0:02

This is a global player

0:04

Original Podcast. We've woken up

0:06

in the early hours of this

0:09

morning to learn that to Israel

0:11

has launched an attack on Iran.

0:13

Now we are being told that

0:16

this attack is limited, but the

0:18

fact remains that Israel has a

0:20

tax Iran almost a week after

0:23

Iran attacked Israel. So the situation

0:25

here is escalating. The Middle

0:27

East. The world. Not for the

0:29

first time in these long six

0:32

months since Oct. the seventh has

0:34

been holding it's breath ever since.

0:36

Around five three hundred rockets into

0:39

Israel itself responds to Israel's killing

0:41

of several senior Iranian military figures

0:43

in Damascus. That dreaded word escalation

0:45

has halted the conversation. The grim

0:48

realization to the region maybe more

0:50

than the region is just one

0:52

mistake. Want miscalculation away from all

0:55

out war in every. Direction Overnight

0:57

the promised Israeli retaliation to the

0:59

Iranian attacks came with missiles directed

1:02

to the heart of Iran itself,

1:04

the cities of Isfahan and to

1:06

Breeze. And yet the word on

1:09

Friday wasn't one of the next

1:11

round of deadly tit for tat

1:14

of a rainy and mobilization an

1:16

Israeli counter mobilization. but instead of

1:18

everyone including the Iranians playing down

1:21

or the taken place. So for

1:23

today's episode we have a very

1:26

simple question. Is. This it

1:28

can. we exile again. And. For

1:30

How long? What is this shadow war

1:32

between Israel and Iran? And if it

1:34

is one, will it stay in the

1:37

darkness? It's Louis here. Welcome to the

1:39

News Agency. The

1:44

news agents the United States has

1:46

not been involved in any offensive

1:48

operations are what we're focused on,

1:50

what the G Seven is focused

1:52

on, and again, it's reflected in

1:54

our statement and in our conversation

1:56

is our work to the escalate

1:58

tensions. to de-escalate

2:01

from any potential conflict. You

2:03

saw Israel on the receiving end

2:05

of an unprecedented attack, but

2:07

our focus has been on of course

2:10

making sure that Israel can effectively defend itself,

2:12

but also de-escalating tensions,

2:16

avoiding conflict, and that

2:18

remains our focus. That was

2:20

the US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken,

2:23

at the G7 Foreign Ministers' meeting in

2:25

Capri, reacting to the news of the

2:27

strike, indeed confirming the Israel attack had

2:29

taken place. Israel itself has kept pretty

2:31

quiet, meanwhile bizarrely Iran has denied there

2:33

was any damage at all. A

2:35

reminder that this all started on

2:37

April 1st when Israel apparently attacked

2:39

Iran's consulate in Damascus, killing one

2:41

of Iran's most senior military commanders

2:43

and other members of the country's

2:46

Islamic Revolutionary Guard. Usually

2:48

the decades-long antagonism between the two

2:50

countries has been conducted through proxies

2:52

rather than direct attacks between the

2:55

two states. That changed with what

2:57

happened on April 1st, and Iran

2:59

responded a few days later with

3:01

300 rockets and missiles into Israeli

3:04

territory, largely intercepted and neutralised by

3:06

Israel, its allies, and bordering Arab

3:08

countries. Israel promised retaliation,

3:10

and that's what came overnight with the attacks

3:13

on what we think were military

3:15

facilities in Isfahan and Tabriz.

3:18

But it was limited. Care was taken

3:20

to avoid Tehran. Iran claimed, probably jubiously,

3:22

there was no damage at all, and

3:25

basically implied the matter was closed. So

3:27

can we all for now at least

3:29

breathe easy? And why for all the

3:31

bluster have they taken so much effort

3:33

to well, not do that much? As

3:36

we know, it is hard to talk to

3:38

people on this whole subject who a, really

3:40

know what they're talking about, and b, have

3:43

no ideological or political acts to grind.

