← The Chris Hedges Report
The Chris Hedges Report
Everything You Need To Know About War With Iran (w/ Alastair Crooke) | The Chris Hedges Report
00:57:44
Loading summary
Transcript29 lines
- [00:00]
Alastair Crook
Foreign.
- [00:10]
Chris Hedges
The 12 day conflict between Israel, the United States and Iran is not over. It is the first phase of what could become an endless war. Much like Israel's decades long sporadic war against Lebanon, the attacks on Iran, as with the invasion and occupation of Iraq, was was based on a lie. Neither US Intelligence nor the United nations concurred with Netanyahu and Trump's claim that Iran was weaponizing its enriched uranium. Israel was able to inflict significant damage on Iran, including what it says were the targeted assassinations of 30 senior security officials and 11 senior nuclear scientists. But Israel and the United States do not appear to have, as Donald Trump insisted, obliterated Iran's nuclear weapons program. At best, it probably set back any enrichment program by only a few weeks or months should Iran decide to build a bomb. Iran's surface to surface missiles probably caused more damage and casualties than Israel expected. But because the Israeli air force had virtual control over the skies of Iran and was able to find and hit those launchers with increasing efficiency by shredding the nuclear agreement with Iran in Trump's first administration, which the Iranians were abiding by, and then allowing Israel to carry out an attack while negotiations were ongoing with Iran, the United States and Israel have effectively shut the door on any diplomatic resolution to the conflict. The failure of European governments to condemn the bombing, a flagrant violation of Iran's sovereignty, has only widened the divide between Iran and the West. Rather than weaken the Iranian regime, these attacks have enraged Iranians, especially young Iranians who poured into the streets in the millions for the funerals of the victims of Israel's attacks. It has hardened the resolve of Iran's rulers, who have suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and rejected calls by the Trump administration to resume negotiations. Trump Joining me to discuss the fallout from this 12 day war and what comes next is Alastair Crook, a former British diplomat who served for many years in the Middle east, working as a security advisor to the EU Special envoy to the Middle east, as well as helping lead efforts to set up negotiations and truces between Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other Palestinian resistance groups with Israel. He is also the author of Resistance the Essence of the Islamist Revolution, which analyzes the ascendancy of Islamic movements in the Middle East. You can find his work@conflictsforum.substack.com let's begin with a question has puzzled me since these attacks began and that is why it was so easy for Israel to take out Iran's air defenses, which were a mixture of Iranian produced air defenses, of course, but Also Russian air defenses.
- [03:26]
Alastair Crook
Well, there's a certain deception about what happened there. I know that it's advertised by Israel and by many in the United States that there was open skies and that Israel could actually come across and destroy the air defenses. That actually is not true. In fact, if you look, you'll find there is not a single video. Many people were taking shots from their smartphones and things. Not a single video of an Israeli aircraft over Tehran or Iran as a whole. What happened, it's really very interesting because it has a very important impact. What happens was that well before the 13 June surprise attack that Israel mounted on Iran, Israel Mossad and its special forces were pre positioning anti tank strike, anti tank weapons from Kurdistan area, from Erbil and the Kurdistan area of Iraq across the border into Iran, quite close, as close as they could get to the air defense systems that were present. And then special forces Israeli and the Israelis have admitted they had special forces in Iran at that time. And the special forces then were using, coming and using ballistic missiles guided by American software, the Battlescape software system, onto the targets that they wanted. Now there were no aircraft crossing into Iranian airspace, except that some aircraft from Israel flew right along the north of Iran, which is very mountainous and really deserted, into Azerbaijani airspace. And from Azerbaijan, Israel launched drones, attacked drones. They didn't have such a big warhead, but they also then flew down the Caspian till they were opposite Tehran. And from there the Israeli planes fired these latest cruise missile, ballistic cruise missiles. Those are the ones that hit Tehran and made a big impact on it. Now. So it was a very complicated setup that had taken months, if not years for Mossad to put all of those into position to infiltrate people, pre position them. What took out the Iranian air defenses in that first day was actually a cyber attack, a really major cyber attack on their air defenses. They managed to undo that and to correct it with eight hours after which their air defenses were working again. And you can see there's evidence, we can see quite clear evidence of that happening. Why was Iran in such a vulnerable position? Well, that's quite interesting too because actually on that day, the 13th of June, scheduled, long