Do Israel and Iran know ‘what the f***’ they’re doing now?

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Do Israel and Iran Know ‘what the f*’ They’re Doing Now?"**

Podcast: The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim
Hosts: Yalda Hakim (Sky News) and Richard Engel (NBC)
Release Date: June 24, 2025

---

Introduction and Context

In this episode of The World, Yalda Hakim and Richard Engel delve into the escalating tensions between Israel and Iran, framed by recent missile strikes and the controversial statements from former U.S. President Donald Trump. The hosts provide a comprehensive analysis of the volatile situation, exploring the implications of military actions, ceasefire agreements, and the broader geopolitical ramifications.

---

Timeline of Recent Events

[00:00 – 01:31] Initial Developments

Yalda Hakim begins the discussion from Jerusalem, while Richard Engel contributes from Tel Aviv. They outline the immediate backdrop: Iran's missile attack on the Al Udeid Air Base, following U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. This sequence of events marks a significant escalation, challenging the fragility of the ceasefire recently brokered between Israel and Iran.

[02:18 – 05:46] Unfolding Crisis

The hosts reconstruct the rapid sequence of events, highlighting the U.S. Embassy in Qatar's warning to American citizens amid heightened tensions. Yalda recounts interactions suggesting the attack was anticipated and possibly coordinated between the U.S. and Iran to project strength post the assassination of Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani in 2020. However, Iran's swift missile strikes disrupt this narrative, challenging the authenticity of the ceasefire agreement.

---

Analysis of Ceasefire Fragility

[05:46 – 08:09] Ceasefire Breakdown

Richard Engel describes the confusion surrounding Trump's ceasefire declaration, noting its vague implementation timeline. Despite the declared peace, Iran resumes missile attacks, resulting in civilian casualties in Beersheba before the ceasefire officially takes effect. Engel shares a harrowing firsthand account of the destruction, emphasizing the unpredictability and instability of the current truce.

---

Trump's Controversial Statements and Reactions

[11:35 – 12:50] Presidential Outburst

Donald Trump expresses frustration with both Israel and Iran, questioning their strategic decisions using explicit language: “they don’t know what the F they're doing” ([11:35]). This candid outburst contrasts sharply with traditional diplomatic language, raising questions about its impact on international discourse and the potential for escalating tensions further.

Richard Engel comments on the unprecedented nature of such language from a U.S. president, pondering the implications of censoring presidential statements and the broader effects on political communication.

---

Regime Change and Its Implications

[22:34 – 31:09] Listener Q&A on Regime Change

A listener, Tom, poses a critical question about the feasibility and potential candidates for regime change in Iran. Richard Engel responds by reflecting on past U.S. attempts at regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq, emphasizing the complexities and unintended consequences that often follow. He illustrates this with anecdotes from his experiences in Baghdad in 2003, highlighting how external interventions can lead to prolonged instability and guerrilla warfare.

Yalda Hakim adds that Israel's approach differs slightly, aiming for "regime destruction" rather than direct regime change. She discusses the challenges in predicting the behavior of Iran's next generation of leaders and the possible internal cracks within Iranian society that could be exploited for future negotiations.

Notable Quote:
Richard Engel: “Regime change from afar is really hard... so I think they talk about regime change, but is that a plan or is that a hope? I think it's a hope.”

---

Leadership Dynamics and Strategic Decisions

[15:30 – 19:31] Trump vs. Netanyahu

Yalda Hakim explores the dynamic between Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She underscores a rare instance where Trump exerts influence over Netanyahu, preventing a potentially devastating Israeli military response to Iran. This interaction marks a significant departure from previous administrations, where Israeli leaders largely operated independently of direct U.S. presidential interventions.

Notable Quote:
Yalda Hakim: “It feels like the first time in perhaps 40 years that a US president has shown that in some way he can rein in an Israeli leader.”

---

Potential Outcomes and Future Implications

[19:31 – 30:07] Assessing Stability and Future Prospects

The hosts debate the sustainability of the current ceasefire, questioning whether it will hold beyond the immediate 24-hour window. Yalda posits that both Israel and Iran may have achieved temporary tactical goals, potentially leading to a diplomatic process. However, the underlying objectives, such as Israel's push for regime change and Iran's desire to leverage their nuclear advancements, suggest that the conflict is far from resolved.

