A (7:30)
Welcome back to the PDB. After months of a growing standoff, a brutal internal crackdown that left thousands of Iranians dead at the hands of their own government, and threats of US Military action, the US And Iran returned to negotiations, at least indirectly. President Trump said the U.S. delegation had, quote, very good talks with Tehran, but that's a view that the regime is already pushing against, as we've been tracking here on the pdb. The talks in Oman on Friday followed declarations of red lines and a somewhat unclear promise to the protesters that help is on its way. In the end, the Trump White House stopped short of action after building up a formidable military presence off the coast of Iran. The Trump administration has kept pressure on the mullahs as they engaged in their violent crackdown on internal protests. Moving additional military assets into the region, of course, and warning the Islamic Republic that force remains an option if they didn't come to the negotiating table. Following the Oman talks, Trump told reporters, quote, iran looks like it wants to make a deal very badly. We have to see what that deal is, end quote. As longtime PDB listeners will know, these are the first negotiations between Washington and Tehran since the US And Israeli strikes on the Islamic Republic last Summer. The Trump administration is treating this new channel as an opening, not a breakthrough, a test of whether the growing US Military presence in the region has worked to. To move Iran to the table, or whether the regime is simply foot dragging to block a delay as it regains control inside Iran. Oh, I vote for the latter choice there. Even as they continue to rebuild their ballistic missile program, by the way, in part with the assistance of China. Now, as Trump described the talks as productive, Iranian officials immediately disagreed and signaled that core disputes remain unresolved. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi called the meeting a good start, but even that came with a warning. Ahead of the talks, he said Iran was entering diplomacy with open eyes and a steady memory of the past year, a clear reference to last summer's military strikes and the collapse of earlier negotiations. But he later reiterated that Iran had not retreated from its red lines. Now, when Iranian regime officials talk about red lines, they're referring to positions Tehran considers non negotiable, most notably its insistence on continuing uranium enrichment and its refusal to put its ballistic missile program proxy networks or violent reaction to domestic unrest on the negotiating table. Now, is it just me, or does it seem like kowtowing to the mullahs and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps if the White House allows them to dictate the terms and parameters of any talks? And the regime's resistance wasn't limited to careful diplomatic language. A spokesman for Iran's parliamentary National Security Committee dismissed Trump's characterization of the talks, calling him a, quote, liar and insisting Tehran has not softened its position. Well, it's. It seems like when you kill thousands of your own citizens, suddenly somehow you feel like you're back in the driver's seat. Despite that sharp rhetoric, both sides are leaving the door open to what I'm not quite sure they've agreed in principle to hold follow on discussions. Speaking aboard Air Force One, Trump said another round of talks could take place early this week, though Iraqi poured cold water on that timeline, saying no date has yet been set. Let me explain how these talks actually worked, because the format itself tells you a lot about how fragile. Or maybe the word I'm looking for is useless. This discussion channel still is. As I mentioned, the negotiations were indirect, with Oman's foreign minister acting as the intermediary between the US And Iranian delegations. On the American side, envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner took the lead. Iraqchi told Al Jazeera that despite the indirect setup, he had direct contact with the US Delegation and that the two sides exchanged a brief conversation. But he was also clear about limits. Iran, he said, would only reconsider direct talks if it sensed, quote, seriousness and trust from Washington. Come on, again, that's coming from a regime that just finished slaughtering thousands of its own citizens and detaining tens of thousands of others. The Oman talks mirror early rounds of U. S. Iran negotiations. Before last summer's 12 Day War talks had of course collapsed after Israel bombed Iranian nuclear and military sites, followed by US Attacks on three Iranian nuclear facilities. As for substance, Iranian state media reports that Iraqi presented a, quote, preliminary plan aimed at managing tensions, which Omani mediators passed along to the US Delegation. According to Iraqi discussions focused narrowly on Iran's nuclear program. Arakchi said, quote, we are prepared to reach an agreement that assures the US that enrichment in Iran will be peaceful, end quote. Oh, well, as long as it willing to ensure that. But he also drew a hard line, making clear Iran would not accept a complete halt to uranium enrichment. As we've discussed previously, uranium