Rocket Money User/Testimonial Speaker (2:59)

The number one resolution for people last year was to save more money, but nearly half gave up by February. Don't let that be you. Download Rocket Money to reach your financial goals this year, track your spending, cut waste and automate savings in one simple app. Rocket Money shows you all your expenses and categorizes them so you know exactly where your money's going and where you're overspending. From there, the app cuts waste by canceling your unused subscriptions and lowering your bills. No customer service needed. With that money freed up, the app will automatically set some cash aside for your goals. Whether it's an emergency fund, paying off debt or saving for vacation, Rocket Money's got you covered. Users love the app with over 186,000 five star ratings and on average, users can save up to $740 a year when using all of the app's premium features. Make saving money a priority this year. Go to RocketMoney.com Cancel to get started. That's RocketMoney.com Cancel RocketMoney.com Cancel Dear listeners.

Thomas Small (4:00)

Welcome back to Conflicted. I'm Thomas Small. Here with me, as always, is Eamon Dean and Eamon. Once again we have to confess to the Dear listeners that the best laid schemes of mice and men do indeed sometimes go awry.

Eamon Dean (4:15)

Amazing indeed. What can we do? At the end of the day? We live in tumultuous times and we have to respond to events as they happen.

Thomas Small (4:24)

We had planned to release Dear Listeners, the first of a two episode series on Boko Haram this week, but we have decided instead to give you another up to the minute update on the ever evolving situation on the ground, in the air and at sea. The situation is involving Iran and the United States and the whole region. The interminable Will he or won't he? Regarding Donald Trump and the prospect of American strikes against the regime or full blown war against the regime, the situation is evolving. But I suppose, Eamonn, it's still not for sure clear what's going to happen.

Eamon Dean (5:05)

Well, no one can be so sure about what's going to happen. At the end of the day, I'm still sticking to the 7030 probability that this will not be resolved peacefully at all.

Thomas Small (5:15)

Okay, well, sit back, dear listeners, and strap on. Eamon is going to tell us what's been happening behind the scenes in the intense negotiations between the White House and Tehran. Let's get right into it. Amen. Amen. Amen. You know, every freaking week I'm preparing my episode and then I get a text from you, Thomas. What do you think? Do you think we should maybe do an episode and then you will give me a hint of some serious insider information that you have become privy to. And of course, what I always wanna know is who's telling you this stuff. Spill the beans, Eamon. Where are you getting this information?

Eamon Dean (5:59)

Well, unfortunately, I don't want to be suicided, you know. Thomas.

Thomas Small (6:07)

Are you saying you're the Epstein of the Middle East? David.

Eamon Dean (6:13)

I can tell you, like, basically that, you know, in certain departments I'm extremely dry at the moment. Like, you know, basically, I mean, goodness, there is no island, there are no girls, there are no parties. Ah, well, Lakina, I mean, what am I doing this for, man? What am I doing this for?

Thomas Small (6:30)

So your Valentine's Day was about as exciting as mine, was it, Evan?

Eamon Dean (6:34)

Well, let me put it this way, Lakina. I mean, you know, I'm here stuck with a long bearded guy like you. Hey, hey, I wish there was a girl at least.

Thomas Small (6:46)

Oh, dear. Well, to return to the serious topic of discussion, David, you know, before you spill the beans on what's happened, let's say in the last day. And literally it's like the last day, the last 12 hours even. This is how fast things are moving. I think it would be good if we just sort of set out for the listeners a summary of how the Iranian negotiating position during these high stakes negotiations with the White House brokered through the Omanis. How the Iranian negotiating position has evolved over the last about 17, 18 days. So at the end of January, I mean, we know you told us that the President of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, rang the Saudi Crown prince. Everyone knows that. What exactly did they discuss? Did Iran present some kind of opening gambit in that call?

Eamon Dean (7:40)

Well, if the listeners remember, Thomas, we said here on Conflicted, Conflicted was one of the first, if not the first public outlet that put out that information that President Masoud Bezzishkian of the Islamic Republic of Iran offered MBS the nugget that he can take to the Americans that the Islamic Republic is willing to transfer the custody of the 411kg of highly enriched uranium to the custody of a third party. It only started actually to become a serious subject of media speculation only in the past three days. Prior to that, hardly anyone was talking about it. So we were the first actually to break it.

Thomas Small (8:22)

I have to say, dear listeners, this is my opportunity to say if you like this kind of information and you want to get it early, you gotta sign up to the conflicted community where Eamonn every week tells subscribers only some seriously juicy stuff, nuggets, as he calls it. So sign up. Okay, Eamon. So there was this call and the Iranian president offered to give up all its stocks of enriched uranium to a third party. Has that third party come to light subsequently?

Eamon Dean (8:50)

Well, most likely it's going to be the Russians because they are the ones with the capability on the ground. They run the civilian nuclear reactor at Bushahr. So they do deal actually with enriched uranium on Iranian soil. And so they have that capability and also the trust by both parties, ironically, basically by both Tehran and the White House in order to execute such transfer of this material. And then once they are there in the custody of Moscow, the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors can go and inspect them and confirm the origins of the material.

Thomas Small (9:24)

Why did the Iranian president call the Saudi Crown Prince to tell him this information? I mean, was MBS acting as a go between at the time? I remember back, it feels like a million years ago at that time the, the Saudis were quite publicly opposed to any military action in Iran at the time. Did the Iranians think, well, maybe MBS can act to sort of, you know, dampen the White House's animal instincts or something. How did that go? Why did Iran talk to Saudi?

