The Commentary Magazine Podcast: "Wild Kharg" (March 30, 2026)
Host: John Podhoretz | Guests: Abe Greenwald, Christine Rosen, Eliana Johnson, Jonathan Schanzer

Episode Overview

This episode centers on the rapidly evolving crisis in the Middle East, focusing on U.S. and Israeli actions against Iran’s regime. The hosts and guest Jonathan Schanzer analyze military strategy, political implications, the likelihood and mechanics of regime change, and the domestic repercussions in America. Special attention is paid to the significance of Carg Island, the ongoing threat to the Strait of Hormuz, the uncertainties of U.S. strategy, and the political balancing act for President Trump.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Shifting Military & Geopolitical Landscape

[01:00–09:16]

• Military Operations: The U.S. and Israel have stepped up attacks against Iran's military infrastructure, aiming to reduce their offensive capabilities and future nuclear ambitions.

  • Jonathan Schanzer: “All of those things are getting destroyed… You can see the degradation of this regime in ways that are real and tangible.” [03:07]
  • Israel’s daily pace of airstrikes in Lebanon has dropped as operations shift and focus expands.
  • Minor operational setbacks, such as the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier needing repairs (“from a laundry fire, if you can believe that” [04:23]), but overall momentum is maintained.

• Asymmetric Economic Pressure: Iran retaliates economically by threatening oil supplies (Strait of Hormuz, Bab el-Mandab) and using proxies like the Houthis.

  • Schanzer: “This is the shutting down of the Strait of Hormuz… attacks against Israel and all the Arab states, and those continue apace.” [04:34]

• The Strategic Role of Carg Island: Taking or threatening Carg Island implies a dramatic escalation, as it controls 90% of Iran's oil exports and thus wields enormous leverage over the regime.

2. The Trump Administration’s Deliberate Ambiguity

[02:07–09:16, 11:15–14:04, 16:15–17:46]

• Strategic Silence or Confusion? Debate over whether the chaos and conflicting messages are a smokescreen or lack of planning.

  • Podhoretz: “Is this… trying to get misdirection… or is this also…getting all their ducks in a row so if they decide to move, they have everything at hand?” [02:07]

• Trump’s Communication Style:

  • Schanzer: “Every time Donald Trump speaks, it’s like a cat with a laser pointer… he has not tipped his hand yet as to which strategy he is pursuing exclusively.” [07:58]
  • The “take him seriously, not literally” approach remains in effect.
  • Administration’s discipline in avoiding leaks has fueled “immense speculation” and “anxiety” among observers. [16:41]

3. The Perils and Logic of Ground Troop Deployments

[11:15–14:04]

• Christine Rosen: Queries about the meaning of recent ground troop deployments (adding 10,000 to the region, now roughly 50,000 total). Troop levels are far lower than Iraq War-scale invasions and may be calibrated for focused objectives like securing Carg Island rather than occupation.

• Jonathan Schanzer: Points out the conflicting risks and objectives for troops:

  • Seizing Carg risks “a bunch of our troops on one small island that could be targeted by the regime.”
  • Escorting ships through Hormuz also exposes forces to danger.
  • Preventing Iran from using highly enriched uranium (enough “for 11 bombs”) remains a key motive.

• On the prospects of a raid on Iran’s nuclear stockpile (Isfahan):

  • Podhoretz: “If we get to it...you’d actually have to degrade it on site...the risk of that Mission may not be worth, maybe wildly out of proportion, but the reward would be inestimable.” [14:42–16:15]

4. The Unspoken Goal: Regime Change

[18:05–22:41, 29:29–35:07, 57:12–59:26]

• Regime Change is a taboo phrase, but the consensus is that achieving lasting security in Hormuz or disarmament is impossible without it.

  • Podhoretz: "At the end of this war, the regime must fall. That's the thing they don't want to say." [19:40]
  • Schanzer: “There is…a limitation to how honest anybody wants to be right now in this administration… Trump doesn’t want to say regime change. That’s like the dirty term.” [22:41]

• Internal division in the U.S. administration (isolationists vs. interventionists) is shaping ambiguous official language.

• Phase two, intelligence-led regime change ("Israel, the Mossad working with the Iranians"), is likely under consideration, but unity among Iranian opposition is lacking.

  “I am concerned about the lack of unity and coordination on the part of the people of Iran... I have yet to see a clear indication that they are ready for this moment.”
  —Jonathan Schanzer [22:41]

5. Political and Public Perceptions in the U.S.

[29:14–34:12, 35:07–47:58]

• Eliana Johnson: Early concerns Trump would “end this prematurely because of political concerns” are receding as she perceives persistent resolve, even as political costs rise.

• Podhoretz:

  • Only a “shadow threat to the Strait of Hormuz and nothing else” could shake Trump’s resolve.
  • Oil prices and their global impact (Australia, South Korea, Japan) are points of pressure but mitigated by ongoing efforts to keep markets calm and oil flowing.

• Rosen: Believes Trump misses opportunities by not directly addressing Americans’ economic anxieties due to the war.

