Loading summary
Transcript68 lines
- [00:00]
Shashank Joshi
This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK.
- [00:06]
Podcast Sponsor Announcer
Today's episode is sponsored by NerdWallet's Smart Money podcast. Personal finance can feel like a pop quiz you didn't study for. This podcast is your study guide. On NerdWallet's Smart Money podcast, you'll hear from trusted journalists who explain the why behind major financial decisions. You'll get research backed insights and clear pros and cons. Whether you're planning a big purchase or just want to grow your wealth, make your next financial move with confidence. Follow NerdWallet's Smart Money podcast on your favorite podcast app.
- [00:37]
Podcast Host
Welcome to the Interface, the show that decodes the tech that's rewiring your week and your world. Coming up, in our latest episode, we look at the hidden chain of human labor that's actually reviewing your sensitive data. The proposed law that could end the Internet as we know it, and the debate about wired versus wireless headphones. Which should you choose, listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [01:07]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Hello, it's James in for Adam. And the war in Iran is now well into its third week, but things are moving fast because it seems, what, just about a week ago that Donald Trump was posting on social media saying we, as in the US don't need UK Aircraft carriers to help us. And now he seems to have changed his mind. He seems to want the UK and NATO to come and help and help with the Strait of Hormuz, this narrow choke point for a fifth of the world's oil and gas supplies. But what could the UK Even do? That's what we'll be discussing on this episode of Newscast, Newscast, Newscast from the BBC. Fat Boy Slim and me in the
- [01:47]
Chris Mason
classroom doing our violin lessons.
- [01:48]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
I was the tattletail in the class.
- [01:49]
Donald Trump (Audio Clip)
Can I have an apology, please? I trust almost nobody that daddy has
- [01:53]
Shashank Joshi
to sometimes use strong language.
- [01:55]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Next time in Moscow.
- [01:57]
Jane Corbyn
I feel Delilah with no Salulu. Take me down to Downing Street.
- [02:00]
Shashank Joshi
Let's go have a tour.
- [02:02]
Chris Mason
Blimey.
- [02:03]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Hello, it's James in Glasgow and it
- [02:05]
Chris Mason
is Chris at Westminster.
- [02:06]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And joining us in the Newscast studio is friend of newscast, Jane Corbyn. Hello, Jane.
- [02:11]
Jane Corbyn
Hello. It's good to be here.
- [02:12]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Thank you for coming in to see us yet again. Now, Chris, we've heard from both Donald Trump and Keir Starmer today, and we're going to get into the detail of some of what they've been saying in a minute. I think it's safe to say that they're not really agreeing with each other at the moment. Have we ever seen them so far apart on any issue publicly. I'm now thinking, I'm sure we probably have. What do you think?
- [02:34]
Chris Mason
Well, they are very much digging into differing positions. And I think the other thing that is striking but perhaps not wildly surprising, is how tempted the president is again and again in public, even when he's not asked specifically about the UK to make reference to his dealings with the prime minister. And also to do some things that you don't often hear from leaders. I mean, granted, it's not exactly the greatest revelation to say that we have in the White House right now an unconventional leader in terms of how he prosecutes arguments and discussions with allies. But here you have a president who is quite happy out loud to sort of talk about the specifics of a notionally private conversation with another world leader. You normally get, as we've talked about before on newscast, after exchanges over the phone between one leader and another, a relatively broad and bland readout, as they're known from each side, leaving folk like us reporters decode the subtext. You rarely need that with President Trump because he just says it out loud in very understandable sentences that don't need much decoding, albeit obviously it is an account from his perspective, not necessarily one you might hear from the other side.
- [03:54]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And we heard from the prime minister first today in a much more traditional format of a news conference. And Chris, he was saying the UK Will not be drawn into a wider war, but that he is going to work with allies on a plan to deal with the Strait of Hormuz, this choke point for a fifth of the world's oil and gas coming from the oil producing nations of the Gulf, which is effectively closed, more or less closed at the moment. We'll hear a bit more about that in a little. But first of all, do we know more about what that actually might mean in terms of British involvement there in the Gulf?