enrichment remains the central sticking point in these talks. Iran has offered monitoring and safeguards to prevent weaponization in exchange for sanctions relief. But Washington and its allies have long rejected that trade, given how international inspectors have been barred from the regime's nuclear facilities and how close enrichment can bring Iran to a nuclear weapons threshold. Just hours after the talks wrapped up, the Treasury Department announced new sanctions targeting Iranian oil exports and 14 vessels carrying its crude. The message was somewhat unmistakable. Diplomacy may be open, but pressure for the mullahs to agree to a favorable U.S. deal is not easing. So the talks have reopened a diplomatic channel. Huzzah. But with Iranian officials rejecting Trump's optimism, sanctions increasing and military pressure still in place, diplomacy seems at best unlikely to result in a successful resolution. Okay, I want to turn your attention to a deadly attack near Pakistan's capital and the response that followed. After a suicide bombing at a shiite mosque killed 31 people, setting off a rapid security sweep that led to the arrest of four suspects, including the alleged mastermind. Here's how the Pakistani authorities say this all unfolded. The arrest came just a day after a regional affiliate of the Islamic State stepped forward to claim responsibility, issuing a statement through its Amok News agency. According to that account, the attacker unleashed gunfire on security guards at the mosque's main gate, managing to push his way inside and then detonating an explosive vest after reaching the inner compound. A total of 169 people were injured in the blast. Again, 31 were killed. The language used in the terror group's claim is important. The Islamic State described Pakistan's Shiite community as a human reservoir, accusing it of supplying fighters to Shiite militias battling the Islamic State in Syria. That kind of phrasing reflects the terror group's long standing strategy of targeting Shiite communities to inflame sectarian tensions. The scale of the attack also stands out. Friday's bombing was the deadliest assault in Islamabad SINCE the 2008 suicide bombing at the Marriott Hotel that killed 63 people, a reminder of how rare but devastating such attacks have been in the capital itself. Upon his arrest, Pakistan's Interior Minister said the suspected mastermind was an Afghan national linked to the Islamic State. He alleged the attack was planned and the suicide bomber was trained in Afghanistan and went further, claiming the operation received financial backing from rival India. Now it's important to point out that the minister did not provide evidence to support those assertions, and there so far has been no response from New Delhi. As for the other suspects apprehended, no details have been made public yet. The Interior Minister also broadened his warning, accusing multiple militant groups operating from Afghan territory of planning to stage attacks inside Pakistan. When urging the international community to take that threat seriously, he sought to push back against any criticism over security lapses, saying if one blast happens, 99 others are being foiled, end quote. That line of argument was echoed by Pakistan's Defense Minister, who said the attack showed that militants operating from Afghanistan were capable of striking even the capital. His remarks, however, drew a rebuke from Afghanistan's Taliban led government. In a statement, Afghanistan's Defense Ministry condemned the mosque bombing, but accused Pakistan's Defense Minister of, quote, irresponsibly linking the violence to Afghan territory in order to shift the blame from his country's own security lapses. Now, Pakistan has repeatedly accused Afghanistan of harboring militants, including members of the Pakistani Taliban, separate from the Islamic State, but aligned with Afghanistan's Taliban. That's an allegation that Kabul continues to deny. But what's clear is that this attack does fit a broader pattern. The Islamic State is a Sunni extremist group that's repeatedly targeted Pakistan's shiite minority. In 2022, the group claimed responsibility for suicide bombings at a Shiite mosque in Peshawar that killed at least 56 people. And while Islamabad has been hit less frequently than any other part of the country, Pakistan has seen a renewed surge in militant violence in recent months. As we've been following in our coverage here on the pdb, much of that recent violence has been attributed to BALOC separatist groups and the Pakistani Taliban, adding another layer of instability to an already fragile security landscape. Coming up in today's Back of the Brief, the US Navy brings science fiction a little closer to reality, using a laser weapon to take down drones at sea. Details on that when we come back. Hey, Mike Baker here with an important message from the folks at Trust and Will. Look, no one likes to talk about dying, right? But the reality is creating an estate plan is incredibly important. Not to mention it can give you and your family real peace of mind. With Trust and Will, you can create a plan in as little as 30 minutes to protect guardianship of children, asset distribution and healthcare directives. Their online platform