scheduled, and with the Iranians expecting to go to talks on the Sunday with Witkoff in Oman and the Americans to talk about the nuclear program. The IRGC had a big program, a big exercise prepared with naval and other forces engaged with us and some of the missile launches were actually exposed and put out because of this big exercise. I think it involved the Chinese too as well. But so they were all in this headquarters in a single room in the headquarters when Israeli decapitated the line commanders of the IRGC and the military staff who were all preparing for this big exercise and they were taken by surprise and the decapitation happened. But what happened with the civilian scientists? They were killed by spike missiles fired directly and small ballistic missiles fired by probably the special forces, I'm not quite sure into their homes, precise strikes into the homes, killing them and their families too. I think it's 11, 10 or 11 scientists were killed. So that was really what happened. Now the most important, there are two important things that flow from this. The first is this setup is not repeatable. You can't. I mean it was a very sophisticated, long prepared positioning people in the site, both from the north, from Azerbaijan and, and across the border from Kurdistan. The MEK coming across the Kurdistan, setting all these up. The cyber attack was set up and prepared and everything was ready for this. But now it's exposed, you can't go back to it. And also that now, I mean the Iranian air defenses are fully operational. They're getting more air defenses from the Chinese. So it won't be the same. You can't just repeat that operation. And the talk about open skies was very deceptive, was really a lie. It wasn't open skies. It was actually something rather different that happened. So that's very important that it's not something can be repeated. Israel can't do this next week or the week after. It would take months, you if possible. But in the meantime, Iran is of course operating in around Erbil in Kurdistan. You've probably seen there'd be many explosions and attacks there in the north, removing Baluchis and refugees from across the border from that area. And there is a tough conversation taking place between Russia and Aliyev, the head of the Azeri state and also from Iran. So there is a great deal of tension there from Azerbaijan and Russia about different things. But it used to have good relations but now it's very tense indeed. The Russians suspect that not only those tactics of infiltration of saboteurs were done, if you like, during that attack on Russia's strategic bomber force out of Kazakhstan. But they think that some of them were done by part of the illegal and criminal gangs who are Azeris as well as Russian citizens. And behind this Russia sees the hand of Turkey and NATO for both the attack in Iran and also the attack that took place, I think it was called the Spider's web attack on those strategic bombers that were out in the open on again the day before peace talks were taking place.
- [11:30]
Chris Hedges
Talk about the American strike. You know, correct me if I'm wrong, it was my understanding that the Israelis did take out air defenses to open a corridor for American bombers, but maybe that's incorrect. And secondly, let's talk about, what is it, 408 kilograms of enriched uranium. I think they're supposedly at 60%. But let's talk about the American strike.
- [12:01]
Alastair Crook
Well, the Americans warned these Iranians beforehand, either, I think probably through the Swiss embassy in Tehran or through, equally likely through Oman, warned them in advance and also told them it was once and done, that is, it would be one strike, finish, end of the process. So they passed that information to the Iranians. And I believe. I can't budge for it perfectly. But my understanding is that the Russians said to them, look, just let it happen. It's much better. Just let it happen. You probably won't. It won't be as damaging as it may be advertised, just let it happen. And it's true, because on that time, it's fairly clear there was no evidence you can see of any great, if you like, you know, air defenses being used or mounted or explosions. Iranians tell me, I was in Iran just before this happened. The Iranians tell me it was very quiet that night. There was nothing happening. So they just came in, they did what they wanted to do, and then they left. What success they had, well, you know, nobody can really say. I mean, at this stage, anyone who tells you or says they know, I don't think is telling the truth. Because the only way, you know, there are about five entrances to Fordo, five different entrances. Two of them were blocked up with soil, but by the Iranians before the strike, two days before. And the whole basis of this depends on a very controversial piece of, if you like, mechanics. Most of those entrances to the Fordo base have got blast bends in them. In other words, if there's an explosion, it can't go any further. It can't reach the centrifuge hall. Centrifuge hall, don't forget, is at 800 meters depth in this mountain. And then there is an event, and this is a source of controversy in America as anywhere else is. According to the Americans and who briefed Trump, the vent had no, if you like, bend in it. It was vertical straight from the surface down to the, to the centrifuge hall. And many experts, professors from MIT and