- [04:31]
Chris Mason
The short answer to that is no. The slightly wider answer is there is a conversation ongoing within government here, but then more broadly between the UK And European allies and folk in the Gulf about what that might amount to. What it isn't going to amount to, unless there's a change of heart, is British ships in the Strait of Hormuz, Royal Navy ships involved in maintaining a free and open waterway or creating a free and open waterway. The timeline here for newscasters is that the president was on a flight yesterday over the weekend, on Sunday, was answering questions and expressing frustration at what he felt were allies who weren't doing enough, in his view. There was then the conversation on Sunday afternoon, evening, evening, between the president and the prime minister lasted about 15 minutes in which this was discussed. Then we had the prime minister's news conference on Monday morning, and then that was followed on Monday afternoon by the president doing his own news conference. And so that's, it's worth just setting those things out in order because the way that the public statements play out doesn't always give that impression. But that kind of gives you some sense of how it worked.
- [05:46]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
No, that's useful. That is useful. And, Jane, we're going to hear Donald Trump in a sec, but before we do that, Chris mentioned their other European allies. And I suppose, but I think it's worth remembering this isn't just about, although we might be focusing on it, Washington versus London, there's plenty of other people throughout Europe, plenty of other European leaders who are pretty concerned about what Mr. Trump's up to. Is that fair?
- [06:12]
Jane Corbyn
Yes. And you've heard what Keir Sammer has said today, and the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has said very clearly, this war is not a matter for NATO. He's referring to NATO, he's referring to Germany. He's taking a very strong stand, even though Donald Trump had said that it would be very bad for the future of NATO if allies didn't help to secure the Strait. The position of the French President Macron, is a little different. President Trump said this afternoon when he was asked about the French president's position on this, he gave him a score. He said that his enthusiasm for helping America was 8 out of 10. And he then added, but then he's French. Make of that what you will. So I think we don't know whether the French president has given some indication to President Trump that he would be more inclined to put French ships into any such plan. But the Germans know, obviously, the British know, and no other member of NATO has given any indication that they would be willing to join this.
- [07:17]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Yeah. Well, let's have a listen to Donald Trump now talking about his call for NATO allies to send assistance to the, to the Strait of Hormuz. And President Trump was speaking at the Kennedy center for the Performing Arts, about which there's a whole other controversy involving him, but we don't have time to get into that now. Let's just hear a little bit about what he, the president, had to say.
- [07:40]
Donald Trump (Audio Clip)
Well, we want to know, do you have any minesweepers? Well, would rather not get involved, sir. I said, for. You mean for 40 years we're protecting you and you don't want to get Involved in something that is very minor, very few shots going to be taken because they don't have many shots left. But they said, we'd rather not get involved.
- [08:02]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And then he singled out Sakir Starmer directly and newscasters. Let's have a listen to that as well.
- [08:09]
Donald Trump (Audio Clip)
I was very surprised with the United Kingdom, because the United Kingdom, two weeks ago, I said, why don't you send some ships over? And he really didn't want to do it. I said, you don't want to do it? We've been with you. You're our oldest ally. And we spend a lot of money on, you know, NATO and all of these things to protect you. I mean, we're protecting them. We're working with them on Ukraine. Ukraine's thousands of miles away, separated by a vast ocean. We don't have to do that, but we did it. Well, Biden did it. I mean, I have to be honest with you. Biden got taken to the cleaners, but we worked with them in Ukraine. We don't need to work with them in Ukraine. And then they tell us that we have a mind chip around and they don't want to do it. I think it's. I think it's terrible. No, I would. I was very surprised. I told him, you know, he. We requested two aircraft carriers, which they had, and he didn't really want to do it. And then right after the war essentially ended, you know, meaning they were obliterated, he said, I would like to send the aircraft carriers. I said, I don't need them after the war has ended and won. I need it before the war. So I was very upset with. Not upset. I was. I was not happy with the uk. I think they'll be involved. Yeah, maybe, but they should be involved enthusiastically. We've been protecting these countries for years with NATO, because NATO is us. You can ask Putin. Putin fears us. He doesn't fear. He has no fear of Europe whatsoever.
- [09:48]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Jane, it's a decade since Donald Trump won the White House or getting on for it, and I think it is just worth pausing every now and again to remind ourselves that this is not normal action by a president in the context of any other president any of us has known in our lifetime.