Richard Engel views the ceasefire as a temporary pause rather than a permanent solution, predicting continued volatility in the region.

---

Listener Engagement and Further Discussions

[30:07 – 31:09] Audience Interaction

The episode concludes with a listener's question about the future of Iran's leadership post-regime change, prompting a deeper discussion on the structural challenges of altering Iran's political landscape. The hosts emphasize the unpredictability and resilience of authoritarian regimes, cautioning against oversimplified solutions.

---

Conclusion

Yalda Hakim and Richard Engel provide a nuanced exploration of the Israel-Iran conflict, highlighting the precariousness of ceasefire agreements, the complexities of international diplomacy, and the profound implications of military interventions. Through firsthand accounts and expert analysis, the episode underscores the enduring volatility of the Middle East and the intricate interplay of global powers striving for stability amidst chaos.

---

Key Takeaways:

• The Israel-Iran ceasefire remains highly fragile, with recent missile strikes challenging its viability.
• Donald Trump's unprecedented use of explicit language reflects deep frustration and may influence diplomatic relations.
• Historical attempts at regime change offer cautionary lessons about external interventions and their long-term consequences.
• Leadership dynamics, particularly between the U.S. and Israeli authorities, play a critical role in shaping conflict outcomes.
• The future of the Iran regime remains uncertain, with internal and external pressures potentially driving future negotiations or further conflict.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Yalda Hakim, [00:00]: "Foreign hello, it's me, Yalda Hakim, and I'm still in Jerusalem."
• Donald Trump, [11:35]: "We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing."
• Richard Engel, [26:24]: "Regime change from afar is really hard... so I think they talk about regime change, but is that a plan or is that a hope? I think it's a hope."

---

This detailed summary captures the essence of the podcast episode, providing listeners with a clear understanding of the discussions, insights, and analytical perspectives presented by Yalda Hakim and Richard Engel.

Transcript

[Yalda Hakim]

Foreign hello, it's me, Yalda Hakim, and I'm still in Jerusalem.

[Richard Engel]

And me, Richard Engel in Tel Aviv.

[Yalda Hakim]

Welcome to the world and we hope this will be our main episode for this week. But who knows? Things are developing and moving so quickly. Iran says it took aim at the Al Udeid Air base with what it's calling a devastating and powerful missile attack. It follows Iran's warning that it has a free hand to attack US targets after American bombs pounded nuclear sites yesterday. Donald Trump says that Israel and Iran have agreed to a complete and total ceasefire, but only after an intense night of violence. As President von der Leyen said, Europe welcomed the announcement of the ceasefire. It is in itself an important step towards restoring stability in a region in tension, and this must be our collective priority. Israel is accusing Iran of serious violations of the ceasefire and promising to respond with force. You get a strong sense that this truce isn't just fragile. It looked this morning when that war of words erupted to be almost dead on arrival. The question is how willing both sides are to revive it.

[Donald Trump]

Israel, as soon as we made the deal, they came out and they dropped a load of bombs, the likes of which I've never seen before. The biggest load that we've seen. I'm not happy with Israel. I'm not happy with Iran either.

[Richard Engel]

Yalda, can you ever remember a series of events that has moved as quickly as this one? And can you remember an American president that so often drops the F bomb?

[Yalda Hakim]

Now, we're going to play that in a moment, but, Richard, should we just do a timeline of the events just to help people understand what the hell is currently happening?

[Richard Engel]

Absolutely, because in this case, since we're talking about a ceasefire that may or may not have been violated, it's important to understand the sequence of events because. And frankly, the they haven't been that easy to understand.

[Yalda Hakim]

And, Richard, we do have some questions. We really enjoy getting them, so keep sending them to us. It's the usual place, the worldatsky.uk and of course, follow us wherever you get your podcasts, Apple or Spotify or wherever else.