others, are very adamant in saying it's unbelievable that the Iranians would have put blast bends in all of the entrances, but have forget to do it in the vent? Well, I don't know the answer to that. You'll have to go and ask the professor about that. But, yes, four days beforehand, there were trucks at Fordo and the Iranians. And there's some. I think there's some reasonably reliable reporting that the highly enriched uranium was removed and probably deposited in this other site called Pickaxe Mountain, which is also quite close to Caen. And I would think it's probably hidden there somewhere. It's even deeper than Fordo, by the way. But it was never mentioned because it seems to be off the radar. Anyway, I think that is probably where it is. But until the Iranians clear one of these entrances, which they deliberately blocked up to sort of stop pressure rising and go into the hole, we won't know how much damage is done. But I think the Isfahan one also is very deep, and it's quite likely that centrifuges were not destroyed at Isfahan. Nantas is different. Nantas is very old. It's there from the Shah's time. It's mostly on the surface. I remember passing it and you could, you know, it's there and you see it. But they put the centrifuges down, I think, between 60 and 80 meters. So, I mean, maybe they're badly damaged, who knows? But. But they don't need many centrifuges. One of the things that this professor from MIT Postal says that once you get to a certain point in the enrichment process, then it becomes exponential. You just have to do a tiny bit more and that you're up at 90%. So, I mean, they don't need many centrifuges to have survived.
- [16:53]
Chris Hedges
The pilots talked about seeing explosions, but what I heard, that was, in fact, not a good sign.
- [17:02]
Alastair Crook
Yes, that's right. That is a sign that there was a blast bend on the vent, and so the blast was coming up. And that's why I had a spectacular view of explosion, because it hadn't gone down to the centrifuge floor, it had come up and was at the surface. So. So it isn't necessarily a good indicator of that. So that was really the gist of it, that I think it was clear that Trump wanted it, and we know quite a lot about that day because someone and I wrote about it since you. And I'm sure you probably know Michael Wolff, who's written four books on Trump, and he was talking and calling. You know, he works by calling interlocutors that Trump has just spoken to on the phone, and he says it's A really reliable way of finding out what Trump is thinking, because he says the same question to each interlocutor, and it's not really a question. So on the 12th, it seemed that on the 22nd, rather the day of the American strike, Trump was quite anxious, according to Michael Wolff. And he kept asking people, I mean, is it going to work? Is it going to be a win? Is it going to be, I mean, a game changer? I'm hoping for a game changer. We want something that is perfect and this will be, you know, a big headline and a big win. And I want the headline. We won. And so he says there was an element of sort of lack of confidence almost in Trump. I mean, he went on saying the same thing. You know, this is what it's got to be. In, boom out. In, boom out. Ceasefire. And so that's how it was presented. And actually this suits the Iranians quite well because he says and insists, obliterated. Everything has been obliterated. There's nothing left. It's all over. No nuclear program. Well, this is fine from the Iranian point of view, because they say, well, then to sort of Macron and others who's saying, oh, well, the IEA have to go back and sort of inspect and find out what's going on. And I said, but you, it's you who say it's all over. There isn't a program. So why do we need the IEA in there at all? In fact, the IEA are already out and their return, I mean, I really am not exaggerating this. They need huge bodyguards if they ever went back to Iran. They are hated with a huge intensity by the ordinary population because they believe that particularly the assassination of the scientists and the identification of them came from the IEA artificial intelligence program Mosaic, which is one of the, if you like, Palantir, stable of targeting systems, which relies on. On imputing motives to people not on evidence. This is where you get the great disparity with Tulsi Gabbard, for example, because what the IEA were using was this data gathering process, examining 400 million pieces of data social, what you read on your social platforms, where you move, who your children play with, all of those things. Just like Palantir uses the same system in Israel and in Gaza to impute to Israel to Iran the idea that they are not being honest in moving the enriched uranium, that they're not declaring things. And so that's what happened on the 12th, the day before the Israeli attack on Iran. The board of the IAEA on The basis of this evidence said, oh, Iran is accelerating towards enrichment and therefore to a bomb, and this is in breach of the protocols of the jcpoa. This is really the pretext for the attack on Iran that took place on Friday 13 June. That resolution that was prepared and stage managed effectively by the IEA to give, if you like, a peg for the Israeli attack to take place. And which is why the Iranians and the Russians too, are so distrustful of the iaea. And I don't think it's going back into Iran.