3:45

Jasmine El-Gamal is someone who fits the

3:47

bill. She's one of those people who

3:49

have operated in the shadows of the

3:51

state, but at the highest level, as

3:53

Middle East advisor to the United States

3:55

Department of Defence, under President Obama, and

3:57

special assistant to three under Secretaries of

3:59

Defence. She's an expert in the region

4:01

and came to the news agency studio to try and

4:04

answer that question. Is this it? And

4:06

what now? I think what happened overnight is that

4:09

we've kind of come to a point where

4:11

everyone's done what they feel like they needed

4:13

to do and everyone can now take a

4:15

step back and reassess. So

4:18

I think it's important for people to

4:20

remember that Iran and Israel have been

4:22

at odds for years and that's putting

4:24

it lightly. Iran

4:27

supports Hezbollah in Lebanon. It supports

4:29

Hamas in Gaza and it supports

4:31

the Houthis in Yemen. And

4:33

these are all groups which at one time

4:35

or another as we know are staging attacks

4:38

on Israel or have a long history of

4:40

antipathy to put it mildly to Israel. Exactly.

4:43

They call themselves the Axis of Resistance

4:45

against Israel and so each of them

4:48

have their own kind of agenda against

4:50

Israel. But what unites them

4:52

is this umbrella that they're all under,

4:54

which is the Iranian umbrella. They're all

4:56

Iranian proxies basically. And they get money and- Money,

4:59

training, weapons, you name it. Now

5:02

they're not completely sort of at Iran's

5:04

beck and call. For example, Hamas has

5:06

said in Iran has reiterated that Iran

5:08

wasn't aware of the October 7th attack,

5:11

which was a pretty big deal, but

5:13

it didn't give the go ahead for

5:15

that attack, wasn't aware before it happened.

5:18

Similarly, the leader of Hezbollah in

5:20

Lebanon, he gave a big speech

5:22

a few months ago where he

5:24

made it clear that these Iranian

5:26

proxies are united in their sort

5:29

of desire to weaken Israel and

5:31

they're connected to Iran and they

5:33

speak very deferentially about Iran. But

5:36

it's not a really simple, clear cut situation

5:38

where Iran says go and they go or

5:40

Iran says stop and they stop. But

5:43

the point is, is that Iran has

5:45

this network of proxies that are ready

5:48

and are constantly doing something to

5:50

aggravate Israel, to weaken Israel, or

5:52

just to put it on notice.

5:55

You remember the big 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel.

6:00

out of Lebanon, and there's always a

6:02

chance that that front might get reignited.

6:05

So Iran has always caused Israel

6:08

problems and vice versa. Israel

6:10

has for years targeted Iranian

6:12

shipments in Syria that were

6:14

going to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

6:17

So that's the background. It's not like

6:19

this just started a week ago or

6:21

a few weeks ago when Israel assassinated

6:23

that commander in Syria. But

6:26

because of everything that's been going on around

6:28

this now, you have this war in

6:30

Gaza, every side is posturing,

6:32

trying to use this opportunity to

6:35

set markers to say, okay, this

6:37

is our strength. This is what

6:39

we are. This is what we can do. Don't

6:42

mess with us. So it's a

6:44

mix of aggression and

6:46

deterrence, right? But

6:48

it's this really delicate balance that

6:50

every country in the region

6:53

is trying to strike between aggression

6:55

and deterrence. Everybody's trying to show

6:57

what they can do, but no

6:59

one actually wants this all out

7:01

war in the region that we've all been

7:03

afraid of for the last few months. There's

7:05

a sort of form of shadow boxing that's

7:07

going on. And they're happy

7:10

to wound, but not to

7:12

kill, or at least not to sort of

7:14

launch that full-on frontal aggression that could escalate

7:16

into a place that no one quite

7:18

knows where we're heading. That's

7:20

right. And it's a way for people to really understand

7:23

that it's useful to take a

7:25

step back and look at every

7:27

actor and what they really want, right? Before

7:29

talking about what they're doing to each other.

7:32

Now the Iranians, they have always

7:34

wanted to bleed Israel slowly. They've

7:36

always wanted to weaken it. What's

7:39

that expression about a thousand jabs or something,

7:41

right? About a thousand cubs. Yeah. So

7:44

all out war is not at all

7:46

in Iran's interest. I mean, they're trying

7:48

to maintain their supremacy in the region.

