Latest / The Fourcast / How Iran war has fundamentally changed the world

Transcript

How Iran war has fundamentally changed the world · The Fourcast

0:00
We're inching closer and closer towards the exact kind of
0:03
confrontation that countries have been trying to avoid since
0:06
the last World war. This was a difficult decision.
0:09
I know it it. There's a lot of peril in doing
0:11
this, but I think it was the right thing to do.
0:13
Yet again we see a war of choice.
0:17
No clear strategy, no understanding of the cultural
0:20
implication, no real effort to protect the people.
0:24
What is left at the end of this could be 10 times worse as a
0:29
consequence. Hello and welcome to the
0:34
Forecast. I'm Christian Guru Murphy in Tel
0:36
Aviv, where we have started to see Iranian cluster missiles
0:40
being intercepted by air defences here.
0:43
But a week into this war, the Middle East is on fire, Qatar is
0:47
warning today of global economic disaster, and the White House is
0:52
pumping out propaganda videos of Hollywood memes to try and get
0:56
its base enthused about the war in the face of some skeptical
1:01
opinion polls. Joining me today, General Sir
1:04
Richard Sheriff, former commander of NATO forces in
1:07
Europe, who this week described Trump and Hexif as a pair of
1:11
gung ho nutters. Professor Shimen Keitner is an
1:15
expert in international law and formerly worked at the State
1:19
Department as their international legal counsellor
1:22
during the first Trump term. And the former chief of staff in
1:26
the National Security Council, Fred Fleitz, also joins us from
1:30
the United States. Thank you all so much for
1:33
joining us, Sir Richard. At the beginning of the week,
1:36
you warned of your fears that this war could lead to a World
1:41
War Three, and you have also defended the Prime Minister from
1:46
jibes from Donald Trump about him not being Winston Churchill.
1:49
How do you feel about this war now?
1:51
I feel much the same as I did when I woke up on Saturday
1:53
morning and heard the news that that that a yet another American
1:57
president has has launched a war of choice in the Middle East
2:01
without any clear end state, no strategy, and no idea how this
2:05
war is going to end. Do you still fear that this can
2:10
lead to something much, much bigger, what you call the World
2:13
War 3? Yeah.
2:15
I mean, there are many like President Zelensky who said
2:17
we're already in World War Three.
2:19
And, and, and the reality is of course, that Europe is fighting
2:22
a covert war with Russia and Russia is fighting a covert war
2:26
in Europe. And we've talked about that
2:28
before in a separate context, but the potential knock on
2:32
effect of this war has already generated a regional war across
2:37
the Middle East and, and, and the potential for things to go
2:41
South in a very big way. Should China, for example, take
2:44
advantage of America and be America being fixed in the
2:47
Middle East to have a crack at Taiwan And, and who knows what
2:51
Putin might try to do to embarrass NATO at the same time?
2:55
I mean the the the the the the potential scenarios are
2:58
boundless. How do you feel about the
3:00
justifications that we've heard for the war this.
3:03
Week. Well, we seem to have
3:04
flip-flopped from regime change to destruction of nuclear
3:07
weapons without any real clarity about the objectives.
3:13
And so I, and then, and then on top of that, we get the, the,
3:17
the, the, the, the propaganda feed.
3:21
And let's be clear from a military, purely military
3:23
perspective, I mean, what America and Israel are doing in
3:27
applying military force on an industrial scale, as any
3:31
military man would tell you is impressive.
3:34
But it's more than that. You need to think about, you
3:36
need to have a thought. You need to think through the
3:39
impact of what operations, what your operations are doing on the
3:43
minds of the people among whom you're operating.
3:46
And if you alienate the people, if you are looking to change the
3:49
type dynamic of of what is a pernicious and vile regime in in
3:53
Iran, granted. But if you're trying to do that,
3:57
you probably want to find, have a be able to apply a little bit
3:59
of carrot at the same time as a stick.
4:02
And that doesn't seem to be happening.
4:04
And as a military man, are you concerned about the basis in
4:08
international law for this, or do you accept the national
4:11
interest? Trump's that?
4:13
You need to ask a lawyer, but but the basic say that you've
4:18
got to be prepared to you have a right of self defence and I, I
4:23
you then need to ask what self defence was being applied here.
4:26
And of course, as the dynamic of this war develops, and every war
4:31
has a dynamic of its own that develops because of that, that,
4:35
that that gets even more complicated.
4:37
But of course Iran is now launching missiles at our
4:41
British allies in the Middle East, launching missiles or
4:45
drones at British air bases in Cyprus and the right of self
4:49
defence applies there. But it's a very complicated
4:52
thing because the reality is as well that any organised, any
4:56
nation lining up alongside America and Israel in this war
5:01
is going to own the problem when the bombing stops.