Eamon Dean (9:50)

Well, first of all, we have to make it absolutely clear that there is no love lost between either Saudi or Iran. And the Saudis would dance with joy, including MBS himself, if the regime, the Islamic regime in Tehran were to fall tomorrow. But MBS is not an idiot. He is still scarred tremendously by the experience when the Americans. I'm talking here about Biden's White House or shall I say Obama's third term, when they throw him under a bus literally in order to win the favor from Iran.

Thomas Small (10:22)

Eamonn, you know, your English is amazing, but it wasn't literal. MBS was not literally thrown under a bus.

Eamon Dean (10:27)

Oh, sorry, figuratively, proverbially, under a bus, in order to win favor with Iran, who they were negotiating with for years, a new revived nuclear deal. Iran negotiated for four years, and there was nothing, you know, there was no deal. Nothing. And Biden's White House lost Saudi Arabia for no good reason. And of course, because of the way they treated Saudi Arabia, they switched off the sale of defensive weapons, including Patriot missiles. Also, they threatened to disable the softwares, which will enable the Saudis to intercept Iranian ballistic missiles fired by the Houthis against Saudi Arabia to the point where the Saudis had to seek peace, humiliating peace, you know, and the truce with the Houthis and pay them $133 million a month in order to just prevent a catastrophe against their energy facilities and everything.

Thomas Small (11:19)

So how did that influence MBS's calculations, you know, three weeks ago?

Eamon Dean (11:23)

Well, it influenced him because when the American administration came to him and said, look, we need you, we need Saudi airspace, we need Saudi ports, we need Saudi air bases, we need the entire territory to be on our side. And he was like, yeah, but you are not sure yourself whether he will do it or not. How do you want me to expose my position as I am with you 100%, and then you will go and do deal with them? Because that's what you are saying, President Trump, you want a deal. You know, that's all you are going after. So what if they give you the deal and then I end up being stuck with a newly empowered Iran with sanctions lifted and, you know, a new body like in the basically of the United States, and then they can take revenge against me using the Houthis or the Iraqi militias or Hezbollah or anything else. So that's why he was cautious. This caution is what emboldened the president of the Islamic Republic to call him and to say, you know what? Listen, I will strengthen the Saudi position of sticking to negotiations with a significant concession. And that's a concession. So this is how it all started.

Thomas Small (12:32)

I see. The concession to give up all its stocks of enriched uranium, which is, from what we understand, that's nowhere near what the Americans, you know, probably in discussions with their Israeli allies were, were going for. Because the Americans had, at least publicly, these four conditions, right? The nuclear conditions, the ballistic missile conditions, the proxy conditions, and what's the fourth one?

Eamon Dean (12:54)

The stockpile. I mean, basically, the nuclear issue is divided into two. First, you have the stockpiles of the enriched uranium, and then after that, you have the enrichment, the continued enrichment, the centrifuges.

Thomas Small (13:06)

So it's what they've already enriched. Then it's their capacity to enrich more and more. And then it's the ballistic missile program, especially medium to long range missiles and the proxy network.

Eamon Dean (13:16)

Exactly.

Thomas Small (13:17)

Those are the four conditions. So, you know, in the end of January, the Iranian president is calling the MBS and giving him really one of those conditions, not enough for the Americans. How then does Iran's kind of negotiating strategy move?

Eamon Dean (13:29)

Well, first of all, it was opportunistic for everyone from the point of President Trump. He doesn't have enough assets in the region to even basically launch a sustained campaign because, one, he doesn't have enough fighter jets and offensive capability, and second, he doesn't have defensive capability to defend American bases, let alone American allies in the region. So he thought, okay, let's all buy the most important currency right now, which is not Bitcoin, but it's time. Time, Exactly. So they were buying time.

Thomas Small (14:04)

The Americans were buying time having kind of made this big grand show that they were gonna launch an attack soon. Actually, they had to back off, buy some time, start negotiations, get their troops in order. I mean, that's what's been going on the last two weeks. It's a little bit confusing. And on the Iranian side, they interpreted this as, we don't know what to do, we need to concede more.

Eamon Dean (14:23)

Exactly. And this is when we started to see, and that's important for the dynamics, we started to see something that we did not see being absolutely visible over the past four decade. We all knew that the IRGC was a powerful entity within Iran, but we always assumed that it is a faction among other factions and that it has to fight for its stupor, it has to fight for its own position within the Islamic Republic. But over the past two weeks, the way it was defending its position, because you see, the nuclear issue is a shared responsibility between several factions within the Islamic Republic, which is the ayatollah, several ministries, the president himself, as well as the armed forces, as well as the IRGC. The IRGC maybe control about 20% of the entire program, which include the protection of the sites and procurement and all of this.

Thomas Small (15:21)

So it's a strategic issue that really includes a wide umbrella of the government. The whole state is sort of invested in that issue. The IRGC does not dominate it.

