Winging it in Iran

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Gray Area with Sean Illing

Episode: "Winging it in Iran" (Aired March 6, 2026)

Host: Sean Illing (Vox)
Guest: Alexander Ward (Wall Street Journal, national security reporter)

---

Episode Overview

Sean Illing is joined by Alexander Ward to unpack the U.S. decision to strike Iran in early March 2026, following failed diplomacy and mounting tensions around protests and Iran's nuclear ambitions. The conversation is urgent and candid, reflecting the rapidly changing situation. Ward provides context on political, military, and regional implications, addresses public confusion and fear, and offers both immediate analysis and longer-range projections for Iran, the broader Middle East, and global geopolitics.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Background to the U.S. Strikes on Iran

Time: 02:57 – 05:32

• Initial Spark: The U.S. decision to strike did not arise suddenly but followed months of escalating events, starting with mass protests in Iran (Jan 2026).
• Trump promised "help is on its way" but delayed direct intervention, partly out of concern for unpredictable consequences, pressure from regional allies (Saudi Arabia, Israel), and a calculation concerning U.S. troop safety.
• A significant U.S. military buildup unfolded near Iran’s borders and coastlines, aiming to pressure Iran into diplomatic negotiations on its nuclear and ballistic missile program.
• When diplomacy failed, the Trump administration shifted to military action, citing Iran’s refusal to compromise on nuclear issues, past aggressions, and ongoing threats.

"It started when there were major protests against the regime and Trump promised, quote, unquote, help is on its way. That help didn't come [...] because Trump was worried about what it could unleash." — Alexander Ward (03:09)

2. Was There an Imminent Threat?

Time: 05:32 – 07:43

• The Trump administration attempted to present the strikes as a preemptive response against an "imminent" Iranian threat (ICBM development, nuclear program reactivation, and possible attacks against Americans).
• The evidence provided was inconsistent, with officials shifting from claims of direct threats to more vague assertions about future risks and potential retaliation if Israel acted first.

"When we're talking about imminent, I don't think anyone is saying like they were going to attack Americans tomorrow [...] they're saying they are going to strike America at some point." — Alexander Ward (07:11)

3. Iran’s Nuclear Program: Myth vs. Reality

Time: 07:43 – 09:58

• Previous U.S.-Israeli strikes were touted as “obliterating” Iran’s nuclear facilities, but evidence suggests destruction was significant but not total.
• Iran retains enriched uranium, but technical and logistical limitations (destroyed centrifuges, buried fuel) impede immediate weaponization. The regime could be years away from an actual deliverable nuclear warhead.

"It's true that the Iranians have enriched uranium... if they wanted to and had the ability, they could make fuel for a bomb within about a week. But that's not the same as having a weapon." — Alexander Ward (08:47)

4. Best Political Justification for the Attack – “Steel Man”

Time: 13:39 – 15:38

• The brutality of the Iranian regime’s crackdown on protesters (estimated deaths: 6,000–32,000, with numbers accepted even by skeptical sources) provided strong moral and political grounds for intervention.
• The regime’s continued pursuit of nuclear capabilities despite past deals amplified the argument for action.

"Estimates range from 6,000 to 32,000 dead in about a 48-72 hour period [...] protesters went out to demand a better life, and they were met with death, destruction, brutality at a scale really not seen in decades." — Alexander Ward (13:54)

5. U.S. Goalpost Shifting & Lack of Clear Objective

Time: 15:38 – 18:30

• Trump administration’s stated goals have shifted: from “freedom for the people of Iran” to quick deals, leadership replacement, and at times denying a plan for regime change.
• Ward critiques this as characteristic of Trump’s “shoot first, strategize later” approach to foreign policy, drawing parallels to previous interventions (Iran, Venezuela), and indicating U.S. objectives are still being formulated post-strike.

"He shoots first. He's told we can achieve these kinds of military objectives and then the political, strategic objectives he kind of figures out as he watches things unfold." — Alexander Ward (16:36)

6. Escalation Fears and Range of Possible Outcomes

Time: 18:30 – 21:03

• Ward lays out a wide spectrum of potential paths: from a more democratic, U.S.-friendly Iran to all-out regional war, with history suggesting less optimistic outcomes are probable.
• There’s little domestic appetite in the U.S. for long-term occupation or nation-building, pointing toward a strategy of “breaking things but not building.”

"We're breaking the place, we're hitting a whole bunch of things and we're not willing to build anything." — Alexander Ward (19:21)

7. Regional Escalation: What Does "Regional War" Mean?

Time: 23:23 – 27:09

• The conflict has “already expanded,” with Iranian attacks on Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, and more (“hitting energy locations, tourist hotspots”).
• Middle Eastern states and European allies are reacting in kind, with the French even sending an aircraft carrier, solidifying an emerging anti-Iranian regional bloc.
• The economic and investment climate in the Gulf is now threatened.

8. World-Changing Scenarios: The Best and Worst Cases

Time: 27:09 – 32:19

• Best Case: The regime falls; a more moderate, potentially U.S.-friendly government arises. Iranian proxies lose influence, and the region stabilizes, with improved relations across the Middle East.
• Worst Case (and more likely, per Ward): Iranian civil war, dissolution or fragmentation of the country, fierce intra-state violence, regional destabilization, and a humanitarian crisis.