- [10:08]
Jane Corbyn
Well, those remarks about Keir Starmer were really personal, weren't they? And there was a lot of contradictions in what President Trump was saying. But he kept coming back to the stance of Britain and the stance of Keir Starmer in that very, very personal way. And we know that when this war against Iran started, there was Talk of Britain readying an aircraft carrier to join in and help in a very much a defensive role, which Keir Starmer, for reasons of international law and the legality, has always been very careful to say that it was only for defensive, not offensive reason. And then, of course, we suddenly heard that the aircraft carrier wasn't being got readied. So obviously behind the scenes, there has been a huge amount of to ing and froing as to what the Americans want, what the British were prepared to provide, and then drawing back from that. So we've actually got a situation now where there is one British destroyer still headed not for the Straits of Hormuz, but for Cyprus, the HMS Dragon. And that's the only ship that's gone there so far. And you know, what I find quite hard to understand when I listen to what President Trump has been saying is that at one moment he talks about hammering Iran in the Straits of Hormuz, taking out 100 ships. Of those, 30 are mine laying ships. And yet at the same time, he wants NATO to get involved. And he's being very personal about the British prime minister. And it seems almost that it's a test of NATO's alliance with America rather than necessarily actually needing this or wanting this at this stage in the war. It's a test of loyalty. That's what I read into this.
- [11:53]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Chris, what strikes you about the president's remarks? And one specific thing in that. It's interesting, isn't it, given how much Keir Starmer is not alone, as Jane was just saying a few minutes ago, in his concern about American actions and in his reluctance to get involved, that the president keeps singling out Sakir. I mean, are Downing street worried about that or actually do they think this is working out fine for them?
- [12:20]
Chris Mason
I think. Well, both at the same time, I think. So. I think to unpick this a bit, I mean, I think what we're seeing is President Trump at his characteristic transactional approach to so much of how he governs. It's interesting to reflect that that plenty have been pointing out, particularly when he cites NATO and NATO allies, that there have been plenty pointing out that NATO is a defense alliance rather than one that has any obligation for members to join in a offensive conflict that a particular member chooses to embark on. I think there is a nervousness about where this leads in terms of the relationship between Downing street and the White House. But at the same time, I think we have a prime minister who is doubling down publicly, and I hear it articulated in conversations privately as well on the strategy that he adopted from the outset to this conflict. He is trying to make political capital out of pointing to what he sees as the changing positions, particularly of reform UK and to a degree, at least in emphasis, from the Conservatives, going right back to whether or not the UK should have allowed British airfields from the outset for the Americans to use. And he is making an argument that says he thinks that he's called this right. Equally, he is now having to weather almost daily this public running critique from President Trump, which of course is awkward. And you imagine, or I allow myself to imagine, what does the next encounter with the two of them look like face to face? When does it happen for a start? And if and when it does, how does it play out? Because every indication right now suggests it'll be wildly different tonally from the ones that we've seen thus far. That said, of course, with President Trump, things can blow over, et cetera, et cetera. Who knows where we end up when days or hours under a Trump presidency can seem like they're a long time, if you like, weeks and months, therefore, can seem a long way off. So I think that's kind of the psychology, if you like, of where the prime minister finds himself. And as far as this latest criticism is concerned from the president who has suggested that the prime minister is indecisive. He said President Trump, as far as that phone call on Sunday evening was concerned that the prime minister had said that he would consult with his team before deciding what might be done. As far as helping the Strait of Hormuz is concerned, from what I hear within government, they are making an argument that that was actually the prime minister talking about consulting allies, consulting the military about the practicalities of what can be done to help in the Strait of Hormuz. And the prime minister publicly, repeatedly this morning in that news conference that I was at, emphasizing what he sees as the profound complexity of maintaining an open Strait of Hormuz, which seemed very delicately to be drawing a contrast with, if you like, the more binary or black and white rhetoric, at least, that we hear from the White House.
- [15:37]
Jane Corbyn
And actually, you know, as against his very personal remarks about the British prime minister, he has actually ranged widely today, President Trump. He's talked about some countries being enthusiastic, some are not enthusiastic. The level of enthusiasm matters to me. He said, somewhat threateningly, he's pointed out that less than 1% of U.S. oil comes through the Strait of Hormuz and therefore other countries more widely should step up. He pointed out that Japan gets 95% of its oil from their China or through their China, 90%, South Korea, 35%. And he says, we want them to come and help. So the net is being thrown very wide and we'll have to see what happens, because at one point he refused to name the countries that weren't going to help. But then at another point he said that the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, would be naming seven countries. So, you know, we haven't heard the end of this and it could go anywhere, really.
