A Perilous Week Ahead

Summary

The Commentary Magazine Podcast: "A Perilous Week Ahead" – May 8, 2025

Hosted by Jon Podhoretz, Editor of Commentary Magazine

---

1. Introduction and Jewish American Heritage Month

Jon Podhoretz opens the episode by highlighting that May is Jewish American Heritage Month. He expresses appreciation for America's recognition of Jewish contributions and discusses a concert at the Library of Congress featuring the Al Andalus Ensemble. However, Podhoretz criticizes the ensemble's suitability for the event due to its historical and cultural connotations.

[00:41] Jon Podhoretz: “This is why Doge is a good thing and not a bad thing. And get them out. Somehow this slipped through. Not right.”

Christine Rosen and other panelists engage in a brief discussion about the ensemble, reinforcing the sentiment that the group's association with Al Andalus, a term Laden with negative implications among certain groups, is inappropriate for the celebration.

---

2. Pulitzer Prize Controversy

The conversation swiftly transitions to the Pulitzer Prize awarded to the New Yorker's Mossab Abu Toha for his essays on Gaza. Podhoretz expresses skepticism about the significance of the award.

[04:44] Jon Podhoretz: “Pulitzer Prize. Meaningless Pulitzer Prize.”

Emily Damari, an Israeli soldier who survived captivity by Hamas, vehemently criticizes the decision to honor Toha. She draws a stark comparison between her traumatic experiences and Toha's writings, accusing him of denying atrocities and erasing victimhood.

[06:32] Emily Damari: “Mossab Abu Toha is not a courageous writer. He is the modern day equivalent of a Holocaust denier.”

Podhoretz supports Damari's stance by dissecting excerpts from Toha's essays, questioning the validity and impact of his narratives. He juxtaposes Toha's purported experiences with those of fellow captives, stressing the discrepancy in portraying Hamas's actions.

[10:00] Jon Podhoretz: “She has a lot in common. Except the difference is that Hamas fired offensively on Israel with no. With no provocation and not in response to anything.”

---

3. Columbia University Protests and Campus Activism

The podcast shifts focus to recent unrest at Columbia University, where activists stormed the library, causing disruptions and property damage. Emily Damari criticizes the lenient handling of these activists by law enforcement.

[12:15] Emily Damari: “If they are so truthful and brave in their cause, why do they hide their faces?”

Christine Rosen adds to the discussion by questioning the effectiveness of university administrations in managing such crises.

[14:02] Christine Rosen: “They absolutely just botched it yesterday.”

Podhoretz anticipates an increase in anti-Israel and pro-Hamas activism in the coming weeks, citing recent marches and protests that blend unrelated causes under similar banners.

[45:41] Jon Podhoretz: “There was a march to Columbia by pro Palestinian group last night up Broadway... Justice for Palestine and Stop Cop City.”

---

4. Influence of Gulf Countries in U.S. Institutions

A significant portion of the discussion revolves around the financial and ideological influence of Gulf nations, particularly Qatar, on U.S. educational institutions. Christine Rosen highlights concerns about sovereign wealth funds infiltrating higher education and K-12 systems, advocating for stringent oversight and transparent boundaries.

[28:13] Christine Rosen: “They are Buying off weavers of power in the United States and no one seems to care. And that has to stop.”

Emily Damari echoes these sentiments, emphasizing the need for bipartisan efforts to scrutinize and regulate foreign investments that compromise American institutions.

[27:09] Emily Damari: “Money and its ideological capture of the administrations of these universities is huge.”

Jonathan Schanzer acknowledges the lag in addressing these issues, noting that awareness is growing but actionable measures are still pending.

[29:14] Jonathan Schanzer: “The Qatar question is so new to... it's just getting oriented to where it is on a map.”

---

5. Geopolitical Updates: Iran Nuclear Deal, Houthi Deal, Gaza, and Israel's Actions

The latter part of the episode delves deeply into current geopolitical tensions involving Iran, the Houthis, Gaza, and Israel. Podhoretz outlines several impending developments:

• Negotiations with Iran over a nuclear deal.
• Israel's potential ground invasion of Gaza to end the war and secure the release of hostages.
• Recent attacks by the Houthis against American ships, despite apparent negotiations.

[19:23] Jon Podhoretz: “What does the future hold for business?...”

Christine Rosen analyzes the implications of the Houthi deal brokered by the Trump administration, expressing concerns over incomplete agreements that fail to address missile attacks on Israel.

[30:35] Christine Rosen: “These are high priority questions... what exactly was agreed upon here?”

Jon Podhoretz connects the dots between the Houthi ceasefire and upcoming negotiations with Iran, emphasizing the intricate balance required to navigate these international waters.

[33:42] Jon Podhoretz: “...Senators Cotton and Graham are to have some kind of a statement message...”

The panel discusses the potential outcomes of the Iran negotiations, with Rosen cautioning against any interim agreements that fall short of completely dismantling Iran's nuclear capabilities.

[50:28] Christine Rosen: “If you give a number, it means they're still enriching, which means the nuclear program.”

Jonathan Schanzer voices skepticism about the feasibility of achieving a beneficial deal with Iran, suggesting that any agreement might not adequately address the core issues.

[53:26] Jonathan Schanzer: “I'm frankly, like, disturbed that we're talking about the prospect, the possibility of a good deal. I don't think there's a good deal to be had.”

Jon Podhoretz speculates on possible language used in upcoming announcements, warning listeners to be vigilant about terms that might indicate a compromised deal.

[55:37] Jon Podhoretz: “Number. Bad. Interim. Bad. Bad. And. And a nuclear weapon. Bad.”

Rosen and Schanzer continue to dissect the implications of potential deals and the roles various political figures play in these negotiations, highlighting concerns about executive power and bipartisan consistency.

[60:35] Jon Podhoretz: “...Wyckoff is the negotiator. And Trump is not a detail guy.”

[66:19] Christine Rosen: “He has… he cannot go as deep as they want. So the frustration here is that you probably end up sparking a bigger war with Iran.”

---

6. Closing Remarks

In wrapping up, Podhoretz reiterates the critical nature of the upcoming week, emphasizing the potential for increased activism and the high stakes of ongoing geopolitical negotiations.

[70:41] Jon Podhoretz: “Thank you for working with us today... Keep the candle burning.”

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

1. Jon Podhoretz on the Al Andalus Ensemble:

   [00:40] “It's a deeply important term to radical Islamists who point out that the fall of Al Andalus was one of the great tragedies in world history.”

2. Emily Damari on the Pulitzer Prize:

   [06:32] “Mossab Abu Toha is not a courageous writer. He is the modern day equivalent of a Holocaust denier.”

3. Christine Rosen on foreign influence in education:

   [28:13] “They are Buying off weavers of power in the United States and no one seems to care. And that has to stop.”

4. Jon Podhoretz on potential language in Iran deal:

   [55:37] “Number. Bad. Interim. Bad. Bad. And. And a nuclear weapon. Bad.”

5. Christine Rosen on the implications of an Iranian nuclear deal:

   [50:28] “If you give a number, it means they're still enriching, which means the nuclear program.”

---

Conclusion

In "A Perilous Week Ahead," The Commentary Magazine Podcast navigates a complex landscape of cultural events, journalistic accolades, campus unrest, and high-stakes international diplomacy. The panelists provide a critical lens on each topic, emphasizing the need for vigilance and proactive measures in the face of evolving challenges. With the geopolitical theater heating up, particularly around Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional conflicts, the discussions underscore the intricate balance between diplomacy, national security, and ideological integrity.