Eamon Dean (15:30)

Exactly. However, the ballistic missile program and the proxies, by the way, the IRGC never call them proxies. They call them regional allies, as if that will legitimize their existence. But the regional allies issue and the ballistic missile issue these two issues are purely, exclusively, 100% the prerogative of the IRGC. In the fact that the IRGC now is forced by the American side and also by the faction of the president in Pezeshkayan. To actually start talking seriously about the future of these two issues has angered it so much that first of all it united it. Usually the IRGC is divided into roughly two major factions. The zealot faction, which believe basically they are guarding the emergence of the Imam Mahdi Empire and that the Mahdi, the Messiah will come. So they really drank the Kool Aid. But then you have also the economy managers of the IRGC. The IRGC controls $250 billion of assets within Iran, between 40 and 45% of the Iranian GDP. The entire Iranian economy, half of it almost is controlled by the irgc. Thanks to the sanctions, which they love very much. And also thanks to their ability to coerce the public and private sector in Iran, including banking, energy, telecommunication, food, construction, engineering, they coerced all of these sectors into serving the goals of the Islamic Revolution. So even these people who were always never seeing eye to eye with the zealots are now united. They say the ballistic missiles and the proxies are the wings by which the falcon of the Islamic Revolution can fly. When we cannot give up either of these. They even said, Thomas, something interesting. They said we cannot allow in the negotiation any mechanism of inspection because they said, we don't want to end up humiliated like Saddam Hussein Zirak in the aftermath of the Gulf War in 1991, where he was subjected to 12 years of inspections into his ballistic missile program. It didn't matter. The inspectors went to every nook and cranny, including his palaces. They subjected Iraq to two devastating campaigns of airstrikes. The first one was in 1992 under George H.W. bush, and then after that under Clinton and Blair in 1998 in Operation Desert Fox. They said that, look at the pattern. They hit them, then they invaded them in 2003 and then Saddam was hanged in 2006. Is not a good pattern. All of this happened within the space of 15 years only.

Thomas Small (18:15)

I mean also they might have Gaddafi in their heads. Like he made a deal over the nuclear program and then within five years he was, you know, ramroded through by his own people.

Eamon Dean (18:24)

Goodness. Yeah, exactly. And that, that's why from their point of view, we will only accept self imposed limit on the ballistic missile program. So in the first negotiating position, they told Bezoskian, send your people. You know, they mean Iraqchi and Others send your people back. But you must state our position. There is no negotiation whatsoever over the ballistic missile program or the regional allies. That's it. We are not going to negotiate on these two principal issues.

Thomas Small (18:56)

So that's interesting, because on the surface, a couple of weeks after that phone call between the Iranian President and MbS, Iran's national security Advisor, Ali Larijani, handed over a letter to the negotiating team in Oman in which it seemed like the Iranian position had kind of conceded a bit. So that in addition to giving up all its stocks of enriched uranium, which is the offer that was made to mbs, Iran was now also open to dismantling the whole enrichment program, basically its entire nuclear program, inside Iran. So on the surface, it seemed like they were making a further concession. But actually what you're saying is that in the background, the IRGC was forbidding them from offering any concession on the ballistic missiles or on the proxies?

Eamon Dean (19:53)

Yes, because from their point of view, they are telling the rest of Iran, do whatever you must, but from our side, we are not going to give up the two most dear issues to our heart and our existence. Now, this, for the first time ever, united the IRGC as one entity, political entity within Iran. And then we started to realize that actually the IRGC has become a state within a state. Now it's the first time it's no longer receiving orders from the Supreme Leader.

Thomas Small (20:22)

From the Ayatollah, not even from the Supreme Leader. I mean, we've all known for years that the Iranian President has no control over the irgc. But are you telling me that the IRGC has even sort of wiggled out from under the control of the Supreme Leader? The IRGC is supposed to be the Ayatollah's private army, frankly. But they're acting pretty independently now.

Eamon Dean (20:45)

They are not acting independently. They are just warning the Supreme Leader not to give in to the pressure from the President and his moderate factions and to remember that what the IRGC has built cannot be dismantled. Otherwise it will threaten the position of the Ayatollah himself.

Thomas Small (21:03)

I see. And you know, in the face of that, what would Possesskian say in answer to this? Ayman Pezechyan will know. The IRGC is telling Khamenei, if you move on the ballistic missiles or on the proxies, you're finished. The revolution is finished. What can the president say to contradict the. What might he tell Khamenei?

Eamon Dean (21:22)

Well, it's becoming clear right now that Pezesh Kian and his foreign minister, Abbas Arakchi, are becoming the messengers between the American side and the Islamic Republic. True leaders, Ayatollah Khamenei represented by Ali La Rajani as well as the irgc. It's like as if Abbas Arakji, the Foreign Minister of Iran, he is actually a middleman between the IRGC, which now has emerged as a state within a state for the first time. And that has given a new idea that emerged with the visit of Prime Minister Netanyahu to dc.

Thomas Small (22:00)

Great. Now listen, Eamon, I know you want to move on to Netanyahu's visit, but before we do, I do want to ask you a quick question about this remarkable thing that happened before his visit in the last two weeks. So on the 6th of February, the US Treasury Secretary Scott Besant testified before the Senate Banking Committee. And in the course of this testimony, he simply mentions that the US had, in his words, created a dollar shortage in Iran through its sanctions and that this had directly led to the uprising, to the protests beginning in the end of December. Now, he framed it as a deliberate economic pressure campaign, a maximum pressure strategy, he said. Now, he didn't say explicitly that the goal was to spark protests, but he definitely acknowledged that the economic distress that had contributed to that unrest was consciously and deliberately caused by the us. What do you think about this testimony? Do you think it's totally true and accurate, or Besant is, let's say, claiming responsibility for the US for something that was much bigger than the US's ability to bring about.