[Richard Engel]

So, Yalda, let's talk about Iran, let's talk about Donald Trump, let's talk about where things go from here and what, if anything, can calm President Trump down. I think it's important to just establish a base here, a baseline of information. Our last episode, which was just a couple of days ago, focused mostly on the back and forth and the war and where it was going and the Iranian nuclear program and what it was like in Iran and what it's been like here. There have been a lot of developments just in the last last couple of days.

[Yalda Hakim]

So if we go from, you know, the fact that we were waiting, anticipating a potential Iranian response after the United States dropped those bombs on a number of nuclear sites in Iran, it wasn't a matter of if Iran is going to respond, but a question of when. And suddenly we started to see really strange activity. The US Embassy in Qatar asked citizens, American citizens, to take shelter, to stay indoors, and basically wait because something was moving and developing. I started to, you know, make some contact with people in the region, people who were in the know about the developments. And I was basically told, look, this is just normal. This is what happens when things are quite heightened. Nothing to see here, essentially. So I, you know, I got a phone call basically telling me Qatar is going to be hit, and this is all staged and it's coordinated, just as we'd seen the coordination between the Iranians and the Americans after the Iranian commander, Qasem Soleimani, was assassinated by Trump in his first term in 2020, there was a coordinated attack for Iran not to look weak and respond. This was part of that playbook. But I was told an American base was going to be hit, so I.

[Richard Engel]

Went back on Qatar, or just an American base in the region.

[Yalda Hakim]

Incorrect. No, an American base in Qatar was going to get hit. So I go back on air, and I've got the former head of the US Central Command, centcom, Joseph Votel, waiting for me to interview him. And I said, we have intelligence. We have an understanding that the airspace in Qatar has closed. They're anticipating an attack, but this is all staged. And an understanding between the Americans and the Iranians.

[Richard Engel]

Kelsey?

[Yalda Hakim]

Yeah, he completely denied this and said, absolutely not. There wouldn't be anything like that. That goes on. I don't know what you're talking about. While we're having a conversation, we see over the skies of Doha, these ballistic missiles raining down, and of course, the interceptors swing into action and do what they need to do.

[Richard Engel]

So Qatar, obviously, is a independent country. It has its own government. It is very friendly to many countries. It has good relations kind of with everybody. That's what Qatar does. And they also have this giant American military base. You know, it's the largest military installation, American military installation in the Middle east, and houses anywhere between five and 10,000 troops there, depending on rotations, a huge amount of equipment, a lot of firepower, and the Americans use it. But the Qataris also have good relations with the Iranians. They have good relations. Not good, but they have relations with the Israelis. They've been the mediators, they're professional mediators. In addition to having a country that is an enormously wealthy sort of emirate based on all of their natural gas.

[Yalda Hakim]

I was basically told the tip off was given to avoid any casualties, any injuries. So the Americans were completely prepared for this. And this was basically a way to, you know, to close the account, you know, to basically pay the bill and respond because Iran felt it needed to respond. So that was quite an extraordinary sudden turn of events that we saw. It was risky though. The risky is that of course we're seeing ballistic missiles raining over the skies of a country. So, you know, even if the interceptors, the air defenses swing into action and shoot them out of the sky, they can still, the shrapnel can still cause a great amount of damage and there can be casualties, there can be injuries. But basically the American were given a heads up, the base was more or less cleared to ensure that there wouldn't be any kind of casualties as a result of the strike. Now if we fast forward what's happened in the last 24 hours. So we then heard from Donald Trump who said, look, the Iranians, they launched this very weak strike against, you know, this U.S. base. There are no casualties, there are no injuries. Let's just call it a day and let's call it the 12 day war. And I'm now declaring a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. It's over. And he said at 7 o' clock local time here in Israel, the ceasefire would come into effect.