9. Factions, Power Struggles, and the Limits of Air Power

Time: 29:35 – 34:20

• Deep entrenchment of regime elites, especially the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), makes a Venezuela-style quick regime replacement unlikely.
• Even a “decapitated” regime might not collapse but instead lead to brutal crackdowns, possible ethnic secession, and a breakdown of central authority.

"Scholars of coups and regime change go, it rarely happens with an air war alone. Right. Which we are doing." — Alexander Ward (30:55)

10. America’s Post-Strike Responsibility and “Moral Hazard”

Time: 32:19 – 36:19

• Despite denial of “regime change” intentions, the U.S. plan appears to be to step away and let internal forces play out — essentially “we break it, you fix it.”
• Ward warns about the risk of betrayal: the U.S. has ignited hope among Iranians for a better future. If America disengages or the outcome worsens, this could damage both American and presidential legacies and erode U.S. standing with the Iranian people.

"It feels callous and immoral again, for a country of 90, 92 million people to just basically go, we're going to break it. Hope you can rebuild it." — Alexander Ward (33:13)

"The hope of all of this... America is here now to rid you of an odious regime and to make your lives better. So Trump has to follow through on that. Otherwise…frankly, the American legacy and reputation takes a hit." — Alexander Ward (36:59)

11. Strategic Consequences: Global Power Projection and China

Time: 37:14 – 38:50

• Ongoing U.S. operations are draining its military stockpiles, munitions, and resources—already cited as a reason U.S. cannot fully support Ukraine.
• This could impact American deterrence elsewhere, notably against China over Taiwan, as Chinese leaders weigh U.S. capacity vs. demonstrated willingness to use force.

12. Final Thoughts and What to Watch For

Time: 38:50 – 39:53

• Ward is watching for signs of how internal power struggles in Iran evolve, what factions consolidate, and whether regional or global powers take advantage of U.S. distraction or depletion.
• He underscores the heightened fluidity and unpredictability, urging listeners to monitor signals on U.S. objectives, regional reflexes, and Iranian societal reactions.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "We're building this plane as we're flying it." — Alexander Ward (18:30)
• "You could imagine another major, brutal crackdown like we saw in January… Or you could see the state start collapsing, because it is weaker now than it was before this started." — Alexander Ward (30:33)
• "Sometimes what follows autocracy isn’t democracy, but chaos. But it could also be more autocracy." — Alexander Ward (34:50)
• "We break it, you handle it, could work out. I don't want to discount that possibility… but what I think is more likely is… chaos." — Alexander Ward (33:13)

---

Key Timestamps for Important Segments

• [02:57] – Origin of U.S. strikes and shifting rationales
• [05:32] – Debating the imminence of the threat
• [08:07] – Iran’s nuclear status post-bombing
• [13:39] – Political/moral case for intervention
• [15:38] – Incoherence of U.S. objectives and shifting justifications
• [18:30] – Possible escalation and spectrum of outcomes
• [23:23] – What a “regional war” looks like, unfolding escalation
• [27:09] – “World changing” potential, best- and worst-case scenarios
• [29:35] – Internal Iranian factions and why regime replacement is tough
• [32:19] – Post-strike vacuums and U.S. unwillingness to rebuild
• [37:14] – U.S. military stockpiles, global deterrence, and China
• [38:50] – Wrap-up: What experts are watching next

---

Conclusion

This episode gives a high-level yet nuanced look at the dangerous uncertainty following the U.S. strike on Iran in 2026. Alexander Ward’s sobriety and skepticism highlight the lack of strategy, the improvisational nature of U.S. policy, and the multiple ways in which this crisis could go awry. Both host and guest put a human face on the stakes for Iranians and Americans alike, while outlining concrete geopolitical, moral, and practical consequences no matter what comes next.

---

For more from Alexander Ward, read his coverage in the Wall Street Journal or follow @alexbward on social media.

Transcript

[Podcast Sponsor Announcer]

This episode is brought to you by Choiceology, an original podcast from Charles Schwab. Hosted by Katie Milkman, an award winning behavioral scientist and author of the best selling book how to Change. Choiceology is a show about the psychology and economics behind our decisions. Hear true stories from Nobel laureates, authors, athletes and everyday people about why we do the things we do. Listen to [e-mail] podcast or or wherever you listen.

[Vox Media Host]

This show is brought to you by sxsw. Ready for seven Days of Discovery south by Southwest is the premier destination for creative professionals from around the world. Experience full storytelling, thrilling live performances, cutting edge innovations and so much more at the south by Southwest conferences and festivals this March 12th through the 18th in Austin, Texas. Expect the unexpected at south by Southwest. Driven by rivian Unlock a 10% discount on your innovation badge when you use code [e-mail] VOX discount on badge price only, not combinable terms apply. Foreign.

[Sean Illing]

Welcome to the gray area Friday. My guest today is Alexander Ward, my friend, former Vox colleague, and now a national security reporter for the Wall Street Journal.

[Alexander Ward]

Thanks for having me.