Eamon Dean (23:07)

Well, he framed it in the way that the US created a dollar shortage in Iran. Did they do it? Yes, they've been adamant and they've been doing it extremely efficiently. Do you remember, Thomas, when we talked about Venezuela, President Maduro being arrested and all of that? And I said to you that one of the main reasons why the US moved against Venezuela and against President Maduro in particular is because of how he helped Hezbollah and the IRGC launder significant amount of dollars within the forex and banking system of Venezuela and you know, routing it through Mauritius and routing it through other banking hubs and by putting significant pressure on Venezuela and started to sanction one bank after another, one exchange company after another, one exchange house after another that started the drain on the dollars that were actually destined towards Iran and the Iran and that created the dollar shortage because they started looking at the source and then the hubs and the clearing houses and then basically like, you know, what actually end up like, you know, in either Tehran or in Baghdad or in Beirut, they started attacking like in all of These nerve joints, like in, basically for the financial system of Iran. And they succeeded.

Thomas Small (24:30)

It was a bit of financial acupuncture.

Eamon Dean (24:33)

Exactly. Which added so much pressure on the Iranian system that the currency started to tank. And that will continue. I mean, basically that will continue. And that's why once we explain what happened during the Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit to D.C. we will see that in the aftermath of that, the Iranian shift of their position, not shifting, but I would say basically improvement of their offer, focused a lot on steps that would alleviate the financial effects of the sanction. Because it's the financial effects, it's the shortage of the dollar and, and their ability to trade oil sufficiently and efficiently is what hurting them so much right now.

Thomas Small (25:12)

Okay, so U.S. treasury Secretary Besant's testimony was accurate, but still an unusually candid admission that financial tools were used to destabilize Iran economically, like on purpose. Very interesting. Now we're going to take a quick break and when we get back, Eamonn, you're going to tell us about Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington. You're going to give us all the behind the scenes details and illuminate us to what's going on inside that man's head and how Donald Trump is responding. We'll be right back.

Rocket Money Advertiser (25:48)

Want to feel more confident with your finances this year? If you have 60 seconds, I can show you how quick and easy it is to start building healthy money habits that could last you the entire year just by using Rocket Money. Step one, download Rocket Money. Step two, link all your accounts and see your entire spending picture. Your subscriptions, your upcoming bills, your due dates, everything. Step three, tap a subscription you don't use and cancel it. Boom. That's money back every single month. Step four, create a financial goal for something you want to save for. Whether it be a vacation, a retirement account, or a pet's birthday. We don't judge. Now let the app automatically move small amounts of cash towards your goal. In a month, you'll see real dollars piling up. In a year, you'll be shocked at how much money you saved, similar to the over 10 million members on the app that have saved up to $740 a year. When using all of the app's premium features, use the Savings Challenge as one step closer to feeling better about your finances. Today@rocketmoney.com Cancel that's rocketmoney.com Cancel. One more time, it's rocketmoney.com Cancel foreign.

Thomas Small (27:00)

We're back. We're talking about Iran negotiations with Iran carried out by the United States. And when we left off, aim and you were going to talk about the visit that Benjamin Netanyahu paid to Washington D.C. on 11 February. So that was four days ago, as of this recording, Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington, met with US President Donald Trump at the White House. Reuters, Eamon and I know you think that some of the public reporting on this visit has not been entirely accurate. Reuters reported that Netanyahu came obviously to discuss the negotiations with Iran. He was concerned that if the negotiations failed, then the conflict would widen the standard Israeli view. Really. He publicly signaled a kind of skepticism that an agreement could ever be reached. But apparently he was privately telling Trump that Iran could be forced into a good deal. So there's a sort of disconnect there, according to Reuters, between what Netanyahu is saying publicly and what he's telling the President privately. What do you think? What do you think Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington was all about? And what do you think it has resulted in, if anything?

Eamon Dean (28:10)

First of all, Thomas, we have to understand, and I have to tell the listeners here that there is a deliberate strategy by multiple players involved in this entire confrontation, or shall I call it pre confrontation, in putting out a lot of confusing noise. This noise is supposed to be confusing for everyone, not only basically for the leaders of the Islamic Republic, but even for us, basically. So we can't guess exactly the direction that the White House is going to take. However, my job here is to sift through the noise and also Lakina, I mean, try to get as much as possible pretty accurate understanding of what was really happening there. First of all, let's not pay too much attention to words being put out on Reuters, Axios, ft, WSJ, Lakinamin or any of the other outlets. They are designed for either adding pressure or to muddy the waters or to create confusing noise. Let's look at action. And so there has been lots of actions that took place afterwards. The first of them is to send another aircraft carrier with immediate haste, which will arrive anytime between roughly like before the 9th of March, which is the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier.

Thomas Small (29:29)

Was that the one that was sent to the Caribbean and then back again? The Gerald Ford?

Eamon Dean (29:32)

Yeah. The Gerald Ford is the aircraft carrier that took part in the arrest of Maduro, the Gerald Ford.

Thomas Small (29:39)

I mean, I do feel a bit sorry for the. The naval seamen on board the Gerald Ford. It was in the Mediterranean and then in November was told to go to the Caribbean. It got to the Caribbean, participated in the Venezuela Adventure. And then a couple of days ago it was told, right, head back to the Mediterranean, presumably the eastern Mediterranean, in order to be, you know, there should sparks begin to fly.