- [22:14]
Chris Hedges
Well, the UN inspection teams in Iraq were riddled with foreign intelligence operatives, including Israeli. One has to assume that's also true with the iaea.
- [22:24]
Alastair Crook
Oh, it's completely. I mean, it's not. I mean, it's verified. I mean, we know that they were providing intelligence to the. To Mossad and to Israel about. And of course, IEA insisted on meeting the scientists involved in the nuclear program and therefore being able to identify them. Whether this was directly passed on, I can't say. But the Iranians have intelligence which suggests that it was passed on. I haven't seen the intelligence.
- [22:59]
Chris Hedges
Let's talk about the strikes on Israel. Of course, because of military censorship in Israel, we don't know the full picture. We know that refineries were hit in Haifa. We know the Weizmann Institute was hit. You know, reading it from a distance, it does appear that Israel was probably a little surprised at the extent of the damage that the Iranians were able to inflict.
- [23:24]
Alastair Crook
Oh, I think they were very shocked by it. They had never been. They were attacked, as they'd never been attacked before. I mean, they might have been used to a few Katyusha rockets from Gaza, but this was a completely different order. As you say, there's been a complete news blackout, but subsequently, from satellite images, it's clear that at least five military sites were destroyed by the Iranians, apart from, if you like, the main ones, which was the Akira, which was the equivalent of the Pentagon, the Mossad headquarters and Herzilya and various other sites as well, as well as other damages. And those other ones are very important because this is key in their economic sense, that first of all, there was the attack on Haifa and the destruction of the refinery at Haifa, and that's been. That the Israelis say will not be able to operate for at least a month. And then there was the attack on the Ashdod port, which destroyed the electric power system there, the generators. The power generator there, which led to the blackout in about a third of the country. It's been restored. But these Israel has three ports, Eilat, which has been closed for months. Ifer and Ashdod, both of those were heavily attacked and the economy was really at a halt. And this is why Israel called to the Omanis and said we need a ceasefire and said the same to America, we need it. And the other reason was because they were running out of missiles of intercept missiles. The Israelis themselves say 93 THAAD missiles were fired by the Americans and the Israelis in that pit period of the 12 days. 93, which is equivalent to 1.2 billion worth of missiles and which is about 2 to 3 years total production capacity of Thaad missile interceptors during that period. So again, you know, not only can that operation that they did on the 13th not be easily resurrected, but at the moment Israel is going to have to wait to re equip itself with air defenses in a major way before they could think of attacking. Iran is doing the same. The Iranians believe and think that there will be a further attack from Israel because it's not. They believe in Israel's interest to accept the Trump assertion that the program is over, that Israel wants to say that the program is there because that provides them with the cue to say yes, within the ceasefire. We have the right to attack when and as we want onto Iran. If we suspect that they're enriching or moving uranium, we can attack at our initiative. This is what the basis of the ceasefire in Lebanon is, that there is to be a ceasefire. But Israeli has the right to attack anywhere in Lebanon as it chooses and when it chooses. So they've been trying to impose the same terms, if you like, on Iran. And I think that is ultimately intended to try and pull in America to another round of, of attacks. Because the Israeli position is still, and this is very important really, that the Israeli position is that simply the enrichment program cannot be defeated by military systems alone. The only way ultimately to defeat it is by a regime change and the imposition of a, of a Western style puppet government into Tehran. Because they believe that, you know, they cannot kill the technical knowledge or the will to move ahead with enrichment. So I think it's pretty if the West, I think there are two triggers that we should watch this. If the west really pushes the Iranians to, to allow some sort of oversight or monitoring of the program with a reformed perhaps IAEA or whatever. By the way, Russia won't push them very hard on that because the iea, Russia has its own quarrels with the iaea. But if the west pushes Trump pushes very hard in that, then I think, and it is required under the npt, the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty. Monitoring and accountability is part of the treaty. If that is pushed, then I think there will be an answer which is, we're leaving the NPT. And if then which is also likely, the Euro 3 and the JCPOA push for a snapback of sanctions on Iran. And they've already said publicly that they intend to push for snapback sanctions, part of the whole process of putting more pressure on Iran. And then, you know, the hope that Trump keeps saying that they will then come and offer an unconditional surrender, which will never happen, but that's the plan anyway. But those two things were likely to push Iran off the npt. What happens then? We have to wait and see. But there is a very strong patriotic mood, as you referred to in the introduction, that I mean. And what is so striking is it's the young, the people that people thought were not necessarily, you know, supporters of it. And they are totally, totally supporting the Supreme Leader. He's like a sort of celebrity figure now for everyone, for the young and for all. So I don't know whether they will decide to move towards a weapon or leave it in sort of strategic ambiguity. That's a possibility, too.