7:51

They're trying to maintain their sort

7:53

of good guy in relation to

7:55

Israel. We're not the aggressors. Israel,

7:57

the aggressor in the region. you

8:00

need a resistance network against it. So

8:02

all of that stuff is important to

8:04

Iran. Now for Israel,

8:06

it's important to Israel not only

8:09

to defend itself and prove that

8:11

it can defend itself, deterrence is

8:13

really important for Israel, precisely because

8:15

they're surrounded by so many enemies

8:17

in the region. We just named

8:20

all of them, right, in terms of these proxy

8:22

groups. It's important for Israel

8:24

to show that you cannot mess with

8:27

us. We can come after you. But

8:29

at the same time, it doesn't really

8:31

want to, not least

8:33

because it needs US support

8:35

militarily. Now- And the US does

8:37

not want an all-out escalation and has been

8:39

urging Israel to either not respond to the

8:41

missiles that were sent from Iran or to

8:44

do so in a very, very measured way.

8:46

Exactly. Now they were saying publicly, the

8:48

Americans to Israel and privately try to

8:51

de-escalate, we don't want to see an

8:53

all-out war. That said, I

8:55

don't think anyone was surprised that Israel

8:57

retaliated because again, they need to establish

8:59

deterrence. Otherwise, it's really terrible for them.

9:01

They can't show a degree of weakness

9:04

that would allow these enemies that we've

9:06

talked about to be so empowered that

9:08

all of the sudden they all try

9:10

to strike Israel at the same time.

9:12

But have they done that? Because, I mean,

9:14

were you surprised, and someone on this has been

9:16

saying this morning that this was in

9:19

many ways quite restrained by

9:21

comparison to what some people have been

9:23

expecting. So was it less of

9:25

a retaliation than perhaps you thought might happen?

9:28

And therefore, have they established deterrence, which

9:30

is their principle objective as you've

9:32

described? I was

9:34

saying a few days ago that the

9:36

best case scenario would be for Israel

9:39

to strike something symbolically,

9:41

but not escalate. So I wasn't

9:43

surprised at all. I would have

9:45

been more surprised if Israel had

9:47

done nothing. So I

9:49

wasn't surprised. And they

9:51

did in fact strike symbolically. No

9:53

major military targets, no nuclear sites

9:55

were hit. We didn't see any

9:57

mushroom clouds. There were no... casualties,

10:00

you know, it was a strike that

10:02

basically said, we know where your nuclear

10:04

sites are, we can reach them if

10:06

we want to, but we've decided not

10:08

to. It is our choice. And

10:11

really important point, the drones

10:13

were not sent from Israel. The

10:16

important thing about them not being

10:18

launched from Israel is

10:20

that they avoided embarrassing the Arab countries

10:22

in the region once again. Now, you

10:24

know that the Jordanians were not at

10:26

all happy at having to be in

10:29

between Iran and Israel,

10:31

right? The Jordanians had to activate their

10:33

defense systems. I was there

10:35

the night of the Iranian attack when the

10:37

Jordanians had to activate these systems. They

10:40

weren't happy about it, but they did it

10:42

because in large part they have to

10:44

defend their own airspace. The last thing Jordan

10:46

would have needed was to be put in

10:48

a position where now Israeli missiles are flying

10:51

over its airspace and the Jordanians would have

10:53

had to make a decision. Do we strike

10:55

down Israeli projectiles like we struck

10:57

down the Iranian ones? And then what does that

11:00

mean for us? That poses only school tree

11:02

risk. Absolutely. So that is a really

11:04

good thing that Israel did in the sense

11:06

that it didn't involve the Arab countries in

11:08

the region. So I think where

11:10

everything stands is a very

11:13

uncomfortable sort of simmering just

11:15

below the surface, uneasy

11:17

detente for now. Iran

11:20

did what they needed to do. And like

11:22

I said, now everyone has to just stand

11:24

back and reassess. What do you really want

11:26

to do next? And the Iranians are even

11:28

denying that it took place or if it

11:30

did, that there was any damage whatsoever, right?

11:32

So there is this sort of weird briefing and

11:34

counterbriefing. Everyone as you say,

11:37

there's this uneasy balance and yet everyone seems

11:39

desperate to pretend actually that there's basically no

11:41

problem. Right. The messaging

11:43

is so fascinating because each

11:45

country is trying to message

11:47

two slightly different things. Right.

11:50

On one hand, they're trying to message that we

11:53

are not the aggressors. We're just defending ourselves.

11:55

So neither sides wants to be seen as

11:57

the bad guy in this. But

12:00

at the same time, they each have

12:02

to message to their domestic audiences to

12:04

say, look, we're not just going to

12:06

roll over and let this happen. We

12:08

are powerful. We are sovereign.