For further insights and detailed analyses, listeners are encouraged to subscribe to Commentary Magazine and explore the full episode available at commentary.org.

Transcript

[Jon Podhoretz]

Hope for the best, expect the worst.

[Abe Greenwald]

Some preach and pain Some die of.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Thirst the way of knowing which way.

[Christine Rosen]

It'S going Hope for the best Expect the worst, hope for the best.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Welcome to the Commentary Magazine daily podcast Today. Today is Thursday, May 8, 2025. I am Jon Podhoritz, the editor of Commentary magazine. With me, as always, executive editor Abe Greenwald. Hi, Abe.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

Hi, John.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Social Commentary columnist Christine Rosen.

[Abe Greenwald]

Hi, Christine.

[Emily Damari]

Hi, John.

[Jon Podhoretz]

And joining us Today Commentaries contributing editor and big cheese at the foundation for Defense of Democracies and expert on all things Middle east and author of an important article in the current issue of Commentary on the Nation of God, Gutter and our relationship with Gutter, the extremely euphoniously named country in the Middle east that is going to be playing an outsized role in the next week. Jonathan Schanzer. Hi, John.

[Christine Rosen]

Hi, John.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Okay, I want to begin by telling everybody I didn't even know this. It's Jewish American Heritage Month, which is very nice. Thank you to all of America for celebrating Jewish American Heritage Month. The absolutely indispensable Jewish Insider newsletter informs me today that if I can just dig this up, that at the Library of Congress, which you may have heard of, it's an institution in Washington that, you know, has all the books, everything. So the Library of Congress is having a concert today to celebrate Jewish American Heritage Month, and the concert features a group called the Al Andalus Ensemble, which performs in Hebrew, Ladino, Amharic and Arabic. So first of all, we can spend five minutes talking about why the name of this group indicates why it should never have been allowed anywhere near a Jewish American Heritage Month event, because Al Andalus not only refers to the medieval area of the Maghreb, which certainly Jonathan knows way more about than than I do, but is, as Matt Condi referenced yesterday, is a deeply important term to radical Islamists who point out that the fall of Al Andalus was one of the great tragedies in world history because it's when the Christians essentially took over from the Muslims in the sort of most southern part of Europe and in North Africa. And so using the term Al Andalus would be a little like calling, you know, going to Arab American Heritage Month and having the Judea and Samaria Ensemble Ensemble perform at that sort of event. And the more, more notably, the Al Andalus Ensemble says in its mission statement, quote, that it is very careful that texts that promote a particular religious ideology will be avoided, quote, unquote, because they are cross faith. This is Jewish American Heritage Month. It's Not Interfaith Heritage Month involving a group named after Osama bin Laden's most favorite term to refer to Europe or Southern Europe. And this is who forces at the Library of Congress decided would be the suitable performers at a concert to celebrate Jewish American Heritage Month, about which, of course, Jewish American Heritage Month. In terms of music, you got Leonard Bernstein, you got the Gershwins, you've got Rogers and Hart, you've got Bob Dylan, you've got, I don't know, Kiss. You got plenty of Jewish American music that doesn't have to involve performances in Arabic and Amharic. And everybody there should be fired. And this is why Doge is a good thing and not a bad thing. And get them out. Somehow this slipped through. Not right.

[Christine Rosen]

Anybody wanted John that kneecap was not the headliner.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Well, kneecap is not fair enough. Kneecap or. Yeah, or Kanye or whoever that French comedian is. Who's the crazy anti Semite? Anyway, thanks so much to the Librarian of Congress and all of his staff, who I do expect are going to be hearing from our listeners and others today. And thank you to Jewish Insider for very puckishly and very quietly just including the fact of this concert in their daily agenda, because I was really glad to know it. That's the first thing I wanted to cite. The second thing I wanted to cite, and I had mentioned this earlier this week, is that the Pulitzer Prize, one of the Pulitzer Prizes, was handed out this week to the New Yorker for the essays of Mossab Abu Toha about the tragic circumstances of Gaza, or as the Pulitzer committee put it in their citation, for essays on the physical and emotional carnage in Gaza that combined deep reporting with the intimacy of memoir to convey the Palestinian experience of more than a year ahead and a half of war with Israel. Well, that's again, lovely. And my deepest congratulations to the New Yorker for winning a Pulitzer. Meaningless Pulitzer Prize. But what's more important than that is the response that came a couple of days after this from.

[Christine Rosen]

I'm sorry, Emily Damari.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Emily Damari. So Emily Damari, who is 28 years. Now, 28 years old, an Israeli soldier who was captured on October 7, shot, lost two of her fingers. You may have seen the photograph of her upon her release from captivity after 500 days, holding up her hand cheerfully, showing the. Showing the blown off, you know, the two fingers that have been blown off of her hand. And here is what Emily Damari posted last night. Dear members of the Pulitzer Prizes board, Pulitzer Prize, by the way, given out by the Columbia Journalism School. And we're probably gonna have to talk about Columbia University. My favorite topic a little bit after this, because some stuff happened there yesterday. My name is Emily Damari. I was held hostage in Gaza for over 500 days. On the morning of October 7, I was at home at my stall in my small studio apartment in Kibbutz Kharaza when Hamas terrorists burst in, shot me and dragged me across the border into Gaza. I was one of 251 men, women, children and elderly people kidnapped that day from their beds, their homes in a music festival. For almost 500 days, I lived in terror. I was starved, abused, and treated like I was less than human. I watched friends suffer. I watched hope dim. And even now, after returning home, I carried that darkness with me because my best friends, Gali and Ziv Behrman, are still being held in the Hamas terror tunnels. So imagine my shock and pain when I saw that you awarded a Pulitzer Prize to Mossab Abu Toha. This is a man who in January questioned the very fact of my captivity. He posted about me on Facebook and asked, how on earth is this girl called a hostage? He has denied the murder of the Bibas family. He has questioned whether Agam Berger was truly a hostage. These are not word games. They are outright denials of documented atrocities. You claim to honor journalism that upholds truth, democracy and human dignity. And yet you have chosen to elevate a voice that denies truth, erases victims, and desecrates the memory of the murdered. Do you not see what this means? Mossab Abu Toha is not a courageous writer. He is the modern day equivalent of a Holocaust denier. And by honoring him, you have joined him in the shadows of denial. This is not a question of politics. This is a question of humanity. And today you have failed it. I'm going now to quote. Sorry to continue monologizing. I want to quote from something that Mossab Abu Thomah wrote in the New Yorker in one of the four essays for which he was granted the Pulitzer Prize. And I want to read it, and then we can parse it a little bit. When I think of how little I know my grandfather, he wrote, I think of my three children and what I myself can pass down to them. When Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, three generations of my family lived together under one roof in Gaza. Five days later, Israeli forces dropped leaflets that ordered us to evacuate the area. We left everything behind except some clothes and food. On October 14, after an airstrike hit my neighbor's house, I checked on our home and found broken windows, fallen books and dust covering every pillow, mattress and Bl blanket I tried to clean off the couches. I thought my house, my books and my writing desk would be there for us when the war ended. I took pictures of the damage so that I would remember. Two weeks later, our house was destroyed in an Israeli airstrike. When I risked returning days after the bombing, I felt compelled to spend an hour or so digging through the rubble, hoping to salvage some clothes or shoes or blankets. Okay, now I just want to say two things about this. Number one, Israel saved Musab Abu Toha's life and the life of his children by dropping the leaflets that said, you need to leave the area because we're going to strike it. Thus raising the question of whether or not he has any right on earth to claim that war crimes are being committed when Israel had no reasonable justification to do what it did in the middle of a war and give notice, advance notice on the fact that it was going to strike the area. Number two, guess who else had. There was an airstrike that hit near her home, breaking windows and shooting dust into her, into her house. And that my sister Ruthie, whose window was shattered by a Hamas rocket that landed near her in Tel Aviv in the first couple of weeks or the first couple of days of the war. So he and Ruthie have a lot in common. Except the difference is that Hamas fired offensively on Israel with no. With no provocation and not in response to anything. And this was the opposite. So I think this is a very important thing that Rachel Damari has done and we. Excuse me, Emily Damari has done. And I am, I am thankful to her that she has called out the Pulitzer board and of course, the disgraceful David Remnick and his foul crew at the New Yorker publishing Hamas Haas propaganda by this poet who is doing nothing more than dehumanizing people who through simply by dint of the fact that they were Jewish have been. Were taken and tortured and lived in darkness. And where there are still 21 to 24 yet alive.