[Richard Engel]

I must have read President Trump's statement half a dozen times and I couldn't make heads or tails of it. It was totally confusing. For the first, there's gonna be a ceasefire, but for the first six hours it will be implemented. And then there's another 12 hour period. After that 12 hour period, it will be officially declared 12 that it wasn't sure, it wasn't clear which side was going to have to stop first. It was very vague. So did, did the, did the reporting, got a few hours of sleep and then around and I'll use local times, Israel Times. If I get into GMT and Washington time, it'll get even more confusing. So let's just stay on local time at around and it's, you know, it's, we're close to the equinox here, so sun up, sun comes up really early. So around 5:15 in the morning I got an alert, I'm sure you got an alert too. Incoming Missiles, right. Several volleys come, one after another after another. And these were all in the very early morning hours, Israel time. And one of these missiles hit that residential building in Beersheba and killed a number of civilians. I just got back from that building. I was climbing up in the building, I was on the upper floors of the building that were totally blown out. Locally, officials there told me that at least four people were killed in a safe room when the fifth and sixth floor of this apartment building were devastated by a thousand pound Iranian ballistic missile and more than 20 people injured. But other death tolls have gone up to as many as seven people killed. And that happened before the ceasefire officially kicked in. And I know that because at 8 o' clock local time, President Trump makes this new statement saying, okay, everyone, the ceasefire is now in place, we're done, you got your last licks, it's over. After that, Iran fired more missiles. And I think it was about two hours after that there was another series of missiles and they went up mostly to the north around Haifa, but they didn't do anything. They didn't have any impact at all. No damage, no deaths shot down. And the Israelis then responded furiously with the Defense Minister putting out a statement saying that Israel's gonna respond, it's gonna be a devastating response, they're gonna build all this fire and brimstone. And that. He actually deleted that response. If you were following this morning. And then the Israeli military put out a similar kind of statement that we're gonna respond, we're gonna hit him hard. The Iranians violated the ceasefire and they were cheating. And the Israelis were conflating what had happened. They were combining both. The first attack on civilians, which you could easily argue is a violation of a ceasefire because you're attacking civilian buildings and not military installations. But aside from that ethical debate, we'll put that aside just on a timing point of view. It was technically within the timeframe. The second was not that it had no impact. Then the Israelis say they're off, they're launching and they're going to carry out this reprisal. And then suddenly President Trump makes another statement which our own network is struggling to figure out what to do with. When he comes out and says, what the F is wrong with these two people? They don't know what the F they're doing. I think that's the technical quote. And then he went off on both sides and he went off on Israel hard.

[Donald Trump]

Israel. As soon as we made the deal, they came out and they dropped a load of bombs. The likes of which I've never seen before. The biggest load that we've seen. I'm not happy with Israel. You know, when I say, okay, now you have 12 hours, you don't go out in the first hour, just drop everything you have on them. So I'm not happy with them. I'm not happy with Iran either. But I'm really unhappy if Israel is going out this morning because of one rocket that didn't land, that was shot, perhaps by mistake, that didn't land, I'm not happy about that. You know what we have? We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing. Do you understand that?

[Richard Engel]

Could I just talk about language for a second? Because you talked about powerful diplomacy. Language can be powerful, too. There's an interesting debate going on here. You can't curse on American television. In the past, it used to be you couldn't even talk about pregnancy. You couldn't show people in any affectionate way. The US has a bit of a puritanical streak, but they're not blurring it or bleeping it out in this case because it was something the President said. So are we going to censor the President? They're just not running it very often.

[Yalda Hakim]

Basically, the information I have is that after the Israeli Defense Minister said, you know what, we're going to respond hard and we're going to smash you for what you've done here this morning. Iran, you violated the ceasefire. We're going to show you what our military power can do. So apparently, dozens of Israeli fighter jets were hovering ominously over the skies of Iran. Donald Trump rings Benjamin Netanyahu and says, what are you doing? Benjamin Netanyahu says, I'm sorry, I've already greenlit it. I can't stop it. And Donald Trump says, you better not drop a single bomb on Iran. Stop this right now. Stop the operation. So then what happens? The aircraft, the fighter jet, the jets were ordered to come back, and as a symbolic gesture, they basically drop one single bomb. One aircraft drops one single bomb. Not on any kind of strategic position, but basically as a symbolic move to send a message to Iran. Look, if you try this again, we will come back. We've been ordered to go back, but, you know, we can do this again. So just goes to show you how delicate these conversations are. Dozens, I'm told, dozens of the fighter jets were hovering over the skies of Iran this morning, wanting to respond. And Donald Trump told Benjamin Netanyahu, turn this around. I think what's extraordinary about this moment is it feels like the first time in perhaps 40 years that a US president has shown that in some way he can rein in an Israeli leader. We saw how freely Benjamin Netanyahu was running rings around Joe Biden. Joe Biden went to Israel, gave Israel a bear hug after October 7th and said, I stand by you. And it feels very much like Benjamin Netanyahu made a fool of Joe Biden. And yet here Donald Trump was dropping the F bomb, making a phone call and basically putting Israel on notice, forcing them to turn the aircraft back.