- [16:35]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And there's also the question of what the UK and other NATO allies might actually be able to do, practically able to do in the Strait of Hormuz. And a little earlier today, I've been speaking to the Economist defence editor Shashank Joshi to find out a bit more about why President Trump might be so keen on that NATO involvement. Hello.
- [16:59]
Shashank Joshi
Hello. Thank you for having me again.
- [17:00]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Well, thanks very much for coming in to explain what's going on here, because we thought we would try to do this essentially thought experiment to understand why President Trump has changed his tune to the extent to which he needs the help of European allies for the war in Iran. So I suppose the question is the street of Hormuz, again, is at the heart of this issue. And it's blocked, but it's not literally blocked. I mean, it's not something barricading it, is there? In what sense is it actually blocked?
- [17:29]
Shashank Joshi
You're right, it isn't literally blocked. And we know this because Iran has been exporting its own oil through the Strait of Hormuz. We know that India negotiated a couple of Iranian tankers worth of oil coming to its own port. There's also another ship that's gone through. And what's happening is Iran has basically threatened shipping through a variety of means, including mines, naval drones, drones from the air, missiles and various other things if they pass through against its will without its permission. And so basically, lots of ships that would normally go through this incredibly important waterway. You know, I think about 20% of global oil flows go through Hormuz, are basically frightened. They are not going across. Traffic has, I think, dropped almost to zero, though not quite. And you have 150 ships anchored outside the strait. So it isn't physically blocked, but basically ships are afraid to pass for fear that they will be struck, as a few have, with sailors dying and their cargo going up literally in smoke.
- [18:32]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Donald Trump is commander in chief of the most powerful military on the world. So is he not been able to do anything to try to open the strait himself?
- [18:43]
Shashank Joshi
Well, they probably are doing something in that if you think about the, the range of options I just outlined for Iran, America is attacking some of those. So they're attacking mine storage facilities. You saw that in a big attack a couple of days ago on Hog island, which is a massive island, a very important oil terminal for Iran at the northern side of the Persian Gulf. So they're trying to degrade Iran's stockpile of mines. They're trying to blow up up the mine laying vessels that can lay those mines in the Gulf. So that's another way they're trying to block Iran. And then of course, they're bombing Iranian missile launchers all across the country. But the problem is Iran's a very, very big country. It's enormous. And so you really can't stop every last drone, every last missile. America has been busy elsewhere in Iran and it only really takes one naval drone attacking a tanker or one Shahid 136 aerial drone coming over the air for ships to be paralyzed with fear. So unless America is going to basically invade and occupy a huge chunk of Iran's coastline, which would be a really massive undertaking, you can't bring that risk down to zero. You can bring it down, but you can't bring it down to zero. And that is the problem America's facing today.
- [19:58]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
So I suppose that brings us to NATO then. I mean, Donald Trump's had a bee in his bonnet about NATO for years and what he perceives to be its lack of diligence or lack of funding or lack of commitment from NATO allies, which lots of them would dispute. But specifically here, can NATO help? Could NATO help? What would NATO actually be able to do that the US can't?
- [20:22]
Shashank Joshi
Well, a lot of focus right now is on what we call MCM mine countermeasure capabilities. And what that means is basically shift ships or helicopters that can clear mines from the water. They're specialist vessels. America doesn't have enough of them. It has, I think three of them devoted to the Middle east, of which I think two have, and I'm a little baffled here myself, turned up in Asia in the last couple of days. And so this is a huge problem. Europe does have mine clearing vessels, it has others. So they could contribute some of those to clear any Iranian mines. But the problem is, is the issue isn't just mines. In fact, it's not even clear whether Iran has actually laid any mines in this conflict so far. The problem is missiles and drones coming in. And so Europe could do a couple of things. It could bomb those Iranian launchers to try to Stop them from firing at the ships. That's very, very hard to do. You need extremely good intelligence. You can launch a shahed drone from the back of a truck. So how do you spot that in the mountainous terrain on Iran's coastline? And so the more realistic option is what Europeans have done in things like the Red Sea, which is escorting tankers. You escort them through these waters. The problem, of course, is that this is actually an even harder job than it was in the Red Sea, where there was a really difficult threat from the Houthis, who were an armed group backed by Iran. You've already established how narrow Hormuz is, so these escorts, the destroyers and the frigates themselves would be at real risk of hitting a mine or being struck by a missile. They would need to take out very large numbers of drones coming in. They might run out of ammunition. And I think, as we've heard from Boris Pistorius, the German Defence Minister, if America's navy is incapable of doing this, why do we think that European navies, which are fairly smaller in size and are much less capable, particularly on air defence, would be up to this job? So I think there's a real question over capability here as much as there is over political will.