5:04
And I think it's highly likely, frankly, that when the bombing
5:08
stops, Trump will declare victory, walk away, leave a
5:11
smouldering pile of Iranian rubble, and those countries that
5:15
have been alongside will be owning the problem for years to
5:19
come. Professor Keitner, let me bring
5:21
you in. I I'm sure you're more concerned
5:22
about the the basis in international law.
5:25
If you were in the State Department still, would you be
5:28
telling them they have a legal basis for action?
5:30
All right. Well, legal advice, of course,
5:32
depends on the questions being asked.
5:35
And unfortunately, if I were in the State Department now, I
5:37
don't think anyone in the White House would be listening to me.
5:40
But I would say that the legal framework that applies to going
5:43
to war, the UN Charter, we have Aun Security Council for a
5:47
reason. And unless the Security Council
5:50
has authorized the use of force, or the force is being used
5:53
against an imminent threat, there is no legal basis.
5:57
Let's bring in Fred flights then in the United States, I mean
6:01
criticisms on a number of fronts for you to pick up on there.
6:05
Let's begin with with international law.
6:07
Are you not concerned that scholars and close allies like
6:13
Britain don't think the initial attack was legal?
6:16
Well, I, I first want to talk about the justification for the
6:20
war, which I think is pretty strong.
6:22
President Trump said the US has to stop Iran from getting
6:25
nuclear weapons, has to stop a missile program that by the end
6:29
of the year probably would have doubled in size and may have
6:32
constituted a missile shield. That's what Secretary Rubio said
6:36
this week that would have prevented pre emptive action
6:38
against the the Iranian nuclear program.
6:41
And President Trump is providing A pathway for the Iranian people
6:45
to take back their government. And for people argue about
6:48
international law, we all know nothing could be done about this
6:51
in the UN Security Council because of vetoes for the
6:53
Chinese and the Russians. So international law can't help
6:56
these people. Will 10s of thousands of them be
6:58
executed again, Trump is giving them an opportunity.
7:01
That's why the the Australian Canadian governments have
7:04
endorsed this operation. That's why hundreds of thousands
7:08
of Iranians in the Iranian diaspora have enthusiastically
7:13
celebrated with mass demonstrations in London and
7:16
Berlin, in New York, in Los Angeles, because they see
7:19
freedom, they see the end of an evil regime.
7:22
They see an American president who had the courage to do
7:25
something very difficult and not without giving the Iranians A
7:28
diplomatic way out. So I think this was a difficult
7:31
decision. I know it it there's a lot of
7:33
peril in doing this, but I think it was the right thing to do.
7:36
But what do you make when you hear a man like Sir Richard
7:39
there, a former NATO commander, effectively saying, you know,
7:44
he, he doesn't know what the strategy is, he doesn't know
7:46
what this is going to achieve and he's very worried about
7:49
where it's going to lead. Well, I think there's clearly a
7:52
strategy, which is one reason why we didn't start bombing in
7:54
January. After the massive crackdown on
7:57
Iranian protesters. There was some time taken to
8:01
plan this, but Joint Chiefs of Staff General Kane said
8:05
operations like this are planned over many years.
8:07
There's a lot of war gaming. There's a lot of planning done.
8:10
And I think we're simply seeing the very early days of a four to
8:14
five week operation to take out this regime, to destroy its
8:18
offensive capabilities, hopefully to discourse security
8:21
services, which will give the Iranian people an opportunity to
8:24
take back their government. But look, neither the general or
8:28
I know this full plan. The administration is not
8:31
admitting to exactly what it is going to do publicly because
8:34
they don't want to inform the Iranian regime.
8:36
So, Richard, what do you make of that?
8:37
Well, it was a bit to unpack there, isn't there?
8:39
I mean, pathway for the Iranian people to take back their
8:43
government? What is that pathway?
8:47
How are you expecting bombed, traumatized people to step up
8:52
against the IRGC and the Bazji, the Bazij militia?
8:57
How? And and then you think back to
8:59
the, the very action of assassinating Khamenei, who of
9:04
on the one hand, of course, he was the head of state, but at
9:07
the same time he is, he was a a revered Shia cleric.
9:13
And by doing that, what America and Israel have done is
9:16
immediately promoted him to the ranks of the martyred Saints and
9:19
alienated Shia Muslims right across the world.
