do you make of that, Jamie? Can you see Britain, France, I don't know, Germany, the others doing anything that is helping Trump here or helping in this war effort, helping Hormuz Straits be reopened.
- [27:09]
C
My best guess, and obviously nobody knows, but let me give you my best guess. I think Greenland broke the European American alliance when President Trump threatened to invade Greenland. This was a bridge too far for all the European allies. France, not all of them, but pretty much most of them. Britain, Germany, obviously Denmark. I've heard that Denmark was sending in troops to prepare for the possible invasion of England. When that happened, the trust and confidence that has been built up over literally 70 years between the United States and Europe cracked. And I don't see that trust and confidence being restored for a very, very long time. Perhaps a generation of goodwill will have to be generated before people will trust the United States again. Why is that related to this? When you have allies and friends, even when they disagree with you, they come and help you because they know you're their friend. I remember during the Libya crisis, President Obama was apparently persuaded by Hillary Clinton to do something about Libya, by her saying they came and helped us in Afghanistan, they put their lives at risk in Afghanistan. We need to do something for them. That's what allies do. That's what do we all have those relationships that broke in Greenland. So now what are these countries doing? Well, they are trying to get show some support enough to not break completely with the United States and force Trump to get out of NATO but do the absolute minimum and only respond when their own forces are put at risk and provide minimal support. They're not going to do this unless we go to some full scale land escalation. The kind of I've been saying I don't think will happen. With hundreds of thousands of troops and a years long war. I don't see Europeans changing their posture and that is they're going to do the barest minimum because they're just going to try to avoid a final break with the United States. But they don't believe in this war. They don't believe the Strait of Hormuz can be protected easily even if they sent all their ships in. It's a months long operation to try to demine that place. People who know something about it have written saying it takes a long, long time to control the Strait of Hormuz. And that's why I say that it doesn't look like Iran is going to fall the regime and it's going to still have this threat to close the Strait of Hormuz when it's all over and thus everyone is going to be worse off.
- [29:47]
B
I was quite. What's the right word? I guess a little bit. I don't know how even to describe my reaction when I saw the Secretary General of NATO. I mean, again, his forces, he's the Secretary General, but all those NATO leaders are being called cowards. That would include him as well. And yet he comes out and he says, you know, Trump is just trying to make the world a safer place. This is Mark Rutter. And then also on the Sunday shows, the Israeli ambassador to the U.S. told, I believe it was CNN that, that actually, you know, we're still talking about ground troops. Who knows who's ground troops? Are they Kurds? Are they? Who, who are they? But we're still talking about ground troops. So all of this stuff is still floating in, in the atmosphere. But Jamie, you talked about, you know, the Denmark reaction and sending troops. There's a whole article that I saw where Denmark was even apparently considering blowing up airfields in Greenland to prevent a US Invasion of Greenland. It just boggles my mind. It boggles my mind. I don't understand it. I don't understand it. I don't understand it.
- [30:57]
C
You're exactly right. And that's where, why I think that nothing has been the same ever since. To think that Denmark was even. This is one of the strongest pro American peoples of Europe that fought with us in war, after war and after war, and people have died. And they are a very pro American country. I've spoken with many Danish diplomats over the years. They're the ones you Americans could count on. For them to believe the United States might, just might invade their country was a crack so deep that I think we're going to be paying a heavy, heavy price for it. And that's why we, you and I, have trouble understanding what to say about it because it so breaks with everything we know, everything we've learned about international affairs and reminds you that President Trump is not getting what you would call normal advice. You know, Marco Rubio may be very proud of himself because of what's happened in Venezuela, which is something he's always wanted, and maybe Cuba will be next. But he's enabled the president to damage the strongest thing America has in the world, which is our allies. What's made us different than every other great power for thousands of years is that we have allies Those allies are not going to be the same in my lifetime. We're going to have to work for the rest of a generation to rebuild that trust. Maybe quicker than that, I would like to think, but that's how deep the damage has been.
- [32:24]
B
For those who believe that Trump can do no wrong, there is a couple of theories. One is the madman theory, which I thought he tested with North Korea when in his first term from the U.N. he called Kim Jong Un, he called him Little Rocket man and Fire and Fury and all of that. And after that he actually had, I think it was three meetings with him. I covered them in Singapore, I think there was Korea and also, also in Hanoi. It didn't actually come to anything because there was no follow up. I was told by the South Korean foreign minister. And as such, North Korea now is actually a nuclear power, a nuclear armed state, nuclear weapons state. I guess what I'm trying to ask you is there are a certain number of people who believe, and then maybe they're mostly in the United States and, and a lot of people who believe support what Trump is doing in Iran and Israel. Is there anything to be said for this kind of 180 degrees disruption in order to get back to, or get to a place where the world is safer, the world is better for trade, for human rights, for democracies, for all of that kind of stuff, as Trump was, would have it. Actually he doesn't say democracy and human rights, of course.