[Richard Engel]

Does it mean that he stood up to Israel for the first time and told Benjamin Netanyahu no. Yes, he did. After having told Benjamin Netanyahu, yes, I will participate in this nuclear. This, this bombing campaign against Iran's nuclear facilities, which several other American administrations, several other American presidents had contemplated and ultimately decided not to do, considering it too risky, the cost too high, and the need not really there.

[Yalda Hakim]

I think what we need to give Donald Trump in all of this and this chaos of the last 12, 13 days or so is that he does understand how to use power. And we've talked about that before on the podcast, but not just that. I think that the only person that has sway over Donald Trump and the only person Donald Trump is accountable to is Donald Trump. And ultimately he will do what he believes is right. So, you know, at the point in which he launched the airstrikes, that was Donald Trump making that call, despite the MAGA base putting pressure on him, despite the likes of Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, these big figures with huge followings basically saying, we don't think you should get involved. We see Hallmarks of 2003, Iraq in this, and we don't want to be, you know, the neocons that get involved and believe in regime change. Get out now. He ignored it. He believed it was the right thing to do at the right time.

[Richard Engel]

We.

[Yalda Hakim]

But when he felt that Israel had crossed a line, he basically, you know, the frustration that we saw there, and I do believe the frustration is real. And actually, let's talk about the ways in which the United States can punish Israel. Israel is currently running low on interceptors. This is a race and a game between missiles and interceptors. There isn't an endless supply of missiles. There isn't an endless supply of interceptors. Even the United States doesn't have enough of this hardware. Will the United States step in beyond this point and help Israel if Israel is stepping out of line? Donald Trump is the kind of president who's going to say, you know what? We've helped you for the last 12 days or so. Sorry.

[Richard Engel]

So this all brings us to the question, is any of this real? Is this just a show to please Trump, or will this really be a lasting ceasefire? Will this last through the day? Will this last through the month? Will this last for, you know, he said it was supposed to be open ended, is what President Trump said in that same statement, that he doesn't envision this as a 30 day or 90 day or 100 day ceasefire, that this is supposed to be a ceasefire. And I have thoughts about it. But before I sort of get into them, what do you think? What are you hearing?

[Yalda Hakim]

Well, one of the things I've been told is that a large percentage of Iran's, you know, uranium and the centrifuges and the materials have already been moved. And so Iran wanted to use this as leverage for future negotiations and talks. And I do believe that Israel, because of the issues around the Interceptors, wanted and knew that it had to sort of stop. And Iran knows that it's been bruised and battered and this idea of regime change has suddenly gone away. So I do think that this will lead to some kind of negotiat and Iran needs to now scramble to have whatever leverage it can get. And for Donald Trump, when you look at his, you know, the book of achievements over the last six months, we've talked about this, you know, the Ukraine war, he hasn't been able to resolve. Gaza still remains a disaster where dozens of people are being killed just for trying to get food every day by Israeli forces. So this nuclear deal didn't take place. He hit the nuclear facilities. But at this point, his credibility is now on the line. You know, he's declared a ceasefire, helped the Israelis, he's told the Iranians launch these strikes on my base and we'll, we'll, you know, call it a day. And then they start, they start basically hitting each other again. So I think in some ways, both sides have seen the fury of the United States, the might of the United States, the will, when they've wanted to, you know, hit often. You know, I think of the United States as almost this frightened lion, this frightened lion of the jungle that is unwilling to step in when it needs to. And yet reluctantly, it has in the past week. So we'll have to wait and see whether Donald Trump can push this in a certain direction.