- [22:18]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And what about the British position here? I mean, Britain does have destroyers and frigates built just a stone's throw from me here on the Clyde. Where are they? One sailing to the Mediterranean right now. What is the British position here?
- [22:31]
Shashank Joshi
Well, I mean, I think you've seen Keir Starmer walking a fine line. He said he's working with allies on a plan to reopen the strait. He said it won't be a NATO mission, and he's really tried to emphasise here, Britain will not be drawn into the wider war. That's. That's the phrase he used. And I think the problem is, if you play defence, if you're just batting away drones and missiles coming at you, that is both an expensive and very risky way to deal with the problem. You have to go after the missile launchers. But, of course, if you are going after the missile launchers, you are effectively being drawn in to a war on Iran and a war that is very, very unpopular in the uk. That would make Britain a belligerent to some degree. I think it would be a real problem. So you're trapped between what is efficient and what is politically expedient. But, of course, the other thing to remember here is, and I won't be shocking you by telling you this, Britain has incredibly low availability of its ships. We have, you know, perhaps 13, 14 main front line escort ships, frigates and destroyers. Very, very few of them are available at any one time. You've got to have some of them in the Mediterranean because you're defending Cyprus, US against things like ballistic missiles and drones. And really, you're looking at extremely minutely small numbers of assets here. And in fact, with very, very bad timing, Britain recently decommissioned all of its main minesweeping vessels with the plan eventually to replace them with uncrewed assets and other things. Very fancy technology, but that's not really ready. So we have this big gap in mine capability at really the worst possible time.
- [24:07]
Donald Trump (Audio Clip)
Time.
- [24:07]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Even if the UK wanted to get involved here, the Royal Navy is essentially, you're saying, not really in the position to do so.
- [24:18]
Shashank Joshi
Well, as part of a coalition, if you included France and you included Germany and you included many others, you can see that you could begin to give a little bit more protection to tankers. The problem is the cost of those escorts would be very high. You know, I've read some estimates suggesting the cost of escorts could basically be equivalent to the oil that they're transporting and helping to transport. The second problem is, of course, that I think Europeans would ask, why are we bearing the brunt of this, when actually it's the Asian economies, China, Japan, South Korea, that depend far more on the export of oil from Hormuz. And our exposure is more indirect through global gas prices. So it still affects us, but indirectly. But third, I think the problem really is also the risk. We saw a German ship, for example, in the Red Sea in earlier operations go up against Houthi missiles. And I can tell you from all the press accounts we've had, it didn't perform well. And this is not like, you know, a big open ocean where you have lots of warning time of stuff coming over the water and you can track it. We're looking at very, very short warning times here for incoming missiles and drones. And so if you haven't degraded those first, if you haven't reduced those threats, there is a really, in my view, significant risk of ships being hit, sailors dying, and real casualties being possible. And the politics of that, I think, would be awful for Europeans given the understandable opposition to this American conflict. So for Europeans, they are trapped here because they do need the straits reopened for their own, own economic security, to bring inflation down, get those oil and gas prices down. But I think they are also deeply stretched. Russia is rearming and they are being pulled in these different directions.
- [26:09]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
So just quickly on that, then. I mean, is it your take that the Royal Navy is not in a fit state for the modern world, that the UK just doesn't have enough escort ships, even if it wanted to be involved in this sort of operation. And I accept there's many reasons why it might not.
- [26:27]
Shashank Joshi
I don't think you'd find a single senior Royal Navy officer who would quibble with your contention that the Navy is not in a fit state for the modern world, let alone its NATO responsibilities in the North Atlantic area for things like tracking Russian submarines, tracking naval threats, let alone being pulled into the Gulf. And of course, it hasn't gone without notice that we have one available operational active of nuclear powered attack submarine and that has been in Australia. Now, I don't know, maybe it's now covertly deployed back into the Gulf of Oman, maybe it's performing stealthy missions in the Middle east again. But really, no one would dispute that we are woefully, woefully under strength for the range of problems confronting this country right now.