12:11

And so it's a really delicate balance. And of

12:13

course, as it's been for the

12:15

last few months, the biggest danger is a

12:18

miscalculation. One actor doing something that

12:20

it thinks is okay, but that

12:23

turns out not to be okay

12:25

after all. And so the reason

12:27

why this sort of stasis is uneasy balance, where

12:30

every side is trying to prove essentially how

12:33

powerful they could be whilst not

12:35

demonstrating that power. But

12:38

of course, if we assume that you're right, and I

12:40

suppose we can be relieved about this, that for now,

12:42

we can sort of take a breath and say that

12:44

for this particular round of things, it doesn't look like

12:46

it's going to escalate. All of those

12:48

conditions are still there. So do you

12:50

think that this is the end of the road, at least in

12:52

the short to medium term, in

12:55

terms of direct, rather than

12:57

through proxies, direct Iranian-Israeli violence

13:00

against each other or attacks aggression? So

13:02

if you look at the Iranian perspective right now,

13:04

it wasn't hurt at all

13:07

by the Israeli attack. In

13:09

fact, some Iranian accounts were making fun of the

13:11

attack on social media saying, what was

13:13

this? This was nothing. If you're Iran

13:15

right now, you're right back where you sort of

13:17

want it to be, where Israel looks a bit

13:20

meek. And

13:22

at the same time, if Iran does not

13:24

retaliate at this moment, then all the attention

13:26

goes back to what Israel is doing in

13:28

Gaza, which is where it was before this

13:31

whole thing started with Iran and Israel. And

13:33

we go back to the fact that we

13:36

don't know what's going to happen with this Rafah operation.

13:39

Everybody, all of Israel's allies included,

13:41

is against a major operation in

13:43

Rafah. Hamas has not been decimated

13:45

or degraded, which the Israelis set

13:47

out to do at the beginning.

13:50

People are still under famine-like

13:52

or famine conditions in Gaza.

13:55

And so if the attention goes back to that, it's

13:57

not good for the Israelis. The Israelis are on their

13:59

backs. again, trying to convince everyone that

14:01

what they're doing in Gaza is not

14:03

violating human rights, which of course we

14:06

all know it is. And

14:08

so for the Iranian regime, the best thing

14:10

to do right now is just to sit

14:13

back and let all the attention go

14:15

back to Gaza. You know,

14:17

yesterday I was in Brussels. I

14:19

was attending an event of Israeli-Palestinian

14:21

peace builders. So I

14:23

was listening to people from inside

14:25

Israel, inside Palestine, the West Bank,

14:28

who said something that was really touching, you know,

14:30

they said, it is incredibly lonely

14:32

to be an Israeli or

14:35

Palestinian peace builder right now. We

14:38

are lonely. We need more support. We

14:40

don't need you to be beating the drumbeats of

14:42

war. We are trying to do good here, help

14:45

us instead of agitating for war.

14:47

And that really struck me. Irrespective of

14:50

what's happening in Gaza, isn't

14:52

the structural factor, which perhaps in the

14:54

medium to longer term could

14:56

lead to renewed conflict, direct conflict between

14:59

Iran and Israel. That fundamental factor is

15:01

still there, which is Iranian nuclear ambitions. And Israeli

15:03

is believing that that is an existential threat. It's

15:06

the Israeli government believing that's an existential threat to

15:08

their state. I mean, that is still the shadow

15:10

which looms largest over all of this, right? Absolutely.

15:13

I would say that and of course the Palestinian

15:16

question, which is the lack of

15:18

self-determination and statehood for the Palestinians.

15:20

Those are the two. If

15:23

you look at everything that's happened in

15:25

the region in recent times, it always

15:27

comes back to one of those two

15:29

things, either inability for

15:31

Israelis and Palestinians, Americans,

15:34

the global community to find

15:36

a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian

15:38

conflict. I mean, at various

15:40

points throughout history, one side

15:42

or the other has not made

15:45

the brave leap that has needed to

15:47

be made for peace. Something

15:49

like on what Sadat did on

15:51

the Egyptian side or Rabin did

15:54

on the Israeli side. Of course, both of

15:56

them paid the ultimate price for those brave

15:58

moves. That idea that

16:00

Palestine has not been able to be

16:02

recognized as a state by the Israelis,

16:05

by the Americans, by the British, that

16:07

has always been a problem and of course

16:09

the Iranian nuclear file. Now, if

16:11

we go back and look at how the

16:14

international community has tried to address

16:17

both of those regions, we

16:19

can very clearly say that militarily

16:21

they've not been successful, right? It

16:23

feels like a cliche to say

16:25

this over and over again, but

16:27

there are no military solutions to

16:30

either of those issues. Now, when

16:32

President Obama, I worked under President Obama

16:34

at the Pentagon, when he concluded the

16:36

nuclear deal with Iran, there were a

16:38

lot of critics against that deal and

16:41

some of the criticism was warranted. The

16:43

deal didn't really address Iranian

16:45

activity in the region vis-a-vis their proxies.