Eamon Dean (30:00)

Exactly. So, so that's the first sign that, well, we are not expecting anything less than a confrontation. That's the first thing. The second thing is the amount of shipments that are coming into the Middle east is staggering. First of all, Significant number of F15 fighter jets, significant number of F35 fighter jets, significant number of aircraft refueling capacity. Almost 60 are available right now in both Europe, Mediterranean and the Middle east, which is enough to sustain a long campaign. Also, at the same time, the most important ones are the interceptors. The air defence capability, the electronic warfare capability has been beefed up significantly. It doesn't mean that you deploy things, you have to use them. Let's be honest about it, like in a minute, you deploy them for the maximum pressure because maybe your enemy will decide to raise the white flag before a bullet is even fired. But let's be clear about this. What Netanyahu and also the national security team of the White House discussed as a whole in terms of the strategy, if Netanyahu went there in order to say, oh, you can get a good deal with them, yes, there is a possibility we could negotiate. That's a noise that never happened. And the reason is because you don't take the head of your air force to America with you. Basically, if you are trying to find a peaceful solution, you take the Foreign minister, you know, you take senior diplomats with you, you take the head of the intelligence. If you are trying to find other non kinetic ways of forcing the regime into submission. Here, however, we see mostly his delegation consisted of military personnel. Now we come to my understanding from credible people basically who were familiar with the event. I'm talking about the Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit there. They say that the discussions were far from being totally conciliatory towards Iran. If anything, it is about addressing a rather important, or I would say two important aspects that President Trump is cautious about. The first one is we need a defined objective. What is the objective here? Redeem, change. Forget it. It's not going to happen from the air. Air campaigns never dislodged a regime directly, usually indirectly. Afterwards you start to see movement, just like what happened with Slobodan Milosevic in the aftermath of the NATO campaign. Months later, he was deposed by his own people.

Thomas Small (32:26)

And Libya as well?

Eamon Dean (32:27)

Yeah, and Libya. So there is no direct correlation between air campaigns and the fall of tyrants.

Thomas Small (32:33)

If air campaigns could dislodge regimes, then the Houthis would have fallen years ago.

Eamon Dean (32:38)

Exactly eight years of the Saudis doing it and the Emiratis doing it. It was all in failure. That is why President Trump is cautious and hesitant. What is the defined objective here? What are we trying to achieve? The second thing is, what about the day after? Do we have an exit strategy? What is the defined ending of the conflict? I don't want to go into a mission creep. I don't want to end up having body bags coming of American soldiers, like in a. Basically like into the US People will not be pleased about the outcome.

Thomas Small (33:11)

He doesn't want to be remembered as another George W. Bush. I mean, he will be remembered as Donald J. Trump, the memory of which may not be very positive anyway. But he doesn't want to be a George W. Bush.

Eamon Dean (33:23)

Exactly. So at least. At least the first question of the what is the objective? Was presented during this visit. And this objective is based on the offer that came from the Iranian side when they were talking about, well, you can't touch the ballistic missile issue. You can't touch the regional allies. You can only talk about the nuclear issue. And we will be generous in that department. However, the Israelis picked up that the IRGC now has emerged as a state within a state. And since they have been recently designated by 27 members of the European Parliament as a terrorist organization, in addition to other countries like the US And Canada and many countries in the Middle east and the Far east and Southeast Asia and Australia, New Zealand, all of these countries basically designated the IRGC as a terror organization. But especially the EU designation of the irgc, very recent one, is in itself a opportunity here. And that opportunity is since they have presented themselves as the obstacle towards peace because of their insistence on guarding their most important precious assets, which is the ballistic missile program and the regional allies. And since they are terrorists who killed their own people recently, they were responsible for the campaign that killed more than 30,000 of their own people and detained 40,000 more. This in itself is a opportunity to direct the entirety of the conflict in a way that would first target the IRGC as a terror organization, leave the army, the Iranian army, intact. You do not attack the government. You do not decapitate. You do not go after the ayatollah. You just focus entirely on the irgc. The problem is the IRGC do not say, the problem is the Islamic regime. So you are not basically liable for regime change. You are just trying to do a regime change, but without explicitly doing a regime change. Because what is the absolute pillar of the regime, the irgc.

Thomas Small (35:24)

So you are saying that the Israelis came to Trump with this strategic calculation about the IRGC, basically saying, Mr. President, we have a way out of this morass. We can just target the irgc. Is that what you're saying? It's really coming from the Israelis, Yes.

Eamon Dean (35:41)

What the Israelis are afraid of any more than anything. Yes, the nuclear issue. But the nuclear issue has been, you know, semi crippled and delayed like, you know, basically for several years by the campaign that first they started in last June, the 12 days war, and it was finished in a midnight hammer operation by President Trump. However, what they fear more than anything else is the ballistic missile program and of course, the proxies, because they dealt with three of these proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, or the Triple H, I would say Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. So from their point of view, you know, it's like, okay, you are afraid of the word regime change because it's such a dirty word, you know, within the American public. Remember, the American public opinion is very much opposed even to intervention in Iran. Only 21% of America's population support a war against Iran. So the opinion polls are completely against it. However, if you reframe the narrative that we are not trying to change the regime at all, in fact, we will leave the army alone, we will leave the government alone. We will go only after the irgc, the largest remaining terror organization in the world.