[Richard Engel]

The US Is sometimes described as a giant with a club, that it is slow moving, slow to react, but when it does move, get the Hell out of the way. And I think President Trump clearly understands that, clearly has an understanding of power. But going back to this question, is this going to last beyond 24 hours or is this just a. It's just a ceasefire in name. Everyone's upset or afraid to upset President Trump. Going back to your point, I think the Israelis, and Netanyahu in particular, because when you say Israelis, it's not like the Israeli people get a say in all of this. It's the political leaders here. It's Netanyahu's personality, him specifically, who's been at the helm of Israeli politics for two decades now. He has been pushing for this for so long and he got what he wanted. This was a politician who was almost kicked out of this country, almost went to jail. I don't mean kicked out, like kicked out of politics, I should say was facing an enormous reckoning after the intelligence failures and I would say leadership failures of the October 7th attack, when this country not only didn't see Hamas preparing for the attack, but then failed to respond to it. There was a massacre and a huge hostage taking atrocity. Netanyahu was down and out. He was in serious legal trouble. He'd been having this in the background as something he wanted to do as a legacy, and now he did it and he's kind of revived his career, revived his legacy. If he were to left today, left office today, he would be loved and hated, I'm sure. But his supporters would say, well, at least he closed out on a strong note and set back the Iranian nuclear program, which is something he always promised he would do. So Netanyahu got what he wanted and fulfilled a long ambition. President Trump got what he wanted in that. He wanted to take out these nuclear sites. He wanted to engage in a limited way, not get sucked down. An open ended Middle east war that, as we all just saw, could have easily drawn in American troops, as we saw when those bombs were falling on Qatar, because had some of them actually gotten through and killed a bunch of people, it could have had. It created a new dynamic. And the Iranians, I don't want to say they got what they want, but the Iranians are not in a position to want this war to continue as it has been going on for much longer, because they're getting pounded. So on a temporary basis, I think that all sides achieved what they want or don't want it to expand beyond this point and can walk away. So we may have a ceasefire with some violations here and there, a couple of missiles here, a couple of strikes but that that holds and leads to a diplomatic process for now. But I think fundamentally this is not over. I think this round is over, but that the goal remains. Israel's goal remains regime change. And I think the Iranians know it.

[Yalda Hakim]

We're just going to go to a quick ad break. And when we come back, we do have a listener's question about regime change and whether ultimately that is the goal of Benjamin Netanyahu and his. Welcome back. We've got a question here from Tom via email. And Tom says if regime change did happen in Iran, who are the likely candidates to take over? Is there a functioning opposition? So I'll let you go first, Richard, because you've spent time in Iran, you know, you've been following the story. And then I can bring in my thoughts around regime change, whether it was the goal of the Israeli government and who are the potential people that could pose as opposition, but also it could replace the supreme leader.

[Richard Engel]

So to answer Tom's question directly, and hello, Tom, thanks for the question. I'm not sure that there is a clear alternative. A government in waiting that would step in regime change is really hard and is really hard to do by remote control. When the US Carried out regime change in both Afghanistan and Iraq, they brought in the governments with them that were going to take over. The CIA helped bring Hamid Karzai to Afghanistan. The US brought, physically brought some of the opposition leaders like Ahmed Chalabi to Iraq. And the governments, in both case, the Taliban government and the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein didn't fall until American troops were really on the doorstep. So the bombing campaign wasn't enough. I was in Baghdad in 03, and I was with the information minister. This is a funny story. I was in Baghdad 03. The American troops had taken over half of the city. I was independent. I wasn't embedded. I was just in Baghdad as the American troops were advancing and Saddam Hussein's government was scrambling to fight back. And the Americans called him Baghdad Bob because he was such a comedic figure. He was the information ministry who denied everything. So the Americans, we'd be bombing and he'd say, no, no, no, they're not bombing and the Americans are advancing. And you could see the American troops and he'd be like, no, no, no, no. I was with him. And the American troops are advancing and we could see them. I was like, what are you, what are you, what are you going to do? And he's like, it's a trap. It's a trap. We're just luring them in. And then he disappeared and went off running. So the government didn't collapse until the American troops were actually in eyesight. And then the government, what did they do? Saddam and his inner circle, they went into hiding and they created a guerrilla movement and they made these bizarre alliances with Islamists and a bunch of brigands. And they formed different resistance groups, terrorist cells, militias, however you want to describe it. And they tied up the US for 10 years there. So regime change from afar is really hard. The Americans and the Israelis, they bomb the hell out of Iran and they keep going, they keep bombing, they keep bombing. They can weaken the government, but that doesn't mean necessarily that what they're going to get on the other side is who they think or what they expect or that the government is just going to collapse. And Iran is a country of 100 million people, and there's no talk of anyone invading it, of bringing troops to Tehran where the government has to look them in the eyes. So I think they talk about regime change, but is that a plan or is that a hope? I think it's a hope. At this stage.