- [30:31]
Chris Hedges
Well, these kinds of attacks always generate that kind of blowback. I was in Buenos Aires right before the British attacked the Falklands and the regime was about to fall, the junta. And then as soon as the attack began, these people became national galtiere and all these criminals became national heroes. I want to talk about that process because the Supreme Court leader has, I think it was 2003 had written that it was against Sharia, Islamic law, to build a nuclear weapon.
- [31:05]
Alastair Crook
That's perfectly true. But there is some important element under Sharia jurisprudence. There's a thing called ijtihad, which is that you can change law through reasoning, through a process of reasoning. And that reasoning can be changed on the basis of time and circumstances. So that if it's no longer appropriate because world has moved on and life is different or because of a changed circumstances, then a jurist, it has to be a jurist. It's not a political decision, but a qualified jurist, Hojat Al Islam or Mohsini, can actually change the law and a new fatwa can be issued very easily. It doesn't need, you know, parliamentary or pew, but there is a majority in Iran now of people who argue that it was a mistake never to go down this route and that, you know, this is going to be something that is going to be really much more. And this is something the Russians have alluded to, which I think is quite significant. They're saying actually this whole proliferation process that the west had is actually back to front because actually it's pushing people ultimately towards a weapon, not preventing them. Because this process of going around and just threatening states, we're going to bomb you to the Stone Age if you don't do what we tell you actually has ended. And that's what happened of course with North Korea. I mean they'd agreed a process of giving it up, but then more requirements and more requirements were imposed. I mean it was all agreed and there was going to be money put in and a new process. And then the extra demands that Washington imposed on top of the original agreement prompted the North Koreans to say, oh hang it, it's not worth it. I mean it's much better that we should go for a bomb. So I mean the Russians and others are saying, well you know, this whole non proliferation actually the real proliferators at this moment is the west because they keep pushing people towards thinking the only thing that, that they need. And look what's happened. They bombed Iran and now Saudi Arabia is talking about a weapon. Now India is expressing concerns about it and what the consequence will be, other states will be pursuing it. So actually rather than stopping proliferation, acting to stop proliferation as the west says it's doing, it is actually encouraging proliferation. That's the Russian view. Medelev said that, the Vice President said that quite recently.
- [34:10]
Chris Hedges
We also have the example of Gaddafi who gave up his program.
- [34:14]
Alastair Crook
Exactly, exactly. It wasn't too difficult to take away. I remember because it was still in its packing cases. He hadn't even unpacked it and it was removed anyway. That was. Yes, there isn't a good history by.
- [34:31]
Chris Hedges
Let's talk about the increased drone activity that apparently is occurring over Iran and what that means.