9:23
And in doing that, what you're doing is most likely pushing any
9:27
moderate Iranian who might who might be fed up to the back
9:31
teeth with the with the theocracy and longing for a
9:34
change. But you're going to harden
9:36
opinion and most likely push them into the ranks of the the
9:40
hardliners. And if this is Billy basic stuff
9:43
that any anybody who served in that I'll starred operation in
9:48
Iraq would understand the need to get under the skin and
9:51
understand the cultural implications of what you're
9:54
doing. And instead of which we're
9:56
seeing mass industrial warfare thumping Iranian cities,
10:01
rubbling in very Iranian cities without any effort to try and
10:06
reach out to the population. On top of which we've just
10:09
heard, of course, that Trump is demanding nothing but
10:12
unconditional surrender. That doesn't sound to me like
10:15
reaching out to the Iranian people to help them take back
10:18
their government. And if I may, if if this nuclear
10:22
threat is so, so dire that by the end of the year, I think you
10:27
said the their, their nuclear weapons will double in size.
10:30
Why I didn't say that Trump missiles, I said missiles.
10:33
But why is it nevertheless? Why is it that America and Trump
10:36
were boasting that last June the nuclear threat had been a
10:39
liberal obliterated? If it was obliterated in June,
10:43
my goodness me, they've done a lot to get to the stage where
10:45
you've got to launch a war now to obliterate it once again.
10:49
Fred flies. Well.
10:51
I think the nuclear program was obliterated last June, but since
10:55
then the Iranian government has been rebuilding its nuclear
10:59
missile programs. I think their missile program
11:01
has been set back substantially more than U.S.
11:04
Government officials are saying the missile program has made
11:07
major advances. I think there's reliable
11:09
intelligence that Iran is making up to 100 missiles a month.
11:14
And according to Secretary of State Rubio, the plan for Iran
11:18
is to use its missiles as a shield to protect attacks of the
11:22
nuclear infrastructure, which might become impossible by the
11:25
end of the year. I think an Iranian nuclear
11:28
weapon is unacceptable and that Iran is determined to build 1
11:31
and that this may be our only opportunity to make sure that it
11:34
doesn't. And what?
11:35
About Sir Richard's point about the folly of the assassination
11:39
of the Ayatollah in the way it was done and and what what what
11:44
that does to the Shia population and moderate Iranian people who
11:48
who may be may be turnable. The Ayatollah is incredibly
11:53
unpopular in Iran, and the death of the Ayatollah is being
11:56
celebrated across the country. About 20% of the country support
12:01
this current regime. Most of them hate this regime.
12:04
It has been so brutal. It's destroyed the economy.
12:07
This is especially true among young people.
12:09
You know, I haven't seen any signs of a movement that that is
12:13
revering the hominy as a martyr right now.
12:16
I'm sure that there are. This 20% is very angry.
12:18
I don't dispute that. But this is a leader who is
12:21
destroyed this country. The vast majority of Iranians
12:24
agree with that. That's why they were out
12:26
celebrating after he was killed. So, Richard?
12:29
What? What would you say to that?
12:31
Well, you. You, you may be right and they
12:33
may have been celebrating, but of course they might be
12:35
celebrating. But now then they're almost
12:37
immediately taking cover from, from the mass bombings that are
12:41
going on. And I think that, you know, that
12:43
I, I, I stand by that principle that you have to understand the
12:46
nature or the impact what you're doing on the minds of the
12:49
people. And, and, and has that really
12:53
been thought through? And I think to assassinate a, a
12:57
major sheer figure during the holy month of Ramadan, as I said
13:01
earlier in an earlier interview, it is about as subtle as
13:05
shooting the Pope on the steps of Saint Peter's Cathedral,
13:08
Saint Peter's in Rome during Holy Week.
13:11
It doesn't smack of of sophisticated understanding.
13:14
Frankly, this is a. Country that's been at war with
13:17
our country for 47 years. It sent assassination squads
13:20
into into Europe to kill dissidents.
13:23
It sent teams in the United States to capture and spirit
13:27
back to Iran. Dissident journalist who had
13:30
criticized Iran. This is a This is a government
13:33
that's been trying to assassinate the president of the
13:35
United States. This is a government that is a
13:37
terrorist state on a different level than other adversaries
13:41
America has faced through history.
13:42
I agree with you. I don't like the prospect of
13:45
assassinating leader of another state and I, I, I think this is
13:48
something that, frankly, if there was another way to do it,
13:50
that isn't something I would have recommended.
13:52
But I do think this is a special case.
13:54
What? I'm concerned about is that what
13:56
we seem to be hearing are a lot of ex post talking points.