[Abe Greenwald]

Still there.

[Jon Podhoretz]

So that's my monologue for the morning before we get on the geopolitics. Anybody want to talk about what happened at Columbia yesterday? The.

[Emily Damari]

Well, there's definitely a different sheriff in town after what happened at Columbia, which is.

[Jon Podhoretz]

That's also a good point.

[Emily Damari]

Yeah, the minute that. So these students, well, activists, we don't know how many of them yet are students, although they were asked to show id, stormed into the library during finals week, disrupting normal students ability to study. Began defacing library property, spraying slogans on bookshelves. And otherwise, you know, committing all kinds of acts of vandalism and threatening, shouting, threatening things. And very quickly the cops were called and the cops rounded them up and there was scuffling and we have video of it. And also very quickly, Secretary of State Marco Rubio posted on social media that he would be looking into the status of some of the people arrested. Now there, there is one question in my mind, which is why were they processed and released through the NYPD process, as has happened before with a lot of these activist types? If so, we need to keep track of them. They all masked their faces, which I think is also something that we need to continue to point out. If they are so truthful and brave in their cause, why do they hide their faces? So this, this was actually, I think, an example of what should have been done over and over and over again last year on campuses and wasn't. And now we have a very strong response. We will see how many are prosecuted, how many actually were students. If they were students, they should be expelled. We'll see what the actual consequences are from Columbia of its own students and also of the, of law enforcement and obviously DHS and others in terms of status.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

Yeah, I mean, it's going to be a real. It's going to answer some questions about how seriously these schools are taking the vibe shift and the threat from the White House.

[Christine Rosen]

Did anyone see the hearing yesterday? House agency.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Elise Stefanik did it again.

[Christine Rosen]

She did it again. Elise Stefanik took a college as President along with DePaul and Cal Poly, but the Haverford College professor, or president rather, absolutely just botched it yesterday. And actually the best part, I don't know if you saw the notes. Somebody took a photo of the notes. Act natural, slow down. Right. I mean, and none of those things helped because it, by the way, there.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Was a choose your own adventure note in these photos of the Haverford, of the binder, the folders that the Haverford president brought, which is like, if you're asked about this, if you're asked about the word genocide, you say A. If you're asked about the word this, say B. If you're this. And by the way, I'm pretty sure that the four Columbia people who testified, if you remember three or four, including the current interim president, Claire Shipman, the now gone president Manous Shafiq and David, David Shizzer, had also been briefed very much in the same way. Act like butter wouldn't melt in your mouth. Say you're nigh. Be nice, don't get, don't get agitated. Don't. Yeah, you know, be nice. So they all hired the same crisis consultant to tell them to just get through this as best, as best they can. And I just hope to have these hearings every single day over the, you know, until November 2026.

[Christine Rosen]

Well, here's the question is, I mean at some point do people get bored of watching these, you know, university presidents just, I mean, embarrass themselves and, and do damage to their schools? I mean, you know, are there other things that, I mean, and this is a question that we've been mulling is, you know, I mean, what else should we be looking at? I mean, apropos of the Qatar piece that, that I wrote for commentary, you know, should we not be doing hearings on the Qatari, you know, billions of dollars that have entered the higher education space? Should we not be looking at how the Chinese are influencing. I mean they're, there's more to it than just the anti Semitism and I think the hatred for these schools is palpable for good reason. Right? I mean they've, you know, filled their coffers with foreign money, they're gouging students and middle class parents. There's a lot more to dig into beyond just the anti Semitism, which is palpable and disgusting. And I think there's, there's a lot more that, that, that that committee can explore if they want to.

[Abe Greenwald]

Hey everybody. John here to talk to you about bowl and branch. I'm not the easiest sleeper. Got a lot of thoughts running through my head just before I finally am able to quiet down that roiling brain and get through the night. And I gotta tell you, I recently got a set of Bowlen brand sheets for my bed and I'm sleeping so much better. It's honestly true. Bowlen brand sheets help quiet all that noise because they wrap me in softness. So extraordinary. My body and mind effortlessly drift to sleep. The signature sheets we got made with the finest 100% organic cotton. So you can spend every night in the softest feeling imaginable. These best selling sheets feel buttery, breathable and get softer with every wash. Why would you do Bowen Branch over other sheets? You can feel the quality immediately. They really do feel better than the ones that you have right now. They are cool when they need to be cool. They are supply the right kind of temperature control if maybe your room is a little cold and you want some, you know, some support there and they get softer with every wash. So I think we've washed ours two or three times now and they are significantly softer than they were when we got them without losing any of that quality. So Bowlen Branch products made different so you can sleep better at night. Woven with the finest 100% cotton or organic cotton on earth. Crafted by artisans who earn the pay and respect they deserve. Signature hem sheets for every mattress size, every mattress style, every bedroom style, design and colors. All kinds of colors, all kinds of and they got those specifically made top and bottom. Very easy to put right there on your bed. So you can try Bowlen Branch sheets for an entire month with that 30 night worry free guarantee for which they're famous. There's no catch. You can wash style and feel the difference for yourself risk free. If you don't get your best night's sleep, you can send them back for a full refund. So feel the difference an extraordinary night's sleep can make with bowl and Branch. Get 15% off plus free shipping on your first set of sheets at bowlandbranch.com commentary that's B O L L A N D branch.com commentary to save 15% exclusions apply. See site for details.

[Jon Podhoretz]

What does the future hold for business? You know, if you ask nine experts.

[Abe Greenwald]

You'Re going to get 10 answers.

[Jon Podhoretz]

A bull market, a bear market, rates rising, rates falling, inflation's going up, inflation's going down. You need a crystal ball. But of course there is no crystal ball. And that's why 41,000 businesses have future proofed their business with NetSuite by Oracle, the number one cloud ERP bringing accounting, financial management, inventory and HR into one fluid platform with one unified business management suite. There's one source of truth giving you the visibility and control you need to make quick decisions. With real time insights and forecasting, you're.

[Abe Greenwald]

Peering into the future with actionable data. When you're closing your books in days.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Not weeks, you're spending less time looking backwards, more time on what's next. If this were the kind of product commentary needed, we would take it in a heartbeat. Whether your company is earning millions or even hundreds of millions, NetSuite helps you respond to immediate challenges and seize your biggest opportunities. And speaking of opportunity, download the CFO's Guide to AI and Machine Learning at netsuite.com Commentary the guide is free to you at netsuite.com Commentary netsuite.com Commentary Foreign.