- [34:39]
Alastair Crook
The Israeli drone activity over Iran at the moment is not attack drones. It is mostly surveillance drones. They're sort of trying to scope out radar and the sort of the time it takes for radar to lock onto them and where the radar is and that is being fed into the American only the Americans have this sort of satellite based battlescape map that sort of tracks all radar and air defenses so that you can, you know, if you like construct your missiles to sort of do a slalom between all the impediments to reach your target. So that's what's happening at the moment. Plus, and I heard this from Tehran just yesterday, they're under huge cyber Attack from all NATO, they say. I mean, there's a big cyber attacks going. So I think, you know, both parties expect there will be another round and Iran's certainly. And Israeli, Israel is preparing for the next stage. So I think, you know, although Trump, and I don't think he wanted this. I mean, from everything that Michael Wolf said about those calls, which were, you know, I just want this to be perfect. I want this, you know, I want this to be in, boom, out, finish, ceasefire done, let's close it, we finish this talk. I think that what Trump is trying to do there is he does not. And Michael Wolff says, and I think this is absolutely right, he doesn't think he has the attention span to do a long, drawn out slugfest fight with Iran. What he's trying to do is shut it down to give him enough space to get back to what really wants, which is, if you like, this new Middle east business world, this new structure whereby Lebanon and Syria and others will be brought into some form, we will have the Abraham Accords 2.0. And that through this will open a universe of business and trading possibilities through. And, you know, that he hopes that Iran can just sort of stand on the sidelines and not do anything about it until he can find some other agreement with Iran. But the main thing is the headline. Let's have a big headline. We've done it. There's a new Middle East. Everyone's in this new sort of matrix of money, investments, resources, and of course, the resources of Iran, which are so vital to China. And also the fact that the Gulf states, and that if he can take that whole, if you like, corridor of the Middle east, he can take it into southern Central Asia and disrupt the BRICs and their connectivity plans in those stan areas, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, all those areas, he can disrupt it and start moving the economic sphere into this at the same time that he's doing, if you like, an attempt to cage China literally by tariff structures and also weakening Russia by reigniting the tensions in the Caucasus again. And so Russia and Putin is taking this very seriously, and so is China. And they are very angry about this. They're angry about the deceit because Putin thinks he was deceived by those attacks on the strategic bombers just the day before the Istanbul talks, just as Iran is. And China believes also that Xi was cheated by Trump in the discussions that they had. So there's a real sort of sense of preparing for a new and wider Cold war that is being pushed. I mean, Kazakhstan in the north, that is, I was in Russia around about the time of the Crocus hall, the concert hall that was burnt down. And they were Tajiks that had come down who were found to be irresponsible. And there was a big structure in Kazakhstan for recruiting people, Afghans and, and Tajiks and others, and for infiltrating them into Russia or to Iran or whatever. And now we see that Azerbaijan is engaged in the same idea. Now the reports, I can't verify them, but recently Russia arrested a number of serious Russian citizens and that produced a dramatic response, response from Aliyev, who arrested all the Sputnik journalists and many others in Azerbaijan. And they roughed them up and they've charged them with espionage and other charges. Now there's always been sort of criminal groups in Russia from Azerbaijan. They're known as sort of a mafia there. But this is more serious, I believe, because it's thinking the Russians may be suspecting that these groups were also facilitating the infiltration of some of those pre positioned units that were ready for the attack on the strategic bomber system in Russia. The spider swept and that also Azerbaijan was facilitating the attack on Iran. So Azerbaijan and the mania too, and the question of, you know, Turkey's role. The United States is trying to woo Erdogan with promises of F35s if only he'll mothball the S4 hundreds that he has. And I think that the aim is, the Israeli aim is the key to their, if you like, their new corridor. The new, if you like, Abraham Accord 2.0, a business plan right through to Asia, is that Turkey should persuade both Syria and Lebanon that they have no choice and incentivize them both to join into this new sort of Greater Israel project. So this is why there's a lot of tensions that all these proposals that are coming out of America at the moment, the intent to sort of cut off China from trade by putting differential tariffs on China if they tranship goods through Vietnam or another country. The prospect of new sanctions on Russia, the attack on Iran as a pivot, a key pivot for Russia and China of the whole brick structure, all of these things are producing a really strong response from Russia. I mean, has given very tough response to Trump and this and says we know exactly what you're doing in the caucuses, we know what you are doing in Azerbaijan and we won't put up with it. And so Russia responded to this by destroying the two refineries in Ukraine that were fueled from Baku, from Azerbaijan. There was Azerbaijan input that was fueling these two refineries. This was A warning to Azerbaijan, you know, stop playing around with this. So Iran will be saying something rather similar, I suspect, to the Azeris. Now, I think some people in the United States think even dream of the idea that Azerbaijan could invade at the right moment in coordination with Israel into Iran, as the Baluch perhaps come from another side or the Kurds from the other. But I think that is very far fetched because 85% of Zeris are Shi. There is, if you like, the leadership is Turkic more than Iranian Shi, but they're Turkic, either Sunni or Shi converted anyway. It's very secular. And the Iranians, all the Azeris in Iran are very, very loyal to Iran. And you know, people talk about, you know, well, is here is glass ceiling. And I slightly laugh at that. And I say, well, there's one person you probably have heard of who's really well known poet and he writes in the Aziri language and he's fluent in the Azeri language and he is Aziri and that's the supreme Leader. So it's not that the Azeris are completely sort of outliers in Iran.