provides step by step guidance and offers optional one on one support from attorneys and or state. Now you say to yourself you're not sure if you have enough assets to warrant a will or trust. Well, honestly, look, everyone has something to leave behind. Trust and Will was created by legal experts and is tailored and designed just for you. And Trust and Will comes with bank level encryption, affordability and amazing customer support. Don't wait until it's too late. Protect your loved ones today, tomorrow and beyond with Trust and Will, the most trusted name in online estate planning. Go to trustandwill.com PDB and get 20% off. That's trustandwill.com PDB to get 20% off again. Trustandwill.com PDB Hey, Mike Baker here with an important tip for home safety. Look, if you own a handgun, this message is for you. Handgun owners know that often your weapon storage options likely fall into two frustrating categories, right locked away and out of reach, or unsecured and vulnerable. Neither is acceptable as an option. And that's where Stopbox comes in. Stopbox USA solved this with the Stopbox Pro. It's a mechanical keyless safe that offers fast, secure access without batteries or keys. Its push button locking system ensures reliability when every second counts. The Stopbox Pro drastically reduces response time while keeping your firearm protected and stored securely. With StopBox USA, you no longer have to choose between security and readiness. The Stopbox Pro delivers both efficiently, reliably and without compromise and for a limited time. Our PDB listeners get 15% off at Stopbox when you use Code Baker at checkout. That's B A K E R just like it sounds. Head to stopboxusa.com and use code BAKER for 15 off your entire order after you purchase. Well, they'll ask you what you heard about them. Do me a favor, tell them the PDB send you in. Today's Back of the Brief the US Navy did something that would have sounded like science fiction. Just a few short years ago, a destroyer used a ship mounted laser to shoot down multiple drones, marking a real step toward turning directed energy weapons into frontline tools. What's striking about this is how quietly it surfaced. There was no major announcement, no dramatic reveal, just a few comments tucked into a Lockheed Martin earnings call and some Pentagon testing documents. But adding up the available information, the picture becomes clear. This wasn't a one off test or controlled facility experiment. It was a live fire exercise at sea. According to reporting from the outlet the War Zone, Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Teichlett confirmed that during an uncrewed aerial system demonstration at sea, the Arleigh Burke class destroyer USS Preble used its high energy laser with integrated optical dazzler and surveillance. Ooh, it's got a dazzler better known as Helios to neutralize four incoming drones. And there's important context here. Pentagon testing officials already disclosed that Preble shot down at least one drone with the Helios in 2024. That's according to a January 2025 report from the Office of the Director of Operational Testing and Evaluation. What's new is the confirmation that the system went further, engaging several targets in a single event. So you ask yourself rightly, what is Helios? IT is a 60 kilowatt directed energy weapon designed to destroy or disable drones and small boats. It also includes an optical dazzler that sounds like fun. That can disrupt or damage enemy sensors. Right now, the USS Preble is the only Navy ship carrying Helios, and it has had this system on board since 2022. Other destroyers received lower powered lasers and additional ships have hosted experimental high energy laser systems, but none demonstrated this level of performance at sea. That makes Preble something of a floating preview of where the fleet could be headed. Now, the Navy is pushing hard to make directed energy weapons a frontline defense against drones and other close range threats. And recent operations in and around the Red Sea have helped clarify why drone swarms, often paired with ballistic missiles, can overwhelm traditional air defenses. Fast lasers offer a different answer. A virtually unlimited magazine. So as long as the ship could generate enough power and keep the system cooled, well, Helios can keep on firing. And that, my friends, is the President's Daily brief for Monday 9th February. Now if you have any questions or comments, please reach out to me at pdb@the firsttv.com and hopefully you had a chance to check out the latest episode of our extended weekend show, the PDB Situation Report. Guests included retired Admiral Mike Studeman. He provided insight on the Trump administration's current dealings with the Iranian regime, and it was very interesting insight. We also sat down with Epoch Times Senior editor Jan Yekalik, and he put a spotlight on the Chinese regime's cottage industry of organ harvesting. You can catch it in past episodes on our YouTube channel. Just go to YouTube, of course, and search up at President's Daily Brief. Or you can find it on podcast platforms all over podcast land. I'm Mike Baker and I'll be back later today with the PDB Afternoon Bulletin. Until then, stay informed, stay safe, stay cool.