[Emily Damari]

Money and its ideological capture of the administrations of these universities is huge. I mean, many of these places have prestige campuses in Abu Dhabi and other other Gulf states where clearly whatever the pay for play that's going on between Saudi and Qatar and all this. All this money flowing back and forth, and that's to say nothing, of course, of China. There was this brief glimmer a few years ago where people were worried about these Confucius Centers when they realized, like, oh, actually these might just be spying operations that we've welcomed onto our campuses and into our cities. I think both of those things, you're absolutely right, John, should be completely examined thoroughly. And it has to be done while Republicans are in charge, because the Democrats are not going to touch that.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Well, now you're being naive, K. Because.

[Emily Damari]

Yes, yes, of course, here is the problem.

[Jon Podhoretz]

It appears that there are certain elements within the Republican leadership, or the family of the Republican leadership currently dominating Washing, that looked at Hunter Biden and his behavior in 2015 and said, that guy's a piker. What did he do? He asked for like, 10 million here, 5 million there. The hell with that. Like, hi, my name is Wyckoff Jr. And my name is Trump Jr. And I'm going to be going around to Gutter and Abu Dhabi and some of these places, and I'm going to be asking for a couple billion because, you know, this is the way the world works. And if the Democrats are gonna get away with Hunter Biden doing his, even though we called them the Biden crime family and used it as a political cudgel against them, hey, we're in business, too. We got access to the White House, too. And the problem is, this is real. There is a real corruption issue going on here in Washington with the Trump administration and family. Members of leading figures in the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are going to have to be the ones to blow the whistle on it, or it's going to have to wait to see if Democrats win in 2026 and therefore have investigatory powers in Congress to do it, because obviously the Justice Department's not going to do it. Or, you know, Trump could just pardon everybody unilaterally or, you know, before anything gets started, just to save their bacon. But that is. That is the flea in the ointment here when it comes to this question of investigating gutter in these other places. The other question I think, which does get to Jonathan's article is, and we talked about this the other day, that obviously the. The gutterys are playing games with our internal politics and ideological games, but they are also clearly useful behind the scenes in the sense of being a party that we can use to deliver messages and send messages and talk to people that we will not otherwise talk to. And so as was the case with the Saudis after 9 11. You'll remember that we went very soft on the Saudis after 9 11, though 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi. And a lot of that reason was that Saudi Arabia was cooperating with us behind the scenes to track people and to interfere with some of this. A lot of us were morally incredibly offended. Remember the float the plane, the number of planes that got to take off privately when no one was flying in the United States to get the Saudis, senior members of the Saudi royal family, and others out of the United States and back home. So there's a history of this with the countries that are nominally our friends or not our friends or whatever, but are also playing both sides of the street. Are you worried about this, Jonathan? I mean, do you agree with me that we have a major issue here in actually tracking what needs to be tracked if we're going to be serious about this?

[Christine Rosen]

I mean, and I think that that's kind of what we're starting to get at. And, you know, I'll just tell you, we have a new program at ftd. We're looking at not just the problem of the Qatari money and other sovereign wealth that's flowing into higher ed, but also Now K through 12. I mean, it's now, you know, you can see the way that it's hitting us here at home in ways that maybe we weren't aware of before or we were afraid to acknowledge. We have to start to reset with the Qataris. I mean, look, I do understand that there are people that say that the Qataris can be useful in certain respects. Although I have to say I don't know why we need the Qataris to do this. Why not have the Swiss do it? I mean, they're just as disgusting and lacked moral. Why not use Europeans who maybe are not directly supporting Hamas, but are willing to talk to Hamas? I mean, I'd be much happier with that. But I think we need to start to tell the Qataris. I was actually talking to somebody in government the other day about this. We need to tell them what is halal and what is haram. We've not actually set boundaries with them. They happen to think that right now they can pretty much do anything because no one has cracked down on this massive flow of funding that's come into the United States. I mean, you know, we, we talk about this in the piece that it's, it's, you know, I think it's, it's state capture at some level here, right? They are Buying off weavers of power in the United States and no one seems to care. And that has to stop. We have to get a handle on this. And you know, I am concerned, John, that we don't have political will on either side of the aisle. You know, I do think that if we bundle the Qataris with the Chinese and the Russians and offshore accounts and things like that, maybe we can all arrive at some kind of an agreement. But if you try to single out the Qataris, I think they have so much influence in Congress right now within this administration, the last administration, nobody wants to mess with this. And we're definitely arriving at a crisis moment. The good news is I think that there's awareness. I mean, people could not point out Qatar on a map. They didn't know what the Qataris were. Now I do think that people are aware. So, you know, I think that then begs the question, what's next?

[Emily Damari]

Well, and you would think that, I mean, it's one of the ironies of our current form of populism under Trump that for all of the concern about everything being, you know, American made supply chains, being American led all this, all this economic arguments about it, they're actually willfully blind to what's happening on American soil with some of this money. I think part of it's that it's not tangible to the American vote voter in the way that again, a few years ago there were stories about how Chinese companies or Chinese entities were buying up very interesting parcels of land near defense bases, near military installments, and that that's near electrical power grid hubs, places that would be strategic.

[Christine Rosen]

Military.

[Emily Damari]

Military insulating. Exactly. And so those stories came out and Americans were like, well hey, whoa, no, that's bad. They understood it was tangible to them. I think part of the problem with some of the way this money flows and again, to the point of not everybody in America has a kid on a college campus or connection to a college campus. They sort of shrug and say, oh well, that's just how the game is played. But you're right that there it's not just the campuses, it's members of Congress, it's lobbying groups, it's a network.

[Christine Rosen]

But here's the, here's the thing that I think needs to be understood or at least explored. Okay, you look at the Chinese, right, and they're buying up, you know, tech companies that are going out of business or they're buying parcels of land or they want to have stakes in ports and things like that. And we can see the clear threat. But when you're investing in kind of education when you're investing in soft power. Is it no less of an investment? Are they still not still getting control of things? So one of the things that we've explored is we have this thing, most people don't know about it. It's a very bureaucratic entity in Washington. It's called cfius, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Right. And it will block acquisition by certain foreign nations of assets in the United States. Why are we not using this mechanism to block the acquisition of assets in the universities or in media? They're no less important in today's day and age. And I don't understand why we haven't mobilized yet in that way.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