Thomas Small (36:55)

Trump, of course, and Trump's team will be paying close attention to those opinion polls, especially as the midterm elections approach in November. The Republicans know that they stand a chance of being obliterated in those elections because there is a lot of discontent amongst the American body politic against Donald Trump in his some of his policies. But I think there might be a dimension to all of this which we're overlooking as well. And it's about Israeli domestic politics, because in Israel as well, there's an election upcoming, I think, scheduled for October. And Netanyahu must be thinking to himself, I have to go into those elections having really sorted out the Iran situation. If the Americans simply negotiate a new nuclear deal with Iran, and if I have been clearly advocating something more muscular, it will make me seem weak, it will make me seem ineffective, and it will leave our greatest enemy, Iran, in power and potentially able to build back its power. So he must be thinking in terms of Israeli politics as well. I have to go into this election, this new election, having defended my record as the one man who can defend Israel despite The huge egg on his face that he received on the 7th of October and all of that. So that's one thing. And, and you sort of see in general there are moves afoot by the Israeli government at the moment, which as we know, is a coalition of, you know, pretty right wing parties. Just today, Eamon, Israel announced a new ruling around resuming land registration in the West Bank. Registration that has been banned or has been not allowed since 1967. So now land registration is being relaunched which will require holders of land in the west bank to prove that they own that land, otherwise it could be confiscated by the Israeli state. I mean, that's what I understand. Of course, you never know these days whether you can trust reporting on anything to do with Israel, but it seems like that's what's going on. So you see in general, domestically and in terms of foreign politics, an aggressive posture by the Israelis, possibly with a political calculation running up to those October elections.

Eamon Dean (39:01)

Exactly. And that's why with the fact that the Trump administration is rather paying close attention and seriously considering the idea that, okay, let's shift the goalposts here. Let's go away from the toxic phrase of regime change and we go into the more popular phrase into fighting terrorism, go after the largest remaining terror organization and terror sponsoring super organization, the irgc. The IRGC is responsible and they can start a narrative. And I understand that soon we will start to see these things flooding the airwaves, flooding the social media, flooding the online news feeds. We will start to see articles and comments about how the IRGC is responsible for what happened to the American brave Marines in Lebanon in 1982 and 1983. 300 dead Marines there. We will see basically how they were responsible for the killing of 19 pilots, US Air Force pilots in Hubar Towers in my hometown in July of 1996. We will start to see how they were responsible for the killing of hundreds upon hundreds of American soldiers in Iraq through the use of sophisticated IEDs given to them by the IRGC, how they were responsible for killing off American soldiers in Afghanistan, how they were responsible, or even October 7th. You will start to see slowly, gradually, that shifting towards, remember they have American bloods on their hands. We will see that soon. Once you start seeing it, you will know that President Trump decided that maybe this is the course of action we're going to take.

Thomas Small (40:40)

So really the narrative will be moving away, you think, from an Iraq War 2003 sort of narrative of invasion, regime change and more towards a Afghanistan 2001 narrative where it's an Anti terrorism narrative where the Taliban are bad because they are facilitating this terrorist actor that have attacked us. So we need to intervene, but we're going to use local actors and blah blah, blah. It's going to be a narrative more like that earlier war on terror narrative that justified intervening in Afghanistan. I mean, America ended up being bogged down in Afghanistan for 20 years longer than in Iraq.

Eamon Dean (41:18)

Exactly. But no one is going to say that Americans are going to rely on local assets or Americans are going to rely on ground strategy. It's madness. It's foolishness. No one is saying that. The whole idea is that you are not there in order to eradicate the IRGC. You are there in order to weaken the IRGC, to defang and declaw the IRGC's capability to be taken seriously or to have any significant influence across the region. How? Take away its ballistic missile program, destroy the manufacturing capability, destroy the launching capability, especially the mobile launchers, get rid of the stockpile of the missiles. Then this way they cannot send these missiles to their allies like the Houthis and Hezbollah. In addition is to destroy their navy because they have their own separate navy from the Iranian navy. It's a asymmetric navy consisting of small boats, small submarines. You know, they are docked around the Hormu Strait along with land launch bases for their anti naval shipping, cruise missiles and drones. If you target all of this also you take away their ability to threaten the international shipping in the Hormuz Strait. Perfect. That's all you need to do. You don't need to do anything else because what can they do after that? How can they retaliate if they can't deploy their missiles against you since you are taking them out?

Thomas Small (42:41)

Okay, so last week on the Q and Day for our subscribers only, you made it clear that the IRGC had sort of sussed out this possible strategy on the part of the Americans and that they were thinking, well, if there's going to be a war, we had better precipitate one sooner rather than later. We would rather start a war, make it big, a kind of war that would force America to intervene, maybe with boots on the ground even, and do it before America had time to put all of its assets in the region. So you sort of thought a week ago that the IRGC was almost champing at the bit to start this war. So is that still the case? And how does that relate to the negotiations in Oman as the Iranian negotiating position has evolved?

Eamon Dean (43:25)