- [45:11]
Chris Hedges
Isn't that. Didn't Israel launch drones from there? Isn't that a point?
- [45:16]
Alastair Crook
Exactly. They launched drones. And also, as I say, the airspace of Azerbaijan was used for standoff firing of drones that had these new cruise missiles, multiple cruise missiles. They could launch them once they were in Iranian territory.
- [45:42]
Chris Hedges
I have two last questions, but just on Gaza, because in the meeting in the White House when reporters were allowed in, Trump and Netanyahu were talking about depopulating Gaza. Netanyahu very cynically said it's not a prison. People who want to leave, of course, there's enforced starvation since March 2 should have the right to leave. Just your thoughts on what's happening in Gaza.
- [46:14]
Alastair Crook
What's happening in Gaza is that Netanyahu and the right are intent on, first of all, pushing all the Palestinians into what amounts to a concentration camp in one small part of Gaza. They will be put in, but they will not be allowed out of it. And it is a stage towards, it's politely called voluntary expatriation, but it is of course mandatory, if you like, removal of the population from Gaza. And the same is going on in the West Bank. Huge process. Smotrich is in charge of this aspect and there is a real effort being made because they think, they believe they can persuade Trump to annex most of the West Bank. But settlers have moved in into large areas. New settlements are announced all the time. It is the annexation is afoot. In the west bank, as in Gaza. And I think I remember Smartrich was always very, very clear about this. I remember listening to him about six years ago or so, and he said, listen, listen, this is our plan, you know, to remove all the Palestinians from the area. And he said, but, you know, as it is with the legal system, it's difficult. What we need is a big crisis or a big war. And when that happens, we will complete the project. That's what we're looking for. And that's why they're always sort of playing around with the Temple Mount, Al Aqsa, looking to use that perhaps as the pretext to sort of trigger a commotion in the whole Muslim world. Al Aqsa is neuralgic point in the Muslim world that they could use us as the ability to sort of create the crisis that they could then, under the pretext of an emergency, really move, finish off the depopulation of Gaza and also much of the west side, drive them.
- [48:41]
Chris Hedges
But does that mean they would drive the Palestinians and try and drive them into Jordan and they would drive the Palestinians in Gaza into Egypt? The Egyptians and the Jordanians have been adamant that's not going to happen.
- [48:53]
Alastair Crook
Yes, but I mean, you know, they are pushing them closer and closer to the Rafah gate. And, you know, what, what's going to happen if they open those gates and just push them out? You know, a million or so Palestinians. It's very, very sensitive in Egypt. The Egyptians are really ordinary Egyptians. The Egyptian army is very angry with Sisi about his ineffectual response to what's happening in Gaza. It could explode. The whole Egyptian element could explode in this process. Of course, there'll be some sort of public relations exercise of sending a few Palestinians to I don't know where, but somewhere to say, oh, no, they went voluntarily. But of course, that's not what's planned is planned is another nakba from Gaza and it's unfolding, sadly, unfortunately, and, you know, nothing. I mean, you know, the Hamas demands are not met by this proposal. This is why I think what we will get is probably some sort of ceasefire, but it's a ceasefire designed to allow the Israelis to resume the attrition of Gaza, either because they'll claim it broken down or because they'll claim, you know, the 60 days are over and the Hamas position remains unchanged. We want an end to the war, we want the removal of all of the Israeli troops from Gaza and a reconstruction of the Strip. And of course, the Witkoff proposal does none of those things. It doesn't provide for an end of the war. There will still be Israeli forces inside Gaza during the ceasefire and after. And the proposals for reconstructing it is quite different to be done by client Arab states.