[Sean Illing]

True story. Alex is the first person I call or text whenever there is an international incident of any and he always very patiently answers my questions. How are you buddy?

[Alexander Ward]

I am fine. I've definitely been more rested, but I'm fine. And when you, when you ring, I answer. So I'm happy to do this for you.

[Sean Illing]

We really do sincerely appreciate you doing this on very short notice. We were speaking on Monday afternoon, March 2, and it goes without saying that things are changing very quickly. By the end of this taping, there may be a completely different situation on the ground, but probably during the staping. Yeah. And so look, all we can do is assess things as they are right now and that is what we will do. This is not my beat. You know, I don't fully understand the situation. I am like a lot of people, I am worried. I'm confused. I'm a little angry. You are here to walk me through it. So at the end I can probably still be worried, but maybe at least informed. So what do you think about that?

[Alexander Ward]

Happy to take our text chain into the, into the audio sphere. Let's do this.

[Sean Illing]

All right. Before we get to where things are now, I just. Let me just go back to the decision to strike Iran in the first place. Why did we do this? Why now?

[Alexander Ward]

It is actually the multimillion dollar question because I'm not sure I can even answer that question. I'm not even sure President Trump can answer that question. But let's start with what the rationale that they now say is the rationale. We gotta go back to January. It started when there were major protests against the regime and Trump promised, quote, unquote, help is on its way. Now that help didn't come. But what happened was in large part because Trump was worried about what it could unleash. And also there were allies, particularly Saudi Arabia and Israel, who said, hey, you, the US Are not well positioned enough to protect us and your own troops should the Iranians retaliate to any strike. So what happens from those protests? The US Amasses a pretty large, what Trump would call an armada. Two carrier strike groups, jet fighters, other, other warships off the coast of Iran, while the US Says to Iran, hey, why don't we negotiate the end of your nuclear program and, and ballistic missile program and support for proxies, etc. And that goes on for quite some time while this armada amasses and we could talk about why it failed, but the diplomacy failed. And when it did on last Thursday, Trump basically went, okay, diplomatic route's not going to work. So now it's time to hit Iran. We hit Iran and then there's, and we'll get into this, I'm sure, but there are all kinds of mixed messages about what we're trying to accomplish. But to back to your point of why we did this, so initially start with the protest, then it was about the nuclear thing and that failed. And then at the State of the Union on Tuesday, before the strikes, I should note Trump was also also mentioned the decades long fight between the US And Iran, like this is not out of nowhere. There's been a pretty long shadow war, if we want to call it that, between the US And Iran, in which Iran has killed a lot of American service members and Americans themselves. And they were, you know, based on US Intelligence, working on a nuclear program and they were trying to get an intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit the U.S. so Trump basically goes between the protester thing, between the fact that they won't give up their nuclear program, the fact that they are could threaten Americans and have killed Americans. Game over regime. It's time, you're out. But as I alluded to, to what end? Now that remains a big question.

[Sean Illing]

Was there actually any evidence that there was an imminent threat? Has anyone even attempted to make the argument that there was an imminent urgent threat?

[Alexander Ward]

Yes, the Trump administration has tried to. They actually did. This would have been Saturday. Three Trump administration officials, pretty senior ones, I can't say Who. But they did a briefing for some reporters and they said, look, we, the Trump administration, have evidence that they have made a decision to seek an icbm, that intercontinental ballistic missile, that they were trying to reconstitute their nuclear program and that they were weighing the idea of striking Americans before the US Hit them. So a preemptive strike. Okay, now that, so at that point, it was worth going ahead and hitting them before they hit the U.S. i should note that after that briefing, so basically, 24 hours after that briefing time is a flat circle. So on Sunday, they brief members, excuse me, staffers of congressional staffers in which they, they were asked, so the Iranians were planning a preemptive strike on the US Wouldn't that be basically suicidal for them? And they went, oh, it's not that they were planning one necessarily. It was just that if the Israelis had struck the Iranians first, then they would have hit us. So basically, when we're talking about imminent, I don't think anyone is saying like they were going to attack Americans tomorrow, although they sort of did, I guess, on that preemptive strike point. But they are saying they are going to strike America at some point and it is not prudent or wise to wait until they're in a stronger position. So looming it's coming, they're hell bent on hurting America. Go after them. Now, I mean, you've heard Trump use language similar to the Iraq war, which was like, they are attacking civilization. You know, they, that it's kind of like they hate our freedom. Right. To make that parallel that this was some, that this is a theocratic, which, it is a theocratic, like regime really trying to destroy America and Israel. And so it was it, your time's up.

[Sean Illing]

I guess it was last June, America and Israel bombed Iran, bombed nuclear facilities. And we were told they obliterated their capabilities or their facilities. Was that just complete bullshit? How do we go from being obliterated to, you know, a half a year later needing to start a war and decapitate the regime?