- [27:13]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And in terms of the United States, as we were talking about right at the start, Shashank, you know, the US has this unbelievably powerful military, the most powerful military that the world has ever known. And yet, as Jeremy Bone was telling us on newscast last week, there's a lot of asymmetric warfare going on here. Iran, being clever in how it responds, has its actions in the Strait of Hormuz put the US on the back foot here. And is Donald Trump, with his war aims, in trouble? And is that why we're seeing him sort of of appeal to NATO?
- [27:51]
Shashank Joshi
I think that's absolutely right. If Donald Trump had prepared for this possibility, this would still have been a very hard problem. But the fact is he hadn't. If you were prepared, you wouldn't see him deploy a Marine Expeditionary Unit from Japan to the Gulf. You wouldn't see him insult the UK one week and then two weeks later ask for assets to be sent to the region. You would have seen him mobilise reserve mine clearing helicopter units from the United States to get to the Middle east, but you haven't. You wouldn't have seen him end up with mine clearing ships sitting in Malaysia this week when they're needed potentially in the Gulf. I think that Donald Trump went into this thinking that decapitating the Iranian regime would give him a quick victory and he'd be able to secure a Venezuela type outcome. In fact, the enemy gets a vote. Iran is very badly bloodied, but it's surviving and it's been able to hold the global economy hostage. And I think that Donald Trump is now scrambling to find a way out of that problem, having to enlist the support of allies whom he has denigrated and indeed threatened. If you think of Greenland for months upon months.
- [28:56]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And just to pick up on that point about the Marines, Shashank sending more Marines, what, two and a half thousand, is that right? Is that how many are going? And I suppose there must be a concern in the United States that the US Might be further drawn in, as it has been in previous conflicts.
- [29:15]
Shashank Joshi
Well, on the subject of the Marines, it's a Marine Expeditionary Unit, which is about 2,500. But more important than the number is the nature of that force, which is an amphibious ready force. It's a force designed to go from ship to shore. It also has some organic mine clearing assets. It has search and rescue assets. So there's a number of things it could do. But of course, Iranians will be wondering, will this unit try to take Hag island, our vital oil export hub? Will it try to take patches of coastal territory to suppress missile launches? But of course, a ground operation in Iran would, I think, further inflame those in America who think this is exactly what Donald Trump campaigned on avoiding, including many of those in his administration, like J.D. vanderbilt, Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, all of whom are veterans of Iraq or Afghanistan. Now, I was really struck by comments by Joe Rogan, who's a very influential podcaster of the United States, basically criticizing Donald Trump for this. And you can see that it's more evidence of the cracks in his MAGA base. For Donald Trump, he has midterm elections approaching in, what is it, six months. He not only faces the prospect of dividing his base, but also higher energy prices, higher inflation, an issue that he knows was deadly for Joe Biden's presidency. So in my opinion, whilst he will want to get the straits open, he will want to deal with Iran's nuclear program, and that will take weeks and weeks. I am personally not sure he wants this war to go into April.
- [30:51]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
It's so interesting to hear all of your analysis as always. Shashank, thanks so much for joining us on newscast.
- [30:57]
Shashank Joshi
Thank you again for having me,
- [31:01]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Jane. We heard there about how the Iranians are undertaking asymmetric warfare. This idea of unbalanced warfare where you know you're the weaker party, but you find your, your ways to disrupt and to cause problems for your enemy. What, what do you think the feeling in Tehran will be if, if they're focused on this at all, on thinking about the UK or indeed other NATO allies potentially becoming involved here. And this not just being about the US And Israel.