16:47

It was really solely focused on the

16:49

nuclear issue, but at least it was

16:51

a start, right? Now, of course-

16:53

Of course, President Trump withdrew from it. He

16:56

came out, scrapped the whole thing, and

16:58

now we're back to this adversarial militaristic

17:01

response to questions

17:03

that really have to be resolved

17:05

diplomatically, whether or not we like

17:08

it. Obviously, one of the themes

17:10

of this conflict, ever since October the 7th,

17:13

has been, well, at least on the surface,

17:15

has appeared to be, to

17:17

some extent, it's felt like almost American

17:19

impotence over the

17:21

region, its ability to control is

17:23

too strong a word, but certainly to exert

17:25

or exact its influence on the region, and

17:27

particularly on the Israeli government. Is this actually

17:29

an example of a victory for

17:31

the Biden administration and its efforts to

17:34

try and pacify the situation

17:36

between Iran and Israel, at least to

17:38

the best of its ability to do

17:40

so? Louis, I feel

17:42

like the bar is so

17:44

low right now. I've got to take

17:46

a picture where they come. For what reason can you take it where

17:48

you can? I mean, sure. It's a victory

17:51

in the sense that the American

17:53

messaging has seemed to resonate

17:56

with Prime Minister Netanyahu this time.

17:58

And presumably, I mean, you would know this. as

18:00

well in terms of your own experience within the American

18:02

government. But the efforts, presumably, from Biden

18:04

with the Israelis, but also Bat-Charles, et cetera,

18:07

I assume to the Iranians would have been

18:09

extremely intense in the last week or so.

18:11

The diplomacy has been incredibly intense,

18:14

not just directly through the parties,

18:16

but also through intermediaries, especially

18:18

when it came to the Iranian strike on

18:21

Israel. There was a lot of back and

18:23

forth before that to make sure that things

18:25

didn't escalate. How do the Americans do

18:28

that, given actually the

18:30

connections, the official relations between the

18:32

US and Iran are so limited?

18:34

Through other states. I mean, other states

18:36

pass on our messages, the Arab states in

18:38

the region. If you look at the number

18:40

of actors that are involved in

18:43

the Middle East when it comes

18:45

to diplomacy and negotiations, you have

18:47

the Qataris who are extremely involved

18:49

in the negotiations between Hamas and

18:51

Israel. You have the Egyptians and

18:53

the Jordanians who,

18:55

the Egyptians have ties and relationships both

18:57

with Israel and Hamas. Of course, Jordan

18:59

is one of Israel's peace

19:01

partners in the region, as well as one of

19:04

the closest American allies in the

19:06

region. These are all ... It goes back

19:08

to what I was saying about diplomacy. People,

19:11

it's so easy. This is something that's

19:13

bothered me, right? I mean, throughout the

19:15

last five months, but also in general,

19:18

that especially people who are not living

19:20

in the region, whether it's analysts or

19:22

politicians or congressmen or parliamentarians here in

19:25

the UK who agitate for

19:27

conflict and war, who find it

19:29

so easy to say, this person

19:31

should escalate or that person should

19:33

escalate. It's really ... It's so

19:36

tone deaf. You know what I hate? It's so black and

19:39

white. It's so black and white and it's

19:41

tone deaf. I think it's very disrespectful to

19:43

people, millions of people, like

19:45

I said, who are living in the region,

19:47

whether that's Palestinians, Israelis, Arabs, British

19:50

citizens. I mean, you name it.

19:52

I mean, it's not in anyone's

19:54

interest. You know, war should be

19:56

a last resort. I'm not naive.