You know, the thing is there's a will to get Chinese influence out of the country, right? I mean, there's like, like at least there's, you hear the, there's rhetoric, right? That's, that's, but that, that's all, that's been a long, slow build. I mean, people have been talking about that. This, this goes back like two decades almost where people have started to talk to it, talk about it till it got to the point that it was sort of on the radar in this way. The Qatar question is so new to, I mean, not, not, not to you, not to us, not to, but you know, for the law, for the larger country, as you said, you know, they're just getting oriented to where it is on a map, as you say. So it's going to be a while. And also the untangling of this administration with, in terms of business ties, that's just a mess. I mean, the fact that the administration is cracking down on anti Semitism on campuses at all is a good sign because that does in and of itself sort of stymie some of the, some of the, what, what the Qataris want to accomplish on the, on these campuses.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Well, it will certainly stymie it going forward. I do believe that while a lot of what we're talking about here is sunk capital money that the Qataris have spent over the last 20 years to create programs at universities in Middle Eastern studies that lean toward them and indoctrinate people in a lot of the ideas that found their full expression in the encampment movement and other things that have been going on after October 7th, that places are going to be very, very, very squeamish about going back to that well for money going forward. That doesn't mean that the investments haven't paid off. It's a generation of investments generation of jobs that were created and generated, tenured positions that were, that were funded and endowed and chairs and the people in them, educating people who then themselves go off to graduate school and programs that they can attend, you know, in, in these places to get more fully indoctrinated and then come home and maybe do the K through 12 work instead of the university work. Do it, do it at a different level. But I do think 2025 probably will mark a dividing line between the spigot, the Middle Eastern money spigot of the last quarter century and the, and what will come forward. The reckoning may be very hard to see happen because of the compromises, because of the fact that so many of these institutions are compromised. So they, the more revelations that they are forced to engage in or might want to engage in to clear their consciences or something will get them into more trouble. And then, as I say, you know, when you have the chief negotiator for the United States, Steve Witkoff and his two, he has two sons who are going around raising money from sovereign wealth funds and others and starting their $500,000 per membership club in Washington, money that they and Donald Jr. Will pocket if they can get themselves, you know, 1,000 members, there's a lot of grift. I'm sorry. It's true. And you may love Trump and you may want to be as supportive of Trump as possible. And I think a lot of the work that the administration is doing on the Title 6 anti Semitism issue is noble and great and I'm incredibly grateful for it. But this is a very big deal. And as I say, it appears to me as though the Hunter Biden story wasn't just useful to the, to the Trump family and the Trump administration as a through line to make the case that don't come looking at us and saying we're crooks or that Donald Trump or the Trump Organization is a crook. Go look over here at the president, United States, who's sitting right there with his son, and that they looked at this and not only used it, but said, huh, that's an interesting business model.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

Maybe along with the preemptive pardons.

[Emily Damari]

Yeah. Well, so this is actually where I think, and I'll point our listeners to a very good op ed that Jack Goldsmith wrote, my colleague at AEI in the New York Times the other day, talking about executive power and some of the precedents and pointing out that previous Democratic administrations are establishing presence of executive unitary power that Trump is now exploiting. So we can't just blame it all on Trump. Look, the Biden, the Biden family and the China connection is huge at the University of Pennsylvania as well. Who do you think funded a lot of that Biden center where he had stored some of those, you know, classified documents? But it's very important for people of conservative sentiment who spent a lot of time like us criticizing the grift of the extended Biden family and its access to power and its influence peddling. We must do the same thing with the Trump family. There is just no excuse. There's no, there's you. We must be consistent because it threatens the structure of our. It also deeply, deeply undermines people's trust in how government should work. So I think it's important to. We gotta hammer the Trump family as much as we hammer the Biden family.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Okay, now let's talk about the Trump administration and where all of this goes in terms of policy, because we have a week coming where we don't know what's going on. But there are some relatively potentially momentous things happening just to sort of set the table, or Jonathan can help set the table. There's going to be negotiations with Iran over a nuclear deal. There are high level, there are talks about the hostages. Israel is amassing reservists to invade on the ground in Gaza in numbers of tens of thousands to occupy Gaza and end the war that way, hopefully with some idea of getting some of the hostages out as they do so. Not clear how that would work. The Hamas, all Hamas has said that it will consider it if Israel agrees to a five year ceasefire, which obviously is not going to happen. And that's just three of the things. And of course the Houthis and where. What on earth we're doing with the Houthis? Did we make a deal where the Houthis said we're going to stop attacking American ships or not? Because six hours after Trump said they'd made this deal, there was an attack on an American ship on the Truman. The Houthis fired another missile at Israel that was intercepted. So, Jonathan, this is your bailiwick. Please ventilate.

[Christine Rosen]

I will ventilate. Look, first let's, let's unpack the Houthi thing. It. If this was a surprise to the Israelis, I think it was a surprise to a lot of people that Trump secured some kind of an understanding and agreement with the Houthis. What it did is it ended the conflict that has been going on for two months where the US has been pounding the Houthis, you know, in an attempt to get them to a Stop firing on American ships, and B, to open up the lanes of shipping in the Red Sea. What was not accomplished here, and which has sent the Israelis into a little bit of, a little bit of a tailspin, is there was nothing about the firing of missiles, the ballistic missiles at Israel. So, in other words, it looks like Trump has cut a side deal of sorts with the Houthis. And, you know, I think you have a lot of people right now in the Middle east wondering, what does this mean for us? We're not, you know, we're not curbing all of the activities of the Houthis. We're just doing this right now as it relates to the U.S. i understand that this is going to appeal to the, let's call them, the neo isolationists of the administration. You know, they were never happy with the war against the Houthis. They didn't see it as an American interest. They didn't see how it impacted the United States in any way. So they're cheering this, and this sort of looks like, I don't know, a win for, you know, for that, that wing of the party. So now then, then comes the next big question. And actually, as we're recording this in about an hour, we're supposed to hear something, a large announcement that's going to be huge, as they say in Trump world, right? We, we believe that there is going to be some kind of an announcement as it relates to Gaza aid. What the United States is going to do is not entirely clear, but the idea is to provide more aid to Gaza and to have it circumvent Hamas. That's important because Hamas continues to wield the distribution of aid as their means of legitimacy in the Gaza Strip. They have administrative control over the food and the medicine that the population needs. And so that's afforded them some power even as they're getting shellacked by the idf, even as people are surrendering, even as whatever is left of their infrastructure is flattened. So, you know, my question right now, and I guess we'll learn soon, is what exactly was agreed upon here? What, you know, what did Israel get in return for allowing this? Are we going to see the release of all the hostages? The rumor that I was hearing yesterday was there would be the release of Idan Alexander, the American Israeli hostage, but not the rest of them. And right now there's questions about how many are left alive. 21, 23. But I mean, why are we not getting all of them out? Right. I'm hopeful here that we'll see a deal that sees all of this happen, but I'm not holding my breath. Then alongside this, as if this is not already making your head burst with all of the kind of options ahead of us. Then there's this question about May 11, which is when the US returns to the negotiating table with the Iranians for more indirect talks. The stuff that's going on in Gaza, the stuff that's going on with the Houthis, does seem to be connected in some way to the negotiations that are going on with the Iranians. There could be some kind of grand bargain in the works here that would bring about an end to the Iranian nuclear program. One would hope, anyway. And Trump has been, I think, up until now. I mean, it's been a tale of two messages. But overall, the messaging has been okay from the president that the nuclear program needs to be fully dismantled. The question is, what are the things that the United States gives the Iranians in return? Is it Gaza aid? Is it not firing on the Houthis any longer? Is there sanctions relief, by the way, which I am utterly opposed to. And I hope that we don't see billions of dollars flowing to the regime, because what that will mean is we're just going to fund more wars along the lines of what we've just watched. Right. The war that's played out over the last year and a half is the direct result of 150, $200 billion in sanctions relief that Obama, Biden gave to the Iranian regime. So a lot happening right now all at once, and remarkably, a lot of it is under the kind of file of Stephen Witkoff, not so much of it under Marco Rubio, and a lot of it will hinge on the personage of Donald Trump himself.

[Jon Podhoretz]

There will also be, maybe as you're listening to this, it'll be over. So I'm not going to speculate on what will happen, but I believe Senators Cotton and Graham are to have some kind of a statement message, something like that, about what the sense of their positions as the leading figures on conservative foreign policy in the U.S. senate have to say about what they expect from the Iran deal.

[Emily Damari]

And also Mike Johnson and Ted Cruz, there's another press conference this morning as well, for Americans United Against Iran, I think it's called.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Yeah.

[Emily Damari]

So there's. There's two press conferences actually trying to put forward a very strong wing of the GOP's position on Iran.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Yeah.