- [31:28]
Jane Corbyn
I think they've just got to get on with this war. I mean, the strikes have not lessened Israel, we haven't spoken about Israel, but Israel has been hitting very hard in the last few days. They hit an intelligence headquarters in Tehran. There've been waves of strikes from Israel and not just in Tehran but in other Iranian cities. And of course, the Americans have continued to hit just as hard or according to, to President Trump, they've been hitting hard for, you know, since it began, but it hasn't lessened. So I think, I suspect that, I don't know, but I suspect that Iran has got its hands full in just coping with a war on a day to day basis. But one of the things that actually President Trump pointed out today is that Iran has always thrived on what he says is disinformation. So I mean, it could be that we just don't know what's happening with Iran view of where it is on this naval front. Because this is what we're speaking about with the Straits of Hormuz. We know that, you know, they have different kinds of drones. They have aerial drones that can attack shipping, they have missiles that can attack shipping. They have underwater drones that can attack. They have fast boats filled with explosives. We don't know where they are or how many there are. We don't even know if mines have been laid by Iran. They're indicating that they have, but we don't know. So all of there's a sort of web of disinformation out there in terms of what the real capabilities of Iran are. We've seen pictures, for example, extraordinary pictures of these fast boats hidden in tunnels that have apparently explosives on them, can be directed at shipping, the kind of things that these tankers are very, very worried about. And that's why they're not crossing in the strait. So we just don't know. And I think disinformation is a very large part of what Iran has to do to try and protect the itself in this battering or hammering as President Trump has called it of this war.
- [33:21]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And Chris, we've been talking all the way through this episode of newscast about the fine line that Keir Starmer is having to walk here. You were saying earlier, you were pointing out that they actually had a chat, President Trump and Keir Starmer yesterday. And as you were saying, newscasters are very familiar with the idea of the readout. Do we have the readout do we know what more, what more was actually discussed in that conversation?
- [33:43]
Chris Mason
Well, let me pull out, let me just find it in my inbox. This is classic newscast, isn't it? I'm now scrolling through my inbox, which is a something of a bin fire. Let me have a look. It's in here somewhere. I get quite a lot of emails. Oh, hello. Have we got it? Yes, I found it. Right, here we are. This was sent at 20 past 7 on Sunday evening. Sorry, 721 on Sunday evening. So this. So there was two conversations the Prime Minister had, at least ones that we found out about in terms of his conversations with fellow international leaders, one with President President Trump and another with the Prime Minister of Canada, which is curious in itself because the Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney, was in Downing street just a few hours later on Monday morning. So I'll read you what Downing street said. The Prime Minister. These things are often not wildly enlightening. But here we go. The Prime Minister spoke to the President of the United States, Donald Trump, this evening. The leaders discussed the ongoing situation in the Middle East I told you about. Not always all that enlightening and the importance of reopening the Strait of Hormuz to end the disruption to global shipping, which is driving up costs worldwide. The Prime Minister also expressed his condolences for the American service personnel who've lost their lives during the conflict. They agreed to stay in touch. So there is a line in there about the importance of reopening the Strait of Hormuz, but obviously there's sort of nothing in there from the Downing street end that tells you anything about agreements, disagreements, what the President wants, what the Prime Minister is willing to give, etc. Etc. Usually these things are matched by something from the other side, which again is usually fairly bland, but occasionally points to what they would emphasize as important talking points versus what their interlocutor on the other end might emphasize as rather different important talking points. But as I say, the reality of a president like Donald Trump is that he just tells you it in very unvarnished terms. Yeah.
- [35:29]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
I have a question here from newscaster Caroline Jane. Let's see what you think of this. Caroline says one question for you all. Why is Trump asking the NATO allies for help? Why not tell the Board of Peace members, that's the Gaza Board of Peace, to do what he is asking? After all, he is the chair and they have handed over billions. That could also help. And Caroline puts it in quotes, peace. Thank you, Caroline. No, thank you, Caroline. What do we think?
- [35:56]
Jane Corbyn
Yeah, I Think a lot of people are quite surprised that literally within weeks of setting up the rather grandly titled Little Board of Peace, headed by himself, by President Trump, President Trump then went to war against Iran. And a lot of people have raised an eyebrow over this. So we haven't really heard much from the Board of Peace. We do know that some of their envoys have been meeting representatives from Hamas in Cairo because Hamas is very worried about the war in Iran, because Iran is the sponsor of Hamas, Hamas is a proxy for Iran. So. So we know that obviously there's things going on. The Board of Peace isn't inactive, but a lot of people suggested when the Board of Peace was set up, that President Trump's sights were set further than Gaza and that this was somehow going to be a blueprint for a worldwide organization that might challenge or even replace the United Nations. I think that we've obviously that's all gone very, very quiet. And the Board of Peace, as far as I know, apart from this meeting in Cairo, really hasn't been doing very much. And yet the situation in Gaza is difficult, the ceasefire is shaky and we don't know what's going to happen afterwards, how it's going to be run, who is going to rebuild it. So the Board of Peace has a big job on its hands just with Gaza, without, as the listener suggests, getting involved in the Iran situation.