Well, we start to see some evolution in that negotiation. Do you remember when I told you that the President and his foreign minister in the Islamic Republic, I'm talking about Pezeshkiya and Al Raqhi, they are acting as really the mediators between the American side and the real power inside Iran, which is the Ayatollah and the irgc. They are saying, look, no matter what, it's a madness to start a war. However, tell us, what is the maximum you could do and what is the maximum you're asking for in order to actually just have it once and for all, do we have peace or do we have war? And the IRGC sweetened their offer a little bit. But it's like Greeks bearing gifts, let's put it this way, on the face of it is an amazing offer. You know, if you are an idiot and you believe like, you know, basically what the IRGC say, but they believe it could be enough, you know, to entice President Trump to declare victory through peace, you know, and that peace happened through strength and peace in our time. And waving just like Neville Chamberlain basically saying peace in our time. Now, what is the offer? The latest offer, I'm aware, that is going to be presented in Geneva this coming Tuesday, today, actually the date that the episode is going to be aired, and it's going to happen in Geneva, but still with the sponsorship and brokerage of the Omani foreign minister. The offer is as follows. When it comes to the nuclear issue, the issue remained the same, the offer remained the same, that they will transfer the highly enriched uranium stockpiles to a third party and to put their centrifuges for the production of this highly enriched uranium in storage under close monitoring by the relevant international organizations. That's the first thing. However, do you remember we talked about the fact that in the previous offer they said we are not going to negotiate anything about the ballistic missiles or the regional proxies. Now they sweeten their offer. The IRGC decided we will give diplomacy a last chance. We will sweeten the offer. The offer is as follows. When it comes to the ballistic missile program, there are four categories of ballistic missiles. The SRBM, short range ballistic missiles up to 5, 6, 700 km. There are different estimation to what constitutes a short range. Then There is the MRBM, the medium range ballistic ballistic missile, two and a half thousand, 3,000 kilometers. And then there are the other two categories which Iran is developing and not yet deploying. The intermediate range ballistic missiles. So the IRBM, which is up to 5,000 kilometers, and then you have the ICBM or the Intercontinental ballistic missile, which could go up to 11,12,000 km. The IRGC offered that they will not develop any further or deploy or field any IRBMs or ICBMs. And this will be self policed and self disciplined. There will be no inspections or any inspection mechanism whatsoever.

Thomas Small (46:32)

So ballistic missiles they don't yet possess, basically they're saying we won't develop them. But all the ballistic missiles they actually possess, they still want to use those. But those are the things that America and especially Israel are worried about. The actual ballistic missiles.

Eamon Dean (46:45)

Exactly. And not only that, they will not even curb the production, they will continue producing them, producing those SRBMs and MRBMs.

Thomas Small (46:55)

And possibly selling them to third parties for all we know.

Eamon Dean (46:58)

Exactly. On the regional allies issue, they didn't promise to end the transfer of any long range offensive weapons such as cruise missiles, drones and ballistic missiles. All they promise is that they will work closely with the United States and with regional allies to integrate politically these proxies within the national dialogue of their respective countries so they can share power and no longer be fully independent from their nations. So that's the sweeteners they offered. Take it or leave it.

Thomas Small (47:35)

So Hezbollah becomes an arm of the Lebanese state. The Houthis, I guess. I mean, I don't really even know what this means. Aman, this negotiating position is a clown show. This is comical. They haven't really budged at all. I don't think the Trump administration is going to wash with them. Is this a way of provoking the war that you said that maybe the IRGC would rather have?

Eamon Dean (47:56)

No, from their point of view, basically they've been extremely generous. And don't forget, these people who lead the IRGC are not people who were educated abroad. You know, they never left Iran. Most of them, you know, most of them basically, like, you know, they grew up in the shadow of so many wars. They fought in the eight years war between Iraq and Iran. They fought in Iraq against Daesh. They fought in the Syrian uprising 14 years to support Assad. They fought in Yemen against Saudi Arabia, like in, I mean, for eight years.

Thomas Small (48:25)

They coordinated the fight against the United States in Iraq during its occupation of Iraq.

Eamon Dean (48:30)

Exactly. So we are not talking about very rational people and people basically like, you know, who see the world differently than, you know, from the field of war. Now if you think like, you know, basically this is a clownish show, wait until you hear what they're asking in return.

Thomas Small (48:47)

Okay, great. What are they asking in return?

Eamon Dean (48:48)

Oh dear. Okay, so first of all, they want a Syria style removal of sanctions, you know, against Iran. All the economic sanctions are to be removed. Okay, I know, like some listeners will say, what? You know. Okay, I'm not done yet. I'm sorry. Dear listener, I still have some rather surprising other detail, surprising detail, really, including, and this is a must, removal of the IRGC from any terrorism list across the globe, especially by the United States, by the European Union, and specifically by the United nations, if there are any targeted sanctions against members of the IRGC rather than a blanket prescription of the IRGC as a terror organization.

Thomas Small (49:36)

Now, that's obviously a ridiculous thing to suggest. I mean, I know politically it's ridiculous, but I can understand the reasoning. Because if economic sanctions were lifted on Iran, but the IRGC remained a proscribed terrorist organization, that would essentially work as a continuation of those sanctions because you're not allowed to do business with prescribed terrorist organizations. And as you've told us many times, unconflicted. The IRGC is basically 45% of the Iranian economy, which means that it has its fingers throughout the Iranian economy and which, you know, companies are going to invest in Iran, are going to do deals with Iran, do business in Iran, if it thinks it's probably thereby doing a deal with a proscribed terrorist organization. So they need both of these things at once if either is going to work.

Eamon Dean (50:20)

And there is a problem here. I've been sitting with business people all across the gcc and recently, as you know, like, basically, I've been touring Europe, from Geneva to Netherlands to Ireland to other places and also basically in the Balkans. And every time I meet business people and representative of large businesses from major European companies in aviation, in steel, in chemicals, in energy, in construction and engineering, as well as American, Canadian companies that are based out of here in the Middle East. And every one of them is telling me the same thing. Even if there is a nuclear deal and even if every bloody sanctions that were imposed on the Islamic Republic's government and on the irgc, even if all of these sanctions were lifted, just going and opening a business there under the leadership of the current regime will make us a subject of boycott and protest all across the globe. No one is going to forgive us. You know, no one will forgive any American, Canadian, European, British, Japanese, South Korean company, you know, that would go and operate under the regime after what happened, after the deaths of so many, so many brave young Iranian martyrs, basically on the altar of freedom. They said to me, no, we can't. Some of them said, if the boards were to force us as CEOs, they said, oh, no, no, no, we have to chase the opportunity. Let's go there, they will resign on principle. So they said, not that lucky, they will do it. Not that they will be forced basically, I mean, to go and invest. But if they have to, they will resign because there is no way that anyone will go and invest. So what's the point of lifting the sanctions then?