19:58

Nobody says that conflict is Never

20:00

the right answer or can always be

20:02

avoided But the number of times

20:05

that we have been quick or some people

20:07

have been quick to jump to conflict rather

20:10

than trying Diplomacy and the

20:12

reason we have relationships and peace treaties

20:15

and deals in the region is precisely

20:17

for moments like this Finally

20:19

Jasmine in your guts Do

20:22

you think that we will see a day? Maybe it

20:24

won't be soon Maybe it's in the medium term, but

20:26

do you think that at some point israel and aram

20:28

will come to a direct conflict? I? Would

20:32

hope not I don't know how this will

20:34

age if I say this but let me just say that The

20:37

stakes are so high for

20:40

everybody involved that I

20:42

would be surprised if either actor Willingly

20:45

now we're not talking about miscalculations

20:48

here or bad decision-making I would

20:51

be surprised if any actor would willingly

20:53

put themselves and the entire region around

20:55

them in That position

20:58

if they were to go to war it

21:00

would be catastrophic for everyone. It would just

21:02

be decimation Everywhere, so I

21:04

don't think so, but I don't

21:06

think we're going to see a

21:09

peaceful resolution just yet given

21:12

Everything else that's happening in the region and

21:14

given the leadership that's in place

21:16

whether it's the mullahs in Iran whether

21:18

it's Netanyahu And the right-wingers in Israel

21:20

you know and frankly I haven't been

21:22

extremely pleased And I know a lot

21:24

of people haven't been pleased with the

21:26

current British and American leadership as well

21:28

in terms of how they've been Using

21:32

their leverage in this conflict, so I

21:34

think with responsible leadership and a bit

21:36

of humility I hope that we will

21:38

not see a war between the

21:40

two doing Obama would have done differently I Think

21:43

that president Biden has been the

21:46

most pro-israel by his own admission

21:49

President as far as I can remember Anna

21:51

and in recent history I don't

21:53

think any other president would have given Israel

21:55

the leeway that it has given without compromising

21:58

Israel security I I think they would

22:00

have been tougher, yes, including President Obama as

22:02

well. And Trump? You know,

22:05

in fact, I think Trump would have had

22:07

more success putting his foot

22:09

down with the Israelis. He was extremely supportive

22:11

of the Israelis. There was no doubt that

22:13

he was a friend of Israel. But

22:16

the way that he dealt with people, and

22:18

I can't believe I'm saying anything mildly positive

22:20

about Donald Trump. And his diplomacy. And his

22:22

diplomacy. I mean, when he put his foot

22:25

down, I think the Israelis

22:27

would have listened. But you know, who knows?

22:29

I don't like to play what if, but

22:31

I would say that, again, I stress that

22:33

we need more than ever. We

22:35

need responsible leadership. We need adults

22:38

in the room. And we need people to

22:41

remember that this isn't a video game. Real

22:43

people live in this region, and they deserve

22:46

better than to be used as pawns in

22:48

this kind of brinksmanship between Iran and

22:51

Israel. A bit of an indictment from you in way of

22:53

Biden, though. I've been very critical of

22:55

President Biden throughout the last few months. He

22:57

was vice president when I was at the

22:59

Pentagon. I had great respect for him up

23:02

until this war. I don't think that he's

23:04

done the region right or well. I don't

23:06

think that he's been fair. And

23:08

I don't think that he's been tough enough on the

23:10

Israelis. And I say that it's been

23:13

to the detriment of both Israel and

23:15

people in the region. Israel's

23:17

security today, I think,

23:19

is more tenuous than it was before

23:21

October 7. And I

23:23

have to say, Louis, one thing that I

23:26

think not enough people are talking about is

23:28

the way that Israel, in

23:30

conducting this war and the U.S.

23:32

support for it and what the

23:34

U.S. has been doing in the

23:37

U.N. Security Council, like calling a

23:39

U.N. Security Council resolution nonbinding the

23:41

degradation of international norms

23:43

and rules that have

23:46

held everything together. I

23:48

don't think we've seen just

23:50

how damaging that's going to be for

23:52

the future, not just for now. But

23:55

mark my words that you're going to see people

23:57

in the future coming back, whether it's Putin. or

24:00

China or other people saying, what

24:02

international law? You know, this is what

24:05

you said back then. What Security Council resolution?

24:07

I thought you said that was non-binding. So

24:10

it's bad. It's bad the way I

24:12

don't approve and I don't appreciate the

24:14

way President Biden has handled this conflict.

24:17

Gentlemen, your insight. So valuable. Thank you so much.

24:19

Thank you, Louis, for having me. This

24:23

is The News Agents.