[Christine Rosen]

And it's designed to sort of hem in the administration. Right. That this sort of, you know, flexibility that we've been hearing this sort of multiple messages Coming out of the White House, I think what they're trying to do is to narrow that narrative and to make it clear, you know, we want full dismantling of Iran's nuclear facilities. We don't want a pause. We don't want to allow them to continue to enrich or to reprocess. You know, there's all of these sort of technical things that I think, look, I got to say, I've said this from the beginning. This deal, if we get one, it will be binary, right? Either it shuts down the Iranian nuclear program and makes it a permanent shutdown, or it doesn't. And that's the binary of whether this is a good deal or a bad deal. So I think right now we're seeing a very useful role in the US Congress where we've got, people are basically saying, Trump, you've got a, you've got an agenda. We want to help you with your agenda. We're going to tell you the rules on Iran and, and so if they're successful, this will lead to a position that the President doesn't move from. And we'll wait and see. You know, May 11th is a big day.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Hey everybody.

[Abe Greenwald]

John here to talk to you about bowl and branch. I'm not the easiest sleeper. Got a lot of thoughts running through my head just before I finally am able to quiet down that roiling brain and get through the night. And I gotta tell you, I recently got a set of Bolen brand sheets for my bed and I'm sleeping so much better. It's honestly true. Bowlen brand sheets help quiet all that noise because they wrapped me in softness so extraordinary my body and mind effortlessly drift to sleep. The signature sheets we got made with the finest 100% organic cotton so you can spend every night in the softest feeling imaginable. These bestselling sheets feel buttery, breathable and get softer with every wash. Why would you do bow and branch over other sheets? You can feel the quality immediately. They really do feel better than the ones that you have right now. They are cool when they need to be cool. They are supply the right kind of temperature control if maybe your room is a little cold and you want some, you know, some support there and they get softer with every wash. So I think we've washed ours two or three times now and they are significantly softer than they were when we got them without losing any of that quality. So Bowlen branch products made different so you can sleep better at night. Woven with the finest hundred percent cotton or organic cotton on earth, Crafted by artisans who earn the pay and respect they deserve. Signature hem sheets for every mattress size, every mattress style, every bedroom style, design and colors. All kinds of colors, all kinds of and they got those specifically made top and bottom. Very easy to put right there on your bed. So you can try Bowlen branch sheets for an entire month with that 30 night worry free guarantee for which they're famous. There's no catch. You can wash, style and feel the difference for yourself risk free. If you don't get your best night's sleep, you can send them back for a full refund. So feel the difference an extraordinary night's sleep can make with bowl and Branch. Get 15% off plus free shipping on your first set of sheets at bolandbranch.com commentary that's B O L L A N D branch.com commentary to save 15% exclusions apply. See site for details.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Hey everybody.

[Abe Greenwald]

John here to talk to you about bowl and branch. I'm not the easiest sleeper. Got a lot of thoughts running through my head just before I finally am able to quiet down that roiling brain and get through the night. And I gotta tell you, I recently got a set of Bolen brand sheets for my bed and I'm sleeping so much better. It's honestly true. Bowlen branch sheets help quiet all that noise because they wrapped me in softness so extraordinary my body and mind effortlessly drift to sleep. The signature sheets we got made with the finest 100% organic cotton so you can spend every night in the softest feeling imaginable. These best selling sheets feel buttery, breathable and get softer with every wash. Why would you do Bowen branch over other sheets? You can feel the quality immediately. They really do feel better than the ones that you have right now. They are cool when they need to be cool. They are supply the right kind of temperature control if maybe your room is a little cold and you want some, you know, some support there and they get softer with every wash. So I think we've washed ours two or three times now and they are significantly softer than they were when we got them without losing any of the that quality. So Bowen branch products made different so you can sleep better at night. Woven with the finest hundred percent cotton or organic cotton on earth. Crafted by artisans who earn the pay and respect they deserve. Signature hem sheets for every mattress size, every mattress style, every bedroom style, design and colors. All kinds of colors, all kinds of and they got those specifically made top and bottom. Very easy to put right there on your bed. So you can try Boland branch sheets for an entire month with that 30 night worry free guarantee for which they're famous, there's no catch. You can wash style and feel the difference for yourself, risk free. If you don't get your best night's sleep, you can send them back for a full refund. So feel the difference an extraordinary night's sleep can make. With bowl and Branch. Get 15% off plus free shipping on your first set of sheets at bolandbranch.com commentary that's B O L L A N D branch.com commentary to save 15% exclusions apply. See site for details.

[Christine Rosen]

You know, it's interesting. I mean, I know obviously we've all been watching the, you know, the so called neo isolationist wing and I think we talk about JD Vance as being part of that. He had a statement yesterday that seemed to indicate that he's on the right side of this. And, and I'll also just say that anecdotally some of the conversations that I've had with folks from that wing of the party, I think everyone is kind of in agreement that Iran should not have the capability to build a nuke. Right? That is the goal. The question is, what does the United States do to prevent that? That's where they are getting you know, sort of caught up. They're like, we don't want to use American force to stop this, but I think it's important that the threat of American force is on the table, which is part of the administration's strategy from what I can tell.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Okay, so let's engage in a little bit of a thought experiment which is to say let's try to parse what words might be used next week. Should there be a deal. Now if a deal collapses and there is no deal, that will mean that we went to the table and said you have to, to stop doing what you're doing in some fashion or other. And that the Iranians basically said, no, that. Right, that's it. Like if the deal falls apart, it's because the Iranians reject American terms in some fashion or other. But then the question is what happens if there is some kind of a deal? And what I'd like you to do with me, and maybe we can all do this together, is think about the language that will reveal how bad or dangerous or threatening or disastrous the deal is versus language that would suggest that the deal advances American and Western interests. For example, if, let me just give you an example, Trump comes out and says we have a deal and under the terms of this deal, Iran will never get a Nuclear weapon. And that's what he says, good or bad.

[Christine Rosen]

I mean, good. But understand that Obama said the same thing.

[Jon Podhoretz]

That's why I'm going to say it's bad. Because the jcpoa, if you remember, if you remember Obama's efforts to sell the Iran deal in 2015, he said that this deal that I am presenting means that Iran will never get a nuclear weapon. When the clear outlines and language of the deal made it clear that after 12 years under the terms of the deal, Iran could get a nuclear weapon. Now, Obama, because the deal sunsetted basically 12 years after it was signed. Now, Obama said after that if they start doing things, then we're going to put really bad sanctions on them not to, not to enrich their uranium to weaponized levels. But of course, he had no ability to.

[Christine Rosen]

No, he talked about every pathway, right? He talked about every pathway being cut off. But of course there was no way to cut off every pathway, right? I mean, I'll tell you a couple things that I'm looking for right now. One is, I don't want to hear the word confidence building measures, cbm. I mean, shoot me right then and there if I hear confidence building measures. That's just an insane term. And it just means that we're going to kick the can down the road. If I hear that there is an interim agreement, right? That's a problem because it means that we still haven't imposed our will on the other side despite having massive firepower in the region, having massive leverage, sanctions, financial, right? I mean, we have all this leverage right now and we're not using it. So I don't want to hear about an interim agreement again. And if I start hearing about levels of enrichment that will be allowed. That's a problem, right? I got to say, I mean, I've been saying this and this is with all due respect to all of my colleagues in this space that follow all the technicals of nuclear development. I don't care what I mean, I don't want to hear about enrichment levels. I don't want to hear about sunset claws. I don't want to hear about 1, 2, 3 agreements. I want to hear that this thing is not being mothballed, but it is being destroyed, that every facility is now no longer going to be operational because the US has imposed its will on Iran. That is the goal here. And anything short of that, I think will open up the question of whether in fact we got into a good deal or one that is, you know, a resuscitation of elements of Obama Now, I do think we can get a better deal than what Obama got, but if we don't cut off all the pathways. Now, this is rinse and repeat. We're back at this under another president. And that scares me because I actually think you can criticize Trump all you want. He's the best you're gonna get for a while. Right. You get an isolationist that comes in from the Republican Party. Yeah, yikes. Right. You get Kamala Harris comes back. Right. I mean, we're not getting a better deal. I think you're telling Jonathan.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Right.