[Alexander Ward]

So a couple of things. One is I'm, I'm having a lot of trouble with the administration when I bring up these issues because basically for months people were like, hey, you guys said you obliterated the program. You know, there's evidence that it's heavily destroyed, don't get me wrong, but not obliterated. And they would get mad at you. And now we go, but you guys said it was obliterated. And they go, well, what do you mean? Like they could still reconstitute so there's been a, there's been a 180 flip and who's making which points since the war started. But to give the administration some credit, it is like it is true that the Iranians have enriched uranium. You know, some. We don't have to get into the technical purity levels, but point is, if they, if they wanted to and they had the ability to, they could potentially make the fuel necessary for a nuclear bomb within about a week. Right. But some major caveats here. Number one, do they have the centrifuges and things in order to make. Doesn't seem likely because of the strikes from last year. And on top of that, some of the fuel is literally still buried in a mountain and underneath the rubble. Number two, just because you have the fuel you can make for a nuclear weapon does not mean you have a nuclear weapon. It means you have the fuel or you have the material. But you still have to make the bomb, miniaturize it, put it atop a missile and make sure that that missile can make it all the go into the atmosphere, come down, you know, have a heat shield that survives reentry, and hit the exact target you want. That's a lot. That's a lot, a lot, a lot of work and a lot of math. The North Koreans took decades to develop that. And granted, I'm not saying that, you know, the Iranians are advanced enough that it wouldn't take decades, but they, they're not that close. You know, they, they could probably a couple years away from having the missile, but then proving that they could hit America with it, that's a whole other thing.

[Sean Illing]

Okay, Alex, let's come back to this in a minute. We've got to do some commercials. Bills have to be paid. Support for the show comes from Shopify. Starting a new business has never been easy. But without the right tools, it can feel almost impossible. Shopify says they can help set you up for lasting success. Shopify is the commerce platform used by millions of businesses around the world. They say they can help you tackle all those important tasks in one place. From inventory to payments to analytics and more. No need to save multiple websites or try to figure out what platform is hosting the tool that you need. Everything is all in one place, making your life easier and your business operations smoother. Let Shopify be your commerce expert. With world class expertise in everything from managing inventory to international shipping to processing returns and beyond, you can get started with your own design studio. With hundreds of ready to use templates, Shopify helps you build a beautiful online store that matches your brand style. It's time to turn those what ifs into with Shopify Today you can sign up for your $1 per month trial period and start selling today at shopify.com box go to shopify.com box that's shopify.com Vox. Support for the Gray Area comes from wix if you're an ideas person, brainstorming is always going to be your favorite part of the creative process. Executing your ideas is never as easy as it is to come up with them, but when it comes to building a website, WIX Harmony can change that. Wixharmony is a hybrid editor that lets you build the polished website you want by blending powerful AI solutions and precise drag and drop tools. You can launch a professional grade website by entering a single prompt and you can flow between prompting your AI agent and using your manual design tools to shape every detail of your site. Get built in solutions for every type of business from E commerce to to services. Enjoy easy fuss free domain registration with web hosting included and you can rest easy knowing that your WIX site is backed by 99.99% uptime and enterprise grade security with no add ons required. Ready to create your website? You can see why 280 million businesses around the world rely on WIX for their websites and go to wix.com harmony that's wix.com harmony.

[Vox Media Host]

Hey everybody, Astette Hernton here. I wanted to let you know that Vox Media is returning to south by Southwest in Austin for live tapings of your favorite podcast. Join us for March 13 through March 15 for live tapings of Pivot, Teffy Talks, Professor G's Markets. Where should we begin with Esther Perel and the special live taping of Of Today Explained, hosted by yours truly. The Vox Media Podcast stage will also feature sessions from Brene Brown and Adam Grant, Marcus Brownlee, Keith Lee, Vivian Tu, Robin Arzon and more. Visit voxmedia.comsouthxouthwest to pre register and get a special discount on your south by Southwest innovation badge. That's voxmedia.com southbysouthwest Hope to see you there.

[Sean Illing]

I'd like you to steel man for me. The political justification for this attack. Not your case, but the best case you have heard from anyone involved in this on or off the record in January.

[Alexander Ward]

We should not discount the level of death and brutality that the regime exacted on those protesters. Estimates range from 6,000 to 32,000 dead in about a 4872 hour period. It's an astounding number and I should say that 6,000 number is basically coming from, like, unofficial, you know, human rights groups. 32,000 is the Trump administration's number, but I should know that that number has. Is, like, not scoffed at when I talk to other people and from other countries. So it's probably in the tens of thousands, but I can't tell you that for sure. No one really can. The Iran regime says it's much lower. Fine. But point is, protesters went out to demand a better life, and they were met with death, destruction, brutality at a scale really not seen in decades. One could argue somewhat similar to when Bashar al Assad waged war on his people. You know, no chemical weapons here, as far as we know, but still truly brutal, truly deadly. And then add to that the fact that the Iranians aren't going to get rid of their nuclear weapons through diplomacy. They would say, even though there was a nuclear deal in 2015, so what do you do with that? Right. These people would say, what you. Are you going to just let this regime fester or to survive after what they've done, after what they might intend to do towards Americans and allies? You can't. So you kind of hit them when they're down.

[Vox Media Host]

Right?

[Alexander Ward]

Military affairs ain't a fair fight. No one wants a fair fight. And you're not going to wait until Iran can, you know, better defend itself. No, you're going to hit them when they're down, and they are down. And so, you know, the bill has come due.