24:34

Well, we also wanted to get a

24:36

sense of how this news is being

24:38

internalized and reported in Israel and what

24:40

Netanyahu might do next with regards to

24:42

Iran. So we're joined now by Jonathan

24:44

Konrikas, senior fellow at the Foundation of

24:46

Defense of Democracies focused on the Middle

24:48

East. He formerly served in the IDF

24:50

for 24 years as a combat commander

24:52

in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. Jonathan,

24:54

can you just give us a sense

24:57

of how these events and

24:59

how this strike is being reported

25:01

in Israel and

25:03

what the Israeli government is saying

25:05

about it and the Israeli media is saying

25:07

about it? Well, the Israeli government isn't saying

25:10

much and I think wisely so. Israeli

25:13

media is reporting based

25:15

on US media and

25:17

Iranian media and Arabic

25:19

media and they're piecing things

25:21

together. And then behind

25:23

the scenes, background briefings, information is

25:25

coming out. And the

25:27

picture is rather clear. Most people

25:29

understand, most people who live in

25:32

countries where there's free media understand

25:34

what happened. And that is that

25:36

Israel struck in Isfahan, deliberately struck

25:38

an airfield and not any of

25:40

the nuclear sites in or near

25:43

Isfahan, but one of the military

25:45

airfields that were used against

25:48

Israel. And that basically

25:50

allows the Iranian regime to

25:53

scale down and that allows

25:55

them to de-escalate and they're basically signaling

25:57

that they don't want to take this

25:59

one. step further. Do you think that this

26:01

will be it in terms of

26:04

response from Israel? And is that how

26:06

it will be projected from

26:08

within? Is this the end of the

26:10

road as far as the retaliation, this

26:12

sort of period of exchange that

26:14

we've seen between Iran and Israel over the last couple

26:16

of weeks? I think that we

26:18

could cautiously assume that it's the end

26:20

of this round. The round

26:23

started in Damascus, then Iran struck

26:25

Israel with 350 missiles and drones,

26:27

and now Israel

26:31

retaliated against Isfahan. And I think we

26:33

could maybe carefully

26:35

assess that this round is over.

26:37

But it's good to

26:39

remember that both countries, Iran and

26:42

Israel, have crossed Rubicons. Reality

26:45

will not be the same.

26:47

There had been speculation, Jonathan,

26:49

about the idea that Netanyahu

26:52

and his government would

26:54

use this opportunity

26:57

to deliver a significant blow

26:59

against Iran and against the

27:02

Iranian military and potentially even

27:04

against its nuclear program, which

27:07

obviously many Israelis feel is an existential threat

27:10

to Israel over the sort of medium to

27:12

long term. They clearly, at least

27:14

for now, haven't chosen to do so. Did you think

27:16

that that was a credible idea? And if it was,

27:18

why haven't they decided to avail themselves

27:20

of this opportunity? I think that what

27:22

Israel did was a very measured response

27:25

against Iranian aggression, probably

27:28

influenced by requests and advice

27:30

by the US and

27:32

to a lesser extent UK, France and

27:35

perhaps Germany calling on Israel

27:37

not to retaliate, to which Israel

27:39

responded that Israel is going to

27:41

retaliate. The fact that

27:43

Israel penetrates the Iranian air defenses is

27:45

clear and Israel could have struck 10,

27:47

15, 20

27:50

sides instead of one and

27:52

a half or two sides. But that wasn't

27:54

necessary. Looking at what

27:56

Israel probably should be doing in the

27:58

future, yes, the Iranian nuclear

28:00

program, you know, think

28:02

if all of this, if October

28:05

the 7th had happened with a

28:07

nuclear Iran, with Iran

28:09

providing a nuclear umbrella over Hamas

28:11

and over Hezbollah, how difficult it

28:13

would have been for Israel to

28:15

defend itself and its citizens. So

28:18

I think that it's definitely an Israeli,

28:20

a US, and a European interest to

28:22

make sure that Iran never achieves Iranian

28:24

nuclear military capabilities. You said that you

28:26

thought this was the end of round

28:28

one, but there could be a round

28:30

two or indeed a round three between

28:32

Israel and Iran. What do you think

28:35

are the circumstances that could prompt

28:37

that round two and round three? What

28:40

could lead us to that moment? There's

28:42

a few things. One would be if

28:45

Iran goes out and

28:47

does something extreme with regards

28:50

to their nuclear program, if

28:52

there's significant progress in weaponization, or

28:55

if they breach out in terms

28:58

of enrichment or anything else that

29:00

is seen as really rupturing the

29:02

balance. I think that could trigger

29:04

some kind of an Israeli action.