- [37:24]
Chris Mason
I hear from some wags at Westminster who would signed themselves up enthusiastically to being vociferous critics of Donald Trump, that perhaps we all misinterpreted Board of Peace and it wasn't spelled B O A R D. Yes, the other way.
- [37:42]
Jane Corbyn
I heard that too.
- [37:43]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Yes. Yes, I see what they've done there. Well, yes, Caroline, thank you for your question. That was a very good question. And Chris, talking of Westminster, back to Westminster, just to finish, because we heard a little tease about this with Laura at the weekend about the Prime Minister, indeed the government in general saying that they were going to do something to help people who rely on heating oil, particularly in rural parts of the country. A lot of people in that situation here in Scotland and those prices have gone through the roof. Do we have a bit more detail about what the Chancellor and the Prime Minister are actually going to do to help?
- [38:16]
Chris Mason
Yeah. So this was the main domestic announcement coming out of the Prime Minister's news conference and the first domestic policy offer, if you like, in response to the consequences of the war. So this is, as you say, for people reliant on heating oil, primarily in rural parts of the uk, with a particular focus On Northern Ireland. A huge number of households in Northern Ireland are reliant on heating oil as a proportion of the overall population, two thirds of. Indeed, indeed. So the Government says it's putting aside about £50 million that will be be accessible in England via local authorities. It'll be for the devolved governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to, at least in the first instance, allocate it. And it is aimed at what the government described as the most vulnerable households. The reason? There's two reasons why those on heating oil are particularly exposed. Firstly, what tends to happen is that when your tank in the garden or outside the house runs out, you get it filled up, up in one go, probably from bottom to top, because there's a delivery charge as well. If you happen to be particularly, unfortunately running out of oil just at the point the price spikes, then you are clearly very vulnerable to a massive increase in your bill. Secondly, unlike gas and electricity, it is not part of the energy price cap. So that adds to a sense of vulnerability. And certainly those in the sector, there's been accusations that there's been price gouging going on and people have been ripped. Those within the industry say, look, they themselves are price takers. They don't have significant storage facilities. So if the price of the stuff goes up brackets, it has close brackets, then that price gets passed on to consumers. I think what's intriguing is, you know, this is a relatively small intervention for a relatively small proportion of the population at large. Where do we get to if this war carries on for some time and if the implications of this war carry on for some time, particularly when we've had. And the former Chancellor, Sir Jeremy Hunt, was talking about this to Matt Chorley on five Live today. Particularly when in recent years we've had the massive state intervention during the pandemic, the massive state intervention following the full scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia, there has been a relatively recent sense of the government's, or governments making colossal interventions with huge consequences for the public finances. And the argument that Sir Jeremy and others make is perhaps we shouldn't expect that. Again, there are limits to what the state can do. But when there's that recent precedent and the argument from some others that will say, surely this is what government is for, to step in where no others can, you know, where does that argument go? If, and it remains an if, of course, but if this war has a longevity to it and a longevity of consequence to it in the coming weeks
- [41:11]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
and months, yeah, we're coming back to that, I'm sure. Chris thank you very much. Jane. Good to talk to you.
- [41:16]
Jane Corbyn
Thank you, thank you.
- [41:18]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
And Adam is back tomorrow, but that's all from this episode of Newscast. Bye for now.
- [41:23]
Chris Mason
Newscast Newscast from the BBC.
- [41:25]
Podcast Closing Announcer
Thank you so much for making it to the end of Newscast. You clearly copyright Chris Mason Ooze Stamina. Can I gently encourage you to subscribe to us on BBC Sounds? Don't forget, you can email us anytime. It's newscastbc.co.uk and if you would like to join our Discord community to talk about everything Newscast related, there is a link in the description of this podcast. And don't be scared. It's super easy to click on it and then get set up. Or you can WhatsApp us on 0330129480 and I promise you we read and listen to every single message. Thanks for listening to this podcast.
- [42:05]
James (BBC Newscast Presenter)
Bye.