[Yalda Hakim]

The Israelis don't do regime change. They do regime destruction. And they've attempted to destroy aspects of the regime. We've seen how they've cut down the top commanders, top leadership of Iran. I think one of the tricky things for the Israelis right now is that they have for years studied very closely these commanders, their backgrounds, their, their abilities, their strategic mind and military thinking. For years they have. And they've said to me that a lot of these commanders were battle hardened during the Iran Iraq war, for example, that went on for eight years. So they understood the mindset of, of these people. And they said to me, like the supreme Leader, a lot of them had come out of hardship. So they truly believed now, those that are now coming in the next generation, because the Israelis have assassinated the top, those that are coming in, the Israelis actually don't know. Are they more extreme? Are they less extreme? Now, if we look at the makeup of the Iranian regime, you've got Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who took over in 1989 after Ayatollah Khomeini. Ruhollah Khomeini, who brought in the revolution of 1979, died in 1989, replaced by Ayatollah Khamenei. Now he's this son, Mujtaba is seen as the likely successor. However, the Israelis tell me they don't know. I mean, is this like a little princeling who's privileged, he hasn't gone through the same hardship as his father. Is he as hardline or less hardline than his father? Many believe that he's more hardline. It will come down to cracks in Iranian society and for the people of Iran to come to the realization that, oh, wow, okay, so if the Israelis can do this to this regime over the course of the last 12 days, then perhaps we can mobilize like we did in 2009 during the Green Revolution, like we did in the last few years when the young women came out and basically took on this particular regime. But that's not to take away from how powerful and strong this regime is and how desperate it is to stay in power.

[Richard Engel]

Is regime change possible? I think it's a hope. But I think what they're doing now, exactly as you described it, is more regime destruction with the hope that that creates opportunities. One official here in Israel who's very close to Netanyahu, described it to me like Lebanon, that they would like to see it more like Lebanon. Oh, by the way, how long has Israel been attacking Gaza? And there's still Hamas there and there's still no new government, and they are Israeli troops there, and it's unclear that they want a new government. Maybe they just want to keep that place a free fire zone. Gaza is getting totally lost in all of this, and every day it is a bloody mess. But this official said what happened in Lebanon is more of a model that they went after the military, Hezbollah. They didn't attack the government, the civilian government, because that is someone you can kind of negotiate with, but they went after Hezbollah, its leaders, its weapons, its capacity to impose its will over the Lebane. And now they're seeing if by weakening Hezbollah, the Lebanese people take over and manage to create a new government for themselves and a new power dynamic that doesn't involve Hezbollah. That's a similar strategy that they're hoping for in Iran, which is regime change. It's just slower, slower, slower and hoping that you're creating opportunities for the Iranians.

[Yalda Hakim]

And I think what we are certainly seeing is, you know, post 7th of October, how much is shifting and changing in this region. Now, Donald Trump is heading to NATO. You know, he's on his way there at the moment, and he'll be meeting with European leaders. And my gosh, what we've seen over the course of the last week is how weakened the European position has become. The E3 especially, they've tried to hold negotiations with the Iranians, and Donald Trump has thrown their statements to one side, ignored what they've had to say and just done his own thing without even consulting with the Europeans. We're going to have to see how things evolve in the region over the course of the next days and weeks.

[Richard Engel]

He great to talk to you, as always.

[Yalda Hakim]

Until next time.

[Richard Engel]

Until then.

[Donald Trump]

Sa.