- [51:07]
Chris Hedges
We should just draw that parallel between decapitating Hamas. I knew Abdelaziz Rantisi, one of the co founders of Hamas, assassinated with his son in 2004, a long litany of Hamas leaders who were killed. And of course it disrupts the organization without question. But just because Israel has decapitated Iranian leadership, ultimately, I mean, I'll get your feet on this, but it ultimately doesn't disrupt the system.
- [51:45]
Alastair Crook
I think that's exactly what we saw in Iran. I mean, you know that actually, as so often has happened, Israel decapitates the moderates and the younger generation that come in are much more hardline than, you know, they're rather elderly. I mean, some of the irgc, you know, are veterans from the Iran Iraq war and you know, the younger, much more, much more vigorous and much more determined than the older ones. And that's what's happened. And I don't think, you know, I don't think, I think what we've seen is the other part of this great equation that was supposed to come out of Washington. Hezbollah have said categorically they will not accept any process that leads to their disarmament. Now this may end up in civil war in Lebanon. It could do. It's very, it would, you know what, the Americans are pushing very, very hard in every way to disenfranchise, depoliticize, demilitarize the Shi, who are the majority in Lebanon. And it won't happen. I mean, they've been down that route in the past, as you know, and it's not likely to happen.
- [53:08]
Chris Hedges
Lets just close with the next Israeli strike, I mean, which, you know, you talked about how Israel views ceasefires. This is writ large in Gaza where Israel violates every single ceasefire they make to quote, unquote, mow the lawn. That same kind of mentality will most likely be used to again make strikes against Iran if in Israeli eyes they feel they are reconstituting military defenses or a nuclear program. How do you picture that strike and the consequences? The next one?
- [53:51]
Alastair Crook
I think the first thing which is really important to say is that, and we follow the Israeli press very, very closely, the Hebrew press, I mean, not just the English language, which press. It's very clear that they know now, after what has happened, I mean they sustained much more damage than they had expected, that they cannot attack Iran without full unstinting American support. Now the question is, is that going to be forthcoming? And I think one of the things that I feel might stop it is the question of the maga. I think the MAGA are really quite unhappy. There were two issues in the American election, immigration and forever wars. And the MAGA came. And also there is quite a number of Democrats, young Democratic voters, who supported Trump mainly because he promised peace and no more war. Not necessarily for the other part, but certainly for that, they are starting to filter away. And it's also in the maga, you've seen, I mean, Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson and everyone who there's a big pushback against it. They have. Trump has a majority, I think you correct me if I'm wrong, about three in both houses, in the Senate and the House, it's small and midterms are just over a year away. So I think he is going to be worried about the internal position, the MAGA position. And that was obvious almost when Hegseth came in, spoke and he said, he went on, you may remember it, he made a statement, I think, on Fox News saying, look, we're not attacking Iran per se or the Iranian people. We're just attacking the nuclear program. That is saying, we're not wanting to have a war with Iran. We're just trying to sort this but out. So I think he will, because with only three, it would be quite feasible if he gets stuck and locked into a long, bloody conflict in Iran. And it would be because Iran's got surprises for the United States and for Israel if it moves to another phase. Everyone is preparing for another phase. If it does that, you know, he may find that, you know, at the end of it, I mean, it will be a very different world. I mean, one can't even rule out if there is a change at the midterm elections, you know, impeachment and things might come back onto the agenda. Well, you know more about that than I, but it's, it's a, it's a dangerous moment. And I think he's right to be concerned about it because it's from both ends of it. It's the young and it is the maga, who are both, you know, don't want a war, a big war in the Middle east, particularly.
- [57:11]
Chris Hedges
Great, thanks. And I want to thank Sophia, Victor, Max Thomas and Diego who produced the show. You can find me at chrishedges.substack.com.
- [57:32]
Alastair Crook
Sa.