[Sean Illing]

I want to go back to the actual mission objective here, and I want to give credit to the Economist reporter Greg Carlstrom, who tweeted this out, and he was spotlighting the incoherence and how the goals keep moving. Right. And this is just in the last couple of days, apparently. And again, this is Monday, March 2nd. So, basically, over the weekend, Trump has told the Washington Post that the aim is, quote, freedom for the people of Iran. Axios got a quote from him saying, maybe we can end it and two or three days with a deal, he told the New York Times. Might be four to five weeks. I have three very good choices of people who might take control in Iran. And then, of course, he told ABC shortly thereafter, never mind, we killed those potential options to take over power. I don't know what to do with that.

[Alexander Ward]

It's wartime, Jazz. I mean, it is. Again, I'm really not trying to be like. I'm not saying this is like, a point to stick it to Trump. I'm saying I'm not sure he knows what he wants yet. If there's one thing we've seen from Trump in these kinds of conflicts is that he shoots first. He's told we can achieve these kinds of military objectives and then the political, strategic objectives he kind of figures out as he watches things unfold. Like actually, let's go back to Operation Midnight Hammer, the attack that took out those three Iranian nuclear sites last June. Recall that the Israelis struck the Iranians first and Trump tried to stop the Israelis from doing so. But once he saw that the Israelis were having tons of success, he wanted to jump in. And then they created this plan to go after those three nuclear sites and it was a roaring success. And he got to say it was obliterated. And he found out, you know, he got to feel good and it did a big thing which was to destroy major elements of Iran's nuclear work and set it back by quite a bit. Fast forward to Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela. Massive operation removes him. They get Delsey Rodriguez, who was his number two, to kind of be, you know, puppet might be too strong, but surely someone the US can work with quite closely. And he's going, great, this thing works, right? So here we go. So he's, he's being pushed by folks that, you know, Iran is bad, they're not making a deal go in and he's feeling himself so great, we're going to shoot, we're going to take out a whole bunch of stuff. Despite he was warned by a bunch of people about American casualties and you know, the ability of what could, what could come of it. And now he's going, okay, well, now that I've taken out the supreme leader, now that I've hurt a lot of elements of the regime and taken out a lot of, you know, looming slash imminent threats, however you want to look at it, to the US now what. And this is the part they're figuring out and they're, you know, they're building this plane as they're flying it.

[Sean Illing]

People are freaking out. I'm freaked out. How freaked out should I be? How freaked out are you?

[Alexander Ward]

It's way too early to know. I mean, I wish I could give you more answers.

[Sean Illing]

Right.

[Alexander Ward]

It's so I've been reporting on this war since, you know, basically one hour after it started. And I can say the most certainty I can tell you is that the range of options from this exact moment is that on one end Iran has a US friendly, perhaps semi democratic government or that works with the US to all out regional war in the Middle East. And I cannot tell you with any level of Confidence which way we're headed. History indicates that we're probably headed on the bad, at worst end of that spectrum. Now, does that mean all out Middle east war? I don't know. It could mean civil war in Iran, it could mean a violent struggle for power within the capital, it could mean a whole bunch of things. But, but what's interesting is that obviously there's no appetite within the Trump administration or the American public, and I presume with a lot of listeners here for an American intervention, for a long term campaign that sends American sons and daughters into the country to try to set events, in which case what we're really doing right now is we're breaking the place, we're hitting a whole bunch of things and we're breaking stuff and we're not willing to build anything. And so that just now to say just because America is there doesn't mean we build stuff in our way. We've seen Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam and elsewhere and elsewhere, but our ability to actually dictate events is even less now because we're not there. So we're just bombing stuff and then whatever happens, happens. And in fact, Trump's been pretty explicit on this point. Right. What does he say? What did he say when he was announcing the, the strike? You know, I'm not going to do the accent. I could do, I could do the voice, but do it. All right. Well, I mean, what did he say? He basically said, like, we're gonna strike. This is your greatest moment forever. Like, get out there, see how you can do. We'll support you and like, see how you do. Like, this is your greatest chance. So it was basically like, we bomb, you decide or we bomb you coup. That's kind of the strategy here.

[Sean Illing]

We have to take a break real quick. We'll be right back.

[Alexander Ward]

After decapitation strikes against Iran's leadership, what

[Sean Illing]

can we expect next in the escalating war?

[Alexander Ward]

The big question is, if there is going to be a next strongman in Iran, what kind of strongman will that person likely be? I don't think that there's going to be another powerful cleric supreme leader.

[Sean Illing]

I'm John Finer.

[Alexander Ward]

And I'm Jake Sullivan and we're the hosts of the Long Game, a weekly national security podcast.

[Sean Illing]

This week we sit down with Kareem

[Alexander Ward]

Sagapour to discuss what to expect in

[Sean Illing]

this next phase of the war against Iran.

[Alexander Ward]

The episode's out now. Search for and follow the Long Game wherever you get your podcasts.

[Podcast Sponsor Announcer]

Hi, this is Kara Swisher and this week on my podcast, on with Kara Swisher. I talk to California Governor Gavin Newsom. While he hasn't officially to run for president yet, he's telegraphing it all the time. It's exhausting. He's also got a new book out, which is what you do when you're running for president. It's called Young man in a Hurry. I recently interviewed him live in San Francisco. Have a listen.