[Christine Rosen]

But this is the stuff that scares me. I think we have probably two to four years. But even then, I got to say, the two to four years is. It's not even. That's not even the window, because right now, Iran is weak. Its air defenses are down. Its proxies are limping along. They're bleeding. Israel is loaded for bear. The war is still going on. There is leverage here. I want to see it used.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Right.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

Can I just say this?

[Jon Podhoretz]

Yeah, please.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

I'm frankly, like, disturbed that we're talking about the prospect, the possibility of a good deal. I don't think there's a good deal to be had.

[Jon Podhoretz]

There's a deal to be had. That would be the Iranian saying, Uncle. I mean, there is a. There is an Appomattox deal. If you want to consider surrender a deal. I would consider surrender a deal, but.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

But that's not the deal. I don't think that's on the table. I mean, if anything, it's going to be Trump giving them this, that, and the other thing and maybe holding Israel back a little bit to get them to say something resembling an uncle. But I think it's dangerous to start talking about a good deal. I just don't think there's a good deal to be had with the Iranians.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Okay, so the language. So as we've settled this, then here are the things to watch out for. That means that it's time to go into your fallout shelter. Any number that is attached to the word enrichment, that number could be 3.6%, which is the baseline of enrichment. That then goes up to 20, that goes up to 45, that goes up to 80, that goes up to 100. And as Marco Rubio himself, the supposed. The hardliner in the administration, said, if you allow enrichment at 3.6%, it's three weeks. Till then, the enrichment can get to 80% if they start spinning the centrifuges. So there. The breakout time is three weeks. So you're getting Nothing. For an agreement that says it is legal for the Iranians to enrich at all, at any number whatsoever.

[Christine Rosen]

If you give a number, it means they're still enriching, which means the nuclear program.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Number. Bad. Interim. Bad. Bad. And. And a nuclear weapon. Bad. Okay. These are all bad, though they might sound good. So everybody should, like, put that in their bingo card or whatever on the. This is. This is trouble. Good. The Iranians have agreed to destroy their centrifuges and to shut down their three nuclear facilities.

[Christine Rosen]

And what's more, dog them are gone.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Right?

[Christine Rosen]

Yeah.

[Jon Podhoretz]

What's more, we're going to be standing there while they blow them up. Right. That's really good. That's. That's. Trump should win whatever is the conservative version of the Nobel Prize, because they'll never win the Nobel Prize from Sweden or wherever the hell the. No, Oslo. Where the hell is that? Who cares anyway? So that would be good. Now, here's the third element Israel is facing. An existential choice that gets complicated is when Trump comes to the table with the stick and not the carrot. There are two sticks that he brings to the table, in my view. Or three. One, you don't do what we say. We got planes. We're going to fly them over. We're going to drop bombs, bunker buster bombs, and destroy your underground facilities. And we're going to do it. And everybody in the world is going to know it. You have no air defenses against us. This is no threat to us. Do what we say and say you're going to do it so we don't humiliate you, but we'll do it. That's number one. Number two is, okay, you're not going to agree to it. We're giving a green light to the Israelis. The Israelis now say behind the scenes to various people, they've been working on this now for 15 years. They believe, or some people in the Israeli military establishment believe, that they can successfully take out the Iranian nuclear program if they are given immense amounts of logistical support from the United States. In other words, they can execute the task. But they need intelligence. They need some of the things that the Biden administration gave them when they did the strike in the summer, was it the spring or the summer of last year that took out the air defenses? They need us. They met our eyes in the sky. They need us to give them some equipment and material. They need us to help them get home, maybe in midair refueling help. There's some other things that they may need, but that we will help them do. But basically they're the ones who are taking the risk. They're the ones who are going to be the. Be the deliverers of the, you know, fire and fury. And the third is that they do it together. Third is that there is some combined Israeli American mission.

[Christine Rosen]

There's a fourth.

[Jon Podhoretz]

And what's the fourth?

[Christine Rosen]

The fourth is that the Israelis do it against the will of the United States.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Okay, that and there's. Right. So. And this is where this negotiation is so unbelievably delicate and compromised.

[Christine Rosen]

Correct.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Because Steve Witkoff is the negotiator. And Steve Witkoff is literally in the pocket of gutter. Steve Wyckoff has business interests in gutter. He has billions of dollars that he gets from the gutterys for his business.

[Christine Rosen]

So here's the thing. I'm going to push back a little bit. Not that I doubt that he's a business partner of the Qataris.

[Abe Greenwald]

Okay.

[Christine Rosen]

I think that he answers to one person right now and one person only, and that's Donald Trump. When Donald Trump tells him that he has to get a deal, you know he's going to go do it and he's going to do it on the terms that Trump tells him that he needs to. And so he may be trusting of the Qataris, he may be listening to the Qataris, but I'm not sure what the Qataris have to say about Iran. Right. I mean, I understand that the Qataris are probably highly problematic as it relates to the hostage negotiations. And I would not trust them and I would not want to work with them. And I think that it's a problem that Witkoff is working with them, given his relationship with the Qataris and the Qatari relationship with Hamas. I think that one, like we need to, we need to figure out how to solve for that. But as it relates to the Iran stuff, I mean, you got a president who's saying, I don't want to see enrichment, I don't want to see a nuclear program. The Iranians can either solve this the easy way or the hard way. And we're giving them a choice. And now it's up to Witkoff to negotiate this with them. I don't. I'm not sure I see the compromise there.

[Jon Podhoretz]

All right, so. So the only reason I was bringing up Wyckoff was to say that Wyckoff is the one who is at the table and Trump is not a detail guy. So Wyckoff can come back and say, here's what they've agreed to. There'll be a 3,000% levy on the Buzz, the gutterys promise that they will, they will provide oversight in the form of the hoot. These will do that. So there are 17 different fantastic pieces here. You wanted me to negotiate a deal. I've negotiated like a really good, you know, deal. It's 900 pages long. It's like, you know, and so, and so, wow. You know, that's. That would be. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe Trump will say the only thing you need to do is come home and say that the Iranians have agreed to destroy their nuclear program or all bets are off. But we don't know that that's where Trump is. And he is not being clear. And he is not being. And I don't think he's being clear because once again, I don't think we even know why he started this in the first place. It's completely inexplicable. Where he was in 2018 was he pulled us out of the Iran nuclear deal. Why is he, who, who was asking him to strike a nuclear deal?