29:06

That's one. Second, if

29:09

Hezbollah goes all out

29:11

against Israel and unleashes

29:13

its massive arsenal of

29:15

rockets against Israel, I think

29:17

that that would take out one

29:19

of the roadblocks or one

29:22

of the hindrances or the stop

29:24

gaps that exist currently that prevent

29:26

Israel from striking Iran. And third,

29:28

if Iran strikes Israel in retaliation

29:31

for last night's report of attack,

29:33

that could of course bring around

29:36

a second round of fighting. I think

29:38

that we are closer to that

29:41

happening than to returning to the state

29:43

of normalcy of the last 44 years,

29:46

but specifically the last, let's say, 20

29:49

years where Iran successfully

29:51

built and financed and funded terror

29:53

organizations around our borders. And I

29:55

think that we have crossed virtual

29:58

Ruby cons here that will be very difficult. difficult

30:00

to uncross. So just in sum, you think

30:02

at one point or another, there

30:04

probably will be a war, a more comprehensive

30:07

war between Iran and Israel. I think

30:09

it's unlikely that we're going to see

30:11

Israel and Iran return to how things

30:13

have been managed for the last 44

30:16

years. I think that we're

30:18

in a different era. I think that

30:20

the chances of around two and around

30:22

three, they exist. And I think that

30:24

they are quite reasonable because the Rubycons

30:26

have been passed and Israel has seen

30:28

that it can. Jonathan, thank you so

30:31

much. Thank you. Right.

30:34

So all in all, the Middle East

30:36

revert to the status quo ante, a

30:38

tinderbox which could spark at any time

30:40

an uneasy stasis between the major players.

30:42

Meanwhile, the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza continues

30:44

and Israel remains at risk from its

30:46

enemies. No one will be sleeping

30:48

much easier. We will be back just after this.

30:59

This is the news agents. That

31:04

is it from us for this week. Apologies from

31:07

John and Emily for not being here. But this

31:09

weekend, you will know, of course, is the return

31:11

of Britain's Got Talent. And Emily is massaging her

31:13

vocal chords with linseed oil for her professional singing

31:15

debut. Without spoiling the surprise, she'll be performing her

31:17

party piece. The B-52s love Shaq and John will

31:20

be on the marimba. So something to look out

31:22

for. And before we go, do you remember this?

31:24

Why don't you go talk about Jewish space lasers?

31:26

And really, why don't you fuck off? How about

31:29

that? Thank you very much. That was

31:31

Maga Fruitloop, Marjorie Taylor Green, basically telling

31:33

our very own Cindy Lauper which cliff

31:36

she should jump off after Emily reminded

31:38

her at Mar-a-Lago about her interest in

31:40

so-called Jewish space lasers. Coincidentally, it's also

31:42

been my ringtone ever since. Anyway, the

31:45

good news is Marjorie hasn't taken it

31:47

to heart with a Republican congresswoman announcing

31:49

on Wednesday an amendment to the Israel

31:52

funding bill that would direct US Department

31:54

of Defense funding to develop, you guess

31:56

it, space laser technology on the US-Mexico

31:58

border. the amendment on twitter writing,

32:01

Israel has some of the best unmanned defence

32:03

systems in the world. I've previously voted to

32:05

fund space lasers for Israel's defence. America needs

32:07

to take our national security seriously and deserve

32:09

the same type of defence for our border

32:11

that Israel has and proudly uses. I think

32:14

the Emily Maitless Space Laser Commander base has

32:16

a nice ring to it don't you think?

32:18

Oh screw it, one more time. Really, why

32:20

don't you fuck off, how about that? Remember

32:22

you can catch up on all our shows

32:24

from the week on Global Player, send us

32:26

story tips and feedback to newsagents at global.com

32:29

thanks to our production team on the news

32:31

agents Gabriel Rados, Laura Fitzpatrick, Georgia Foxwell, Alex

32:33

Barnet, Rory Simon, Shane Fenner, Leonardo Vinaire, and

32:35

our editor Tom Hughes is presented by Emily

32:37

Maitless, John Sople and me Lewis Goodall. We'll

32:39

see you on Monday. Have a lovely weekend.