[Alexander Ward]

The problem with the Democratic Party so often is we appear weak and we've got to be stronger and we've got to be more assertive. And so that's, you know, it's the spirit, I think, that is required of this moment.

[Podcast Sponsor Announcer]

I've known Gavin Newsom since he was mayor of San Francisco a million years ago, a million hair gels ago. And he's a really interesting and compelling politician. He's done a lot of things in his career and this one, this run for presidency which is going to happen is among the most interesting. You can find a full conversation wherever you get your podcast and on YouTube, obviously. Be sure to follow and subscribe to on with Kara Swisher for more. Hey guys, it's me, Teffy, the host of Teffy Talks. On this week's episode, we're doing a State of the union but more state of pop culture 2026 from Ozempic to Tradwives. Spooky. And why the center of pop culture is in Utah. Now we do a deep dive on Chloe and Lamar. We talk Hilary Duff. You know what, find us everywhere at Taffy Talks. Subscribe on YouTube and all the podcast platforms and Instagram and TikTok so you can share with your other work bestie and hopefully everyone you've ever met.

[Sean Illing]

Let me go back to what you said a second ago about, I guess I'm not sure if it's the worst case scenario, but one of the, one of the bad ways this could go, which is an all out regional war. Now what does that actually mean?

[Alexander Ward]

Right.

[Sean Illing]

It seems like there's always popping off in this part of the world. There's, there's terror incidents and there's, there's, there's bombing campaigns and various skirmishes here and there. When you say regional war, do you actually mean an all out hot war involving, you know, entire nation states?

[Alexander Ward]

I mean at this point we already have Iranians shooting at multiple Middle Eastern countries. Middle Eastern, those countries, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, uae More, many of them. And they might shoot back.

[Sean Illing]

But are those, are those face saving strikes or are they serious? Serious strikes designed to inflict maximal harm.

[Alexander Ward]

Yes. And yes, they have to respond. And they're hitting serious things. They're hitting liquid, you know, they're hitting energy locations, they're hitting tourist hotspots. I mean, not to go too deep into like Gulf politics, but if you are the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia or, you know, Bahrain or these kinds of countries, Qatar, one of the things you've been arguing for years is, hey, we know the Middle east, there's been chaos around, but these are stable countries that are safe. You know, you can build a Dubai, you can build an Abu Dhabi, you can build a Doha. Like there was just a World cup in Doha, right? And Qatar, Dubai is a major international city now. Now Iran is attacking those places. And if you're a multinational corporation, are you gonna think twice about investing in those areas or perhaps doing business there? So that's what the Iranians are going after, their tourism and their economy and of course their energy producing areas. So that's of direct interest to those countries. So you can assume that they're gonna strike back. Okay? So you've got that dynamic going. You've got Iranian proxies that are still around, like let's say the Houthis in Yemen or certain groups like Kataib, Hezbollah and others in Iraq, or Hezbollah itself in Lebanon, you know, they might want to get involved. And we've seen Lebanon try to stop Hezbollah from doing it, but we've already seen Israel hit Lebanon over it.

[Vox Media Host]

Right?

[Alexander Ward]

So this is expanded already, Right? So this started within 72 hours or so of this war. This has already expanded to multiple countries. And it's gotten to the point that you have the US and Gulf and Middle Eastern countries give a joint statement being like, hey, we're gonna defend ourselves. If you, the Iranians keep doing this and you've got the Europeans who were initially resistant, right, like the UK and France and Germany now being like, we might get involved too. Now how they get involved, that could just be letting the US Use their bases or they might actually do operations themselves. We shall see. I think the French are sending an aircraft carrier to the region. So, like I should note, the Iranians kind of messed up here initially, right? However you think of the reason for the US Going to war or whatnot, the Iranians went all out. They pretty feckless response all things considered, you know, based on their missiles and their drones or whatnot. But they're not, not doing damage. They're doing quite a bit of damage. And it's really angering a lot of the region and a lot of US Allies. To the point that, like right now Iran is isolated and the US is starting to gain some backing for this.

[Sean Illing]

Okay, so big, big, big, big picture for someone like me who does not really understand this region, how might this really change the dynamics maybe not just in the region, but the world really? I mean, do you see the potential for this, for a cascade of events to unfold such that this really does change the world in some measurable way?

[Alexander Ward]

I mean, the world has for sure changed. I mean, the US has now struck Tehran for the first time ever. So, like, this is a new front in the way the US does war. But let's go with like the very rosy, potentially best case scenario because I'm, you know, let's not talk all doom and gloom here. However you think of this operation or how it started, like, we're here now, so what, what's to follow? Well, here's the potential best case scenario. The regime falls, it cracks, it actually, you know, allows for reforms. It might not be a small d democratic regime, but it might be one that the US and its partners can work with, one that is certainly not endangering the US and its allies that then, you know, makes it so those proxies that have been disrupting societies throughout that, throughout that region in Yemen and Iraq and Syria and Lebanon, they are now able to sort of continue and do their own politics without Iranian interference, let's say. And the Iranian people, who we should not take out of this, it's 90 million or so people, they perhaps, even if it's still very complicated and very rocky, maybe it's preferable to what they're living under. And the Middle east becomes more transformed, more peaceful overall. And who knows, you might see some normalization between Israel and a bunch of more normalization between Israel, a bunch of other countries and an Iran that no longer destabilizes the region as it has for decades. That's the good, that's the good scenario.