[Christine Rosen]

I mean, I'll tell you what the thinking is anyway. I mean, the thinking is, is that we have so many other priorities. And this, by the way, is part of that kind of neo isolationist or China first mentality, right? That we need to get all these other smaller problems off of our table. They're annoying, right? This, this whole war with Ukraine, man, this is just not worth it. And the Russians really aren't a threat. And let's just get a mineral deal with the, with the Ukrainians. We'll put some, you know, American businesses there and it'll be kind of a guarantee and we can move on from Ukraine. And let's get this meaningless conflict, this useless conflict off of the docket. And then after that, let's get the Israelis to just, you know, play nice with Gaza. Let's get them the aid that they need. We'll try to negotiate the release of the hostages. We'll get that problem solved. And then we're just going to get the Iranian nuclear thing solved so that we can get back to the business of countering China. I'm not even sure, by the way, that countering China is what we understand it to be in the context of what the China first crowd is talking about, because they don't want to work with China. They don't want to go in and defend Taiwan if China invades. But what they want to do is, I think they want to get to a different place where we're not dealing with conflicts that they think are not in The American interest, that's what I think is driving a lot of this right now. But this get it done mentality, I think is, is really the problem, right, that they're under the gun, that they need to get results. You know, these things take a long time. You've got partners that don't want to negotiate with you, at least not in good faith. And so once you start down this road, you risk failure, which is something that the Trump administration will not risk.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Right.

[Christine Rosen]

So they will try to get a quick thing done and then move on. And that's kind of, that's the dynamic that we're watching.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Okay, so let's talk about option four that you mentioned, which is that the Israelis decide that they have to, to take this once in a lifetime opportunity, having destroyed Iran's air defenses, to take out the nuclear program, even though the United States as that, as we know, they're willing to leak to the New York Times saying, you know, is we've told Israel they can't do it. Yeah, you are. You talk a lot to senior intelligence and military officials in Israel. How likely, if you were, I mean, if you were to put a percentage on it, how likely do you think the Israelis would be to say, you know, we've gone it alone before we did ocira, before we did the Syrian reactor, before. Every time we've had to do something that is in our national interest, that we know are going to very much upset the Americans, but we have to do it. We've done it. That's our history. This is bibi Netanyahu spent 20 years in government saying that his purpose ultimately was to eliminate Iran as a threat to existential threat to Israel. He doesn't have much more time left, even though he thinks he might. This is it and he'll do it. So percentage chance low.

[Christine Rosen]

Like really low. At least as I see it, because Donald Trump has tethered him or BB has tethered himself to Donald Trump. I mean, right. I mean, he's sort of said, I'm casting my fate with this guy. And, and so now I think he's hanging on every word coming out of these Iran talks and the Yemen talks and the Gaza talks and everything else. From, from my perspective, Bibi has lost. He's lost the control that I'm not sure he ever had it, but now it's completely in the hands of Trump. I think, by the way, that Bibi's right flank is getting restless.

[Jon Podhoretz]

The right wing code even begin to describe it? No.

[Christine Rosen]

I mean, they're losing Their mind here.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Yeah. But they are attempting to seize control of the policy as relates to Gaza and. And Iran because they think that. I believe these are the radical right, the radical right wingers, you know, Ben Ver and Smotrich type and others in the coalition who believe that Bibi has lost heart or has been sort of, like, put into a corner where he has become Hamlet.

[Christine Rosen]

He has.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Yeah. And he's become Hamlet. He can't decide whether or not to kill Claudius.

[Christine Rosen]

Yeah.

[Abe Greenwald]

Or not.

[Christine Rosen]

And you have to understand, this is why Bibi is so stuck. He does not have the B2 bombers. He doesn't have the bunker busters. If he bombs the nuclear sites, what he will do is probably set it back by a year, and then you're right back to where you were, because they cannot go as deep as they want.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Right.

[Christine Rosen]

And so the frustration here is that you probably end up sparking a bigger war with Iran. You start to see more ballistic missiles flying at Israel out of Iran, and the Israelis go back and they bomb more of their missile sites, and, you know, and you have a widening of the war, which is not what the Trump administration wants. They're trying to contain this. And, you know, what you have is something, you know, people keep talking about, OSI Rock. I actually think that the equivalent here is the Sinai campaign, the 1956 war, where the Israelis went ahead and actually launched a bigger operation against the express wishes of the United States, leading to fallout, of course. I mean, they got over it. Right. But this. This could become a bigger political crisis. By. By the way, back then, the Israelis were not dependent on $3.8 billion in American aid and the flow of armaments that are crucial for every one of the platforms that they run. There's. There's a lot riding on this right now. It's not simple stuff. That's why I think that the chances are low.

[Jonathan Schanzer]

There is also, though, I just want to. I mean, I doubt the Israelis have exhausted their espionage and sabotage campaigns within Iran, too.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Look, they certainly haven't. And again, this goes to this final. One of the interesting side consequences of eliminating the threats from Iranian proxies, not that the Houthis don't represent a threat, because they do. Because they almost, you know, killed thousands of people at Ben Gurion Airport the other day. But eliminating the sort of existential threats from Hamas and from Hezbollah pretty much. Right. Is that. That leaves the fight with. With the principal. They've been spending 20, 25 years fighting on the periphery with the principal's, you know, cat's paws. And now the fight is with Iran. And they fought with Iran as cleverly as they possibly can. And there is this terrible situation now where there is a moment that would represent a huge triumph for the west, in my view, the United States and the west, which would be to say we are establishing the precept that henceforth, any nuclear program that is entered into by any country that we don't like or that we think is inimical to American interests, we are establishing it is our right to take a plane and fly over it and drop a 2,000 pound bomb on that facility. And nuclear proliferation is dead as a 21st century tactic for secondary tin pot countries that want to scare their neighbors and work their will. And that the tragedy here is that we are probably not going to take advantage of. The table has been set. Right.

[Christine Rosen]

Let's wait and see. Honestly, the rhetoric right now is no nukes. If you saw Trump's latest, it was they can either do this the easy way or the hard way. Right. I don't know exactly the way he put it, but we can, we can remove their nuclear program peacefully or violently. That is a good binary choice that he's putting.

[Jon Podhoretz]

I agree.

[Christine Rosen]

If he follows through. And that's the big question.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Right.

[Christine Rosen]

So in three days we're gonna start to find out what's going on. People are nervous that he made a side deal with the Houthis and it looked like that was a conciliation toward the Iranians and that this aid thing might be. But look, if you give more aid to Gaza and you cut down on, on the strikes against the Houthis, but you end up ultimately destroying the Iranian nuclear program. Okay, you know, I mean, we'll take that. Yeah. Not a sharp stick in the eye, right? I can work with that.

[Jon Podhoretz]

Yeah. Well, thank you for working with us today. You gotta go. We gotta go. Not as crushingly morose as might have been. Could have been worse. Was worse yesterday. Make Columbia University sink into the ocean or into the Hudson river, which would be really nice. And the other thing to watch for, as I said yesterday, is activism. Anti Israeli activism and pro Hamas activism is going to spike over the next two weeks. Everybody watch out for it. There was a march to Colombia by pro Palestinian group last night up Broadway, which featured, I think Christine's favorite joint slogan slogan, which is justice for Palestine and Stop Cop City. Cop City, of course, being an issue in Atlanta over a training facility for the Atlanta police. Yeah. So the Omni cause stopping the Atlanta training facility for police and justice in Palestine. But that gives you a sense of where this is going and who might be going into the streets who are not necessarily students but are, you know, America's shiftless 28 year old radical slime balls who make everything worse and have destroyed the Pacific Northwest and now would like to destroy the rest of the country. So we'll we'll be watching for that. Jonathan Schanzer at the foundation for Defense of Democracies and and his article that I should literally know the title of since I am its editor and I don't know, catering to Qatar, Gatoring to Qatar in the May issue of Commentary right now available for your [e-mail] where you should go subscribe and read that and everything else and all the glories and wonders thereto in the May issue and every article article that has ever been published in commentary in its 79 and a half year history. We will be back tomorrow for Abe and Christina and John Pot Pouritz. Keep the candle burning.