- [33:49]
C
I like to be, as you know, on this show over the months we've been doing it to try to find some silver linings in things and try to find some optimistic scenario. I cannot find one in this circumstance. There is little likelihood that President Trump can end this war without everything still being broken, the alliance still being broken, broken. The Iranian regime not broken, still there. The Israelis miserable because they didn't get their regime change. The Arab world miserable because of all that's happened. You know, you mentioned North Korea and that is one of the terrible lessons of this war is that Iran and people need to understand this. Ten, 20 years ago, they could have built a nuclear weapon. They had the enriched uranium, they had the ability to enrich it to the level required for a crude nuclear device. Could have tried to weaponize that material. They chose not to. Instead, they thought they could be a threshold state and that would be sufficient. Most of the Iranians who haven't been killed, now that I've seen quoted or discussing this subject now realize they made a mistake, they should have built a nuclear weapon. That's why the one thing that can't happen from this war, I think there is going to be a powerful instinct in Iran to build a nuclear weapon unless that material is somehow controlled. And this is the crucial part of any war termination strategy. Some way has to be found for the international community to know that that material is not going to be weaponized or else we're going to have a nuclear armed Iran within five to ten years. I'm sure of that
- [35:31]
B
from here it looks pretty bleak. It does. It just looks bleak. And I will say it again because this is who I care about most and that is the Iranian people. And I just hope to God their hopes and dreams are dashed and that they don't end up into a bigger prison that they are right now. Anyway, let us take a break because when we come back, we are going to have our recommendations. All right, guys, we're back. Segment three, which is our recommendation segment. Jamie, what's yours this week?
- [36:12]
C
Well, normally I try to do a book or a film, but this time I was so moved by an an op ed in the New York Times by a man named Phil Klay, K L A Y. He's a Marine veteran, a Marine Corps veteran, I guess, also a novelist. He served in, in Iraq. And I've been trying to put into words for weeks now why I found this war so difficult to deal with. Because of the lack of justification, because of the failure to plan, because of all the many mistakes. And, and Mr. Clay put into words as a, as a soldier, what I've been trying to say as a diplomat. And he harked back to the days of Washington, Lincoln, fdr, our great presidents. And he pointed out how when they fought real wars that caused enormous damage and sacrifice for the American people and obviously for others when they were fighting Hitler, when they were fighting the Revolutionary War, when we were fighting each other in the Civil War, our presidents talked about, about war with gravity and depth and understanding that this is the worst thing that can happen in the modern world, to fight each other and kill each other. As opposed to what we're seeing now coming out of the administration where war is turned into a game, where they use videos and cartoons. And he's appalled as a soldier that the ultimate sacrifice soldiers are offered must face on behalf of their country need to be justified in a way that is meaningful. And for whatever you think about previous American wars, Vietnam, Iraq, all of them, there were rationales that soldiers believed in. And what he's saying is as a soldier, he doesn't see how his fellow soldiers could could get up in the morning and look at themselves in the mirror when the White House is putting out video games that turn war into a game or demonstrate that the world is a horrible terrorist, terrible, miserable place, and the only thing that matters is extreme power. As Stephen Miller, as apparently, he quotes Stephen Miller saying something to that effect. And that is a grim world that a soldier doesn't want. And I thought he put it into words. I don't. I don't even want to pretend to summarize them, but he said it so beautifully that I'm recommending that people read that. And I'm gonna, you know, keep that by my side when I think about this war.
- [38:34]
B
He really did. I actually read it as well. But I also read his critique of the language used by everybody from President Trump to Hegseth and the rest of it. You know, Trump talking about. It's fun. You know, I might just drop some bombs because it's fun. Hegseth talking about stupid rules of engagement. In other words, wanting to cast off, you know, the actual rules and laws and rules of war. So I think he was very, you know, moral on that issue as well. This. This author, I want to recommend, if anybody hasn't seen it yet, yet, an exceptionally rare voice from the Arab world. Arab leader. He's the foreign minister of Oman. He was one of the key or the key mediator in the last round of talks between the United States and. And. And Iran just as the war was starting. And he's written the most incredible article. I honestly, I've never seen. I've never heard of. I've never read an Arab leader, somebody from the UAE or Saudi Arabia or Qatar and the Sultanate of Oman come out and be so frank and so honest about his perspective about the negotiations and about what this is going to do and about the United States. He basically said, it's this. This administration's biggest miscalculation ever. And I was pretty. I was pretty knocked sideways to read that from a senior Arab diplomat. Because I can tell you what, we can't get them on our air for love nor money. All these people can't get the Iranians, can't get the Arabs on, can't get anybody on. And I'll tell you what, this is also dangerous because there was a time when CNN actually, let's go back to the first Gulf War, was a place where, you know, you could see the. The wheels and the machinery of diplomacy happening. You had these, you know, important figures, James Baker and Edward Shevardnadze and Tariq Aziz talking about all the players in the first Gulf War of Iraq, the United States, Russia, et cetera. And, and none of that is happening now. You don't see any of that. Any of that. And to have this, you know, foreign minister from Oman come out and speak so coherently about what's going on was quite bracing. It's in the Economist if anybody wants to read it, and I recommend it. On that note, Jamie, that was great. We'll be back. We'll be back back soon with our bonus Q A episode that drops on a Thursday. And we'll be answering your questions. So don't forget to subscribe to our YouTube channel. You just search. Christiana Monpour presents the X Files. So goodbye from me in London.
- [41:19]
A
This has been a global player, original production.