[Sean Illing]

Okay, the bad one.

[Alexander Ward]

Let's take what I would. I would say one man's opinion is the more likely of the bad scenarios. All out regional war. That's basically like a World War Three. Like, I wouldn't, I can't discount it. I don't think we're headed there.

[Sean Illing]

Okay.

[Alexander Ward]

I think what's more likely is an Iranian civil war and the dissolution of that country of 90 million people.

[Sean Illing]

What would that actually mean again? 92 million people. It's an incredibly large, diverse country, incredibly sophisticated and modern in lots of ways, a lot of different factions. I mean, I want to Ask what's going on on the ground there right now. But again, in 24 hours, it might look completely different. But to that broader point, like, what do you. What are the major factions on the ground? Like, how is this fight going to be playing out inside of Iran moving forward?

[Alexander Ward]

So one of the things we need to foreground here is I'm sure there'll be some listeners who have already heard the Trump administration say, well, we could do the Venezuela play.

[Sean Illing]

Right.

[Alexander Ward]

Right. Which would. Which was remove Nicolas Maduro, his number two. Dulce Rodriguez seems to be kind of pliant, and even though she's not pro American necessarily, we can work with her and a US can achieve its interests. Okay, that seems to be like something that's in the back of Trump's mind. The chances of that happening in Iran are very slim. Not impossible, but very slim. And the reason is, as the Iranian revolution has been an entrenched thing since 1979, there are a lot of people who stand to benefit from it. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is a, you know, paramilitary group in the country, but basically part of the government, has become a major economic force within the country. Like, you can't really do a lot of major shipping and a lot of major economic deals without their say so.

[Sean Illing]

Right.

[Alexander Ward]

So, yes, communities dead. And a lot of his deputies are dead and are. Will be killed now or will be killed later. Do these people that have benefited from this setup for decades willingly give it up? I mean, maybe Trump seems to be betting on that. He's told the New York Times they might just, like, hand the guns over to the people.

[Sean Illing]

How often does that happen, Alex?

[Alexander Ward]

I ain't ever seen it. And I'll tell you, scholars of coups and regime change go, it rarely happens with an air war alone. Right. Which we are doing. That's the thinking here. So, okay, say, say, though, say they don't hand the guns over to the people, which I think we would all agree is probably the more likely option, that they don't do that. Well, then you could imagine another major, brutal crackdown like we saw in January. But you could also see as the state starts collapsing because it is weaker now than it was before this, this whole thing started. You could see the Kurds in Iran try to break away and create greater Kurdistan, which a similar dynamic happening in Iraq. You could see Azeris, you know, who don't maybe try to do their own thing. And you could see a bunch of little cities maybe become little fiefdoms, but basically you would see a centralized Just to put it simply, centralized state control in that large country, roughly three times larger than Iraq, fall apart, and doesn't usually go well when those things happen. And Iran is in, like, the heart of the region here, so you could see destabilization in places, you know, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Syria to the Gulf area. I mean, it's not a small thing. If Iran, however you think of that regime, if it just kind of all that structure, as evil and as odious as it was, goes away.

[Sean Illing]

So the, the administration is saying repeatedly, we're not doing regime change. Okay, Certainly you could argue decapitating the, the political leaders of a country is regime change. But, okay, set that aside. Does that mean we're going to create a vacuum and then just let it play out? Are we, are we, are we supporting certain factions? Do we have a dog in this fight? Or is the plan, such as it is, to create the vacuum, step away and let it unfold?

[Alexander Ward]

That. I mean, Trump said that explicitly.

[Sean Illing]

Great.

[Alexander Ward]

Like, I mean, Trump and the people around him, when I talk to them, they go, look, we're basically opening the space for the Iranian people to dictate their future, and if it goes awry, we give them the shot.

[Sean Illing]

Not our problem.

[Alexander Ward]

It feels callous and immoral again, for a country of 90, 92 million people to just basically go, we're going to break it. Hope you can rebuild it. And we're not gonna. We will help you rebuild it in the, for in the background by, you know, maybe we'll strike again or whatever. But of course, in January, Trump made that promise and he didn't follow through until now. This Colin Powell was Secretary of State during the George W. Bush administration, basically said, if you break it, you own it. Right. The Trump team does not buy that. They are not doing the Powell doctrine. In fact, you know, basically, you know, barely doing a sales job of, of why we're in this in the first place. They are basically saying, we break it, you handle it, could work out. You know, I don't want to discount that possibility. Like, again, we're. I, I will reiterate, until at this early stage, we are everywhere from, like, things work out super well to regional instability on a level we haven't seen in decades. All things are possible. But what I think is more likely is LE tends towards chaos because,

[Sean Illing]

you

[Alexander Ward]

know, you're going to see either a power vacuum or a struggle for power where those entrenched elites and authorities hurt a lot of people, kill a lot of people to stay there. And we cannot discount I should note another possibility of all this is we've been talking about how bad the Iranian regime is, and I don't want to discount that they are very, very, very bad. Right. But it's not impossible. Something worse takes its place.