Thomas Small (52:04)

Well, it doesn't seem ayman that these negotiations, you know, that the next round that are taking place, as you say in Geneva on the day of this episode, you know, if you're listening to this, on the day it dropped, dear listeners, the irgc, through its intermediaries in the Iranian government. What a strange situation. They have basically presented these ridiculous terms to the Americans. Well, you know, they're not going to accept. Accept it.

Eamon Dean (52:26)

So what are we witnessing? I think I'm finally going to accept that maybe this is the longest bluff in strategic history. This is the embodiment of, in the words of a very wise American comedian, Will Rogers, the art of diplomacy is to say and to keep repeating, saying nice doggy, nice doggy while holding a rock behind your back.

Thomas Small (52:54)

So you mean the Americans are performing the world's most sophisticated bluff. The Americans are stringing the Iranians. They're leading them on, keeping them negotiating even as their negotiating position develops. But it develops towards increasingly preposterous conditions, all because the Americans know they're going to strike, they are going to attack the irgc. Is this what you're saying?

Eamon Dean (53:15)

Most likely. Because even though, even though President Trump is cautious and he knows basically that wars have uncertain outcomes and he doesn't want troops to come back dead, you know, and especially if they are coming back in an intervention that says the word regime change. The phrase regime change is such toxic phrase within American collective psyche. You know, remember like basically what General Patton used to say, that the object of war is not to die for your country. The true objective of war is to make the other son of a bitch die for his. So he doesn't want his own troops, like in a basically to come back in body bags. And that's why it will be a kinetic war, but it will be a kinetic war like we've never seen before. It's all about disabling the capabilities and the abilities of the IRGC from first retaliating and from second operating and coordinating.

Thomas Small (54:08)

But so what's the timeline here? It will take the USS Gerald Ford, the aircraft carrier group that has been ordered back to the Mediterranean from the Caribbean. It will take the Gerald Ford some time to get there. So, Eamonn, what's your best Estimate. Because unless something massive happens, I think this is going to be the last time we talk about these Iranian negotiations on conflicted. So what are you thinking? Is this, Are we thinking a month away? Are we thinking two months? What do you think? Because, you know, Ramadan is just around the corner.

Eamon Dean (54:40)

Exactly. I think the US Calculation is taking into account not galvanizing anti American feelings during the month of Ramadan. Let the month of Ramadan pass. The month of Ramadan is much needed time buying again by the American administration and the Israelis and their allies in the region. And there are secret allies in the region, I must say, among Gulf countries and other regional countries, that they are also among the countries that really wanted above everything else to see the Iranian regime go. Now there are countries that doesn't want the Iranian regime to go, like among them, Qatar, Turkey and Egypt. And each one basically have their own reasons, selfish reasons, why they don't want the Iranian regime to go. But I can assure you, among the others, that I did not mention many of them, basically Amin, are willing and happy to participate, even secretly at the beginning. But then basically, when the horses basically leave the stables, then they will actually join the fray, raise their banners and say, well, the IRGC did so many wrong things in the region. We are not fighting the Iranian people. We are not fighting the Iranian government. We are not fighting the Iranian army. We are just basically supporting an international coalition against the irgc, terrorists, terrorism. It's time to deal with it once and for all.

Thomas Small (55:59)

A bit like the coalition that was put together to defeat isis. There is precedent for that kind of narrative, for that kind of pretext, as you've said, for a huge amount of military firepower to be brought to bear to dislodge a bad actor. The IRGC certainly here on Conflicted is considered a very bad actor indeed.

Eamon Dean (56:17)

Indeed.

Thomas Small (56:18)

So, you know, I guess that's it, Eamon. Probably in five weeks, six weeks, we might see a global coalition led by the United States and aided by many regional allies and allies beyond the region, severely degrade the irgc, possibly snuff it out for good. And wouldn't that be, on balance, a good thing for the world? Eamonn, thank you very much for bringing this new info, but also putting it together for us, you know, because you see sporadic headlines here, Bitson X here, or other social media sites about what's going on, but it is hard to keep track of what's step by step, what's going on, and include in that analysis what's going on behind the scenes. The context, the strategic calculations going on by different players. So thank you very much. It's super interesting. I think it's safe to say. Is it safe to say that we will be presenting Boko Haram Part one next Tuesday and maybe we will leave Iran to the side until after Ramadan when perhaps we'll have to do another emergency episode?

Eamon Dean (57:21)

Yeah, I think finally we can say that this Ramadan, that we will have the Haram Ramadan, like basically, we will.

Thomas Small (57:27)

Do the Boko Haram Haram Ramadan. All right, well, that's it for this week, everyone. Thank you for listening. Remember, consider subscribing to the Conflicted community. You get this kind of stuff, stuff all the time and you know, it's. It's fun. We have a lot of. A lot of fun. There's a lot of jokes, a lot of in jokes develop amongst the subscribers. And until next time, take care, everyone.

Eamon Dean (57:50)

Take care, everyone.

Thomas Small (57:53)

Conflicted is a message heard Production. Our executive producers are Jake Warren and Max Warren. This episode was produced and edited by Thomas Small.