  • “All he has to do is say, I acknowledge your concerns about these three things and I'm aware…That, I think, is bad politics, even if it's just sort of something that's baked into the system when it comes to Trump.” [35:07]

• Schanzer and Podhoretz: Argue Trump has been exceptionally vocal and hands-on as commander in chief, constantly trying to “talk markets down” and reassure through actions, if not formal addresses, keeping oil prices from skyrocketing.

• Rosen’s skepticism: Wonders about how long public trust will last amid uncertainty and “mercenary back and forth.” [46:11]

• Greenwald: Contends that antiwar sentiment will only become potent if the war goes badly—current “anti-Trump” passions are not the same as true mass antiwar fervor. If the regime falls, opposition will shift from war criticism to claiming it made the world less safe.

  “They will say the world is worse off for it...their ability to make up an alternative reality…”
  —Abe Greenwald [50:36]

• Polls: Trump maintains overwhelming Republican support (upwards of 90%), a critical difference from when Bush lost GOP support late in Iraq.

6. Mechanics of Regime Collapse

[52:54–57:12, 57:15–59:26]

• Podhoretz: History shows regimes more often fall due to coup dynamics and internal cracks than through mass uprisings.

  • “It is really not the case that regimes fall because people go out into the streets and start dancing and singing…”

• Schanzer: The fragmented Iranian opposition limits prospects for a 'people’s revolution.' The U.S. and its allies may be aiding subversive operations, but unity and capacity are still missing.

  “The people of Iran are very divided, very fractured, and the idea that they will somehow just come together, I think has been unrealistic.” —Jonathan Schanzer [57:15]

• The war’s broader story is American discomfort with projecting power after Afghanistan and Iraq, not just battlefield progress.

7. The Only Way Out: Remove the Regime

[59:29–62:44]

• The hosts agree the only way to fully end the threat to Hormuz, and the risk of ongoing oil shocks and regional instability, is the removal of the current Iranian regime. Even from a hard realpolitik position, regime removal becomes the only answer as long as the Strait of Hormuz is “open-endedly threatened.”

  “My colleague Behnam Ben Taliblu…has been going back to one refrain. The only way out of this crisis in the Strait of Hormuz is through. And by that he means bring down the regime.” —Jonathan Schanzer [62:27]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On "taking Trump seriously, not literally":

  “Every time Donald Trump speaks, it’s like a cat with a laser pointer...he has not tipped his hand yet as to which strategy he is pursuing exclusively.”
  —Jonathan Schanzer [07:58]

• On messaging and regime change taboo:

  “Trump doesn’t want to say regime change. That’s like the dirty term. And nobody wants to say that out loud.”
  —Jonathan Schanzer [22:41]

• On the risk-reward of seizing Iran's nuclear materials:

  “If we get to it, we’re going to have to like, blast our way in to get to it...the risk of that Mission may not be worth, maybe wildly out of proportion, but the reward would be inestimable.”
  —John Podhoretz [14:42–16:15]

• On U.S. discomfort with war:

  “This country is still licking its wounds from the last two wars. We are still fearful that we don't have what it takes to win a war in the Middle east, maybe to win a war in general…”
  —Jonathan Schanzer [57:15]

• On the only path forward:

  “The only way out of this crisis in the Strait of Hormuz is through. And by that he means bring down the regime.”
  —Jonathan Schanzer [62:27]

Timestamps of Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment | Key Points | |-----------|---------|------------| | 01:00–06:22 | Opening & Recap | Updates on regional events; Carg Island’s strategic significance | | 07:58–09:16 | Admin Strategy | Trump’s deliberate ambiguity; “seriously, not literally” doctrine | | 11:15–14:04 | Troop Deployments | Scale and purpose of ground force increases | | 14:04–17:46 | Nuclear Seizure | Feasibility and symbolism of capturing Iran’s uranium stockpile | | 18:05–22:41 | Regime Change | Taboos in public messaging; Israel’s role; Iranian opposition | | 29:14–34:12 | Domestic Politics | Will Trump “cry uncle” or see it through? Oil prices; impact abroad | | 35:07–37:31 | Public Anxiety | Missed opportunities to calm American economic fears | | 46:11–52:54 | Tolerance & Trust | How public patience and trust may shift; nature of antiwar sentiment | | 52:54–57:12 | Regime Mechanics | How regimes actually fall; realism about internal collapse | | 57:15–59:26 | Broader Story | America’s collective uncertainty about war, projection of power | | 59:29–62:44 | Only Path Forward | Consensus: regime removal as the solution to Hormuz crisis |

Episode Tone & Closing Notes

The conversation is serious, occasionally mordant, and highly analytical, combining sharp political analysis with historical perspective. The hosts don’t mince words about the stakes and ambiguities around current policy. While some moments are laced with dark humor (e.g., “clean that lint filter” regarding the carrier fire [04:34], and candid derision of political opponents) the overall tone is one of urgency and unresolved tension about the near future.

Final Note:
The show ends with a brief, lighthearted recommendation for the sitcom “American Classic” (Kevin Kline, Laura Linney, MGM+), unrelated to the episode’s main themes.

For Listeners:

This summary covers the essential strategic, political, and public opinion aspects discussed in the episode, providing a comprehensive sense of where the panel sees the Middle East conflict and its turbulent domestic reverberations.