[Sean Illing]

It can always get worse. It can always get worse.

[Alexander Ward]

It can always get worse. And sometimes what follows autocracy isn't democracy, but chaos. But it could also be more autocracy. Right? And so one of those Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps members, one could imagine, they got the guns, they got the money, they got the power. They're going to hurt a lot of people to stay there. And because they're new and not legitimate, they're going to do a lot more repression just to stay there. Now, I'm not one to judge if it's meaningfully worse, necessarily, than under Khamenei or that revolution, but it could get worse. It could get slightly better. But the hope of all of this. Right, and this is where we need to get into the moral aspect of it, Trump has now basically ignited millions of people into believing that something better is going to come and that America has their back. And we said this in January, and he's saying it now. That's the promise he's making. Again, whether or not you agree with this war, how it's been conducted, what the goals are, as such as they are, the underlying thing of all of this is America is telling a lot of Iranian people, we want you to have a better future. And we're willing for our sons and daughters in the US to die, and we're willing to cause a lot of destruction for you guys to have a better life. And if Trump abandons them, or if Trump ushers in something akin, slightly better, or even worse, it's a major betrayal of a population that I should note writ large, is usually pro American.

[Sean Illing]

Yeah.

[Alexander Ward]

So.

[Sean Illing]

And right.

[Alexander Ward]

It's a very young country, young country, sophisticated, technologically advanced. Like, there's a lot of smart, lovely people over there. That is the promise of all of this. Again, whether you agree with it or not, there is an underlying promise of America is here now to rid you of a odious regime and to make your lives better. So Trump has to follow through on that. Otherwise, I mean, boy, his legacy takes a hit, not just with Iranians, but around the world. And frankly, the American legacy takes and reputation takes a hit.

[Sean Illing]

So what is someone like you watching for as this thing keeps unfolding, like. Like, what are the subtle things that might be said or that might happen that you would really take note of that maybe somebody, some dummy like me who's only casually following this, might miss.

[Alexander Ward]

So we are, everyone's worried about China potentially moving on Taiwan at some point. Now, one of the few things that is deterring the Chinese from doing that is that the US has large munitions stockpile and weapons stockpile to potentially shoot at Chinese ships and targets. We are burning through that real fast right now. And we should know the start of the Trump administration, they sent, you know, millions of dollars worth of munitions and missiles into the sand to go after the Houthis. They are now doing that here in Iran. And one of the arguments that the Trump administration has said for why the US can't arm Ukraine to the hilt is because the US Is running low on things in its stockpile. But here we are burning through it to go after the Iranians. So if you're the Chinese, on one hand, you're going, oh man, the US strikes, that's something, right? I, maybe I do fear Trump in the White House. On the other hand, you're going, I might fear him, but with what can he hurt me? Because we're running low on stuff. And that's going to cost billions of dollars, which means, you know, higher defense budgets could mean more jobs in the US let's not discount that aspect. But there's gonna. And you don't rebuild these things, by the way, very quickly. It takes a long time. So the US military is the strongest in the world ever, also ever. And I think we're showing that. But that doesn't mean resources are unlimited and that we can rebuild as quickly as we can. And so right now, Trump has made the bet that this war, the removal of this regime or whatever he's trying to achieve is worth the shortish term risk to our lower stockpiles.

[Sean Illing]

All right, I'm gonna leave it right there. Thanks so much for answering the Sean signal, Alex.

[Alexander Ward]

You got it.

[Sean Illing]

This episode was produced by Beth Morrissey and Thor Neuer, edited by Jorge Just, engineered by Shannon Mahoney and Christian Ayala Fact Check by Melissa Hirsch Theme song by Emma Munger the Gray Area comes out on Mondays and Fridays. Find it wherever you listen to podcasts. And if you watch podcasts while you listen, you can do that too. Go to YouTube.com Vox for video versions of the Gray Area. If you like this episode, leave a comment. For this episode, you can use today's secret word, which is perfect. You can also send an email to us at the gray [e-mail] the show is part of Vox Support. Vox's journalism by joining our membership program today. Go to vox.commembers to sign up. And if you decide to sign up because of this show, please let our bosses know. All right. Alex, you're the best. Thank you so much for doing this. Where can people check out your incredible work? I cannot believe how much reporting you're doing and how quickly you're doing it. So for people who want to go read that, where can they read it?

[Alexander Ward]

Well, first, you're perfect, Sean. But you can go to the Wall Street Journal and look up Alexander Ward. You'll find all my stories in a row. And you can find me, I guess, on social media. AlexB Ward.

[Sean Illing]

And are you just on call here for basically 24 hours a day until this whole thing ends? Is that the deal?

[Alexander Ward]

I didn't put makeup, but you can see the bags are growing and they're likely to grow longer. So.

[Sean Illing]

Yeah. Handsome as ever.

[Alexander Ward]

Too kind. Too kind.

[Sean Illing]

Thanks, buddy. Appreciate it.