14:00
One of the important features of our legal system and our
14:04
international order is that countries have the ability to
14:07
make the case for why they think force should be used, what
14:12
diplomatic efforts have been tried, why those have failed,
14:16
and what we utterly lacked in the lead up to this really
14:19
surprise attack with any attempt at laying the foundation,
14:23
bringing allies on board and making the case.
14:26
So I'm really not persuaded by any of these ex post attempts to
14:30
justify different members of the administration have come up with
14:33
different rationales at different times.
14:36
It seems like they weren't even talking to their own negotiators
14:39
on the ground. We had a report right before the
14:42
bombing started. The negotiations were actually
14:45
making progress. That's why we have a national
14:47
security bureaucracy. I believe Fred was part of that
14:50
as well. That's why you have advisors,
14:52
including but not exclusively lawyers.
14:55
And we have no confidence and no basis for confidence that any of
14:58
that process either internally or externally took place.
15:02
And that should worry everyone. I mean there.
15:04
Was also a legal framework within the JCPOA, which Donald
15:08
Trump pulled America out of. They say it was failing, you
15:12
know, is that where the limits of international law meet
15:15
reality? Well, I I.
15:17
Don't think we have any basis in that assertion about what the
15:19
so-called reality was. Again, based on public
15:23
reporting, the military generals in Israel actually thought the
15:27
JCPOA was a great arrangement for going forward, or at least
15:31
many of them publicly said that they did.
15:33
What we're encountering here is not so much the limits of law,
15:38
it's the it's the unpredictability of politics and
15:42
the lack of long term strategic vision in the interest not only
15:46
of the United States, but of a largely peaceful world order.
15:52
Again, that the number of wars raging in the world would
15:55
surprise many people because a lot of them don't make the front
15:58
pages. But we have so far managed to
16:02
avoid a nuclear cataclysm. And what we're doing Russia is
16:05
now apparently providing intelligence to the Iranians.
16:08
China is behind the scenes. We're inching closer and closer
16:11
towards the exact kind of confrontation that countries
16:15
have been trying to avoid since the last World war.
16:18
I mean, there was as, as the professor says, a legal
16:21
framework. This was a choice to opt out of
16:24
it and and just go for a sort of a gung ho strategy.
16:28
Well, there's there's people who who believe and idealists who
16:32
think that there's ways to resolve things like this by
16:35
going to the Security Council and laying out your case.
16:38
But in the real world, that simply was never going to work.
16:41
I think that if you're you're going to talk about national law
16:44
and giving notice, the US did engage in negotiations with Iran
16:48
last year and this year. The Iranians would not agree to
16:51
negotiate in good faith. They would not give up the
16:53
uranium enrichment program, which is a weapons program.
16:57
I know there's people who claim that it is not.
16:59
But a nation with so much covert nuclear program can't be trusted
17:02
with the uranium enrichment program.
17:04
And the US refused to let them have an enrichment program
17:07
before the Obama administration. This was a bad concession by the
17:10
Obama administration, which is why the JCPOA was frankly a
17:13
fraud. And I'm glad that President
17:15
Trump withdrew. Well this what is something but
17:17
your. Belief is working.
17:20
It wasn't. Working and and Iran was
17:22
cheating on it. We know we know that from
17:25
documents that Israel stole from the Iranians the Iran nuclear
17:28
archive in 2018. Iran was acquiring materials it
17:32
wasn't supposed to have for nuclear programs.
17:34
It was it was covertly developing advanced centrifuges
17:37
of why it jumped so quickly to 60% enrichment in 2022.
17:41
People who argue that it was working are are frankly lying.
17:44
It wasn't working. It was frankly delaying an
17:46
Iranian nuclear weapon, but they were still going to get one.
17:49
Trump is going to stop Iran from ever getting a nuclear weapon.
17:53
And you can argue, well, the UN isn't blessing this.
17:56
I think justice for the Iranian people and stopping an Iranian
18:00
nuclear weapon are moral positive objectives that frankly
18:05
are worth doing even if the UN says we shouldn't do it.
18:07
I'm pretty. Surprised to hear accusations of
18:09
European leaders lying, but the you know, I think this is one of
18:13
an. American leaders, today's.
18:14
Media Environment Shaman. Kinda.
18:16
I mean, isn't the trouble that now, now that we're in this
18:19
world in which it's the law of the jungle, mice is right, You
18:22
can do whatever you want. You know, international law, who
18:25
cares? It's very difficult to then put
18:29
things back on a secure footing, you know, because how do you
18:32
then build a secure legal framework to create stability in
18:35
the future? I don't think that's the world
18:39
we're in yet. I think that's the world that
18:41
Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump are trying to create.
18:44
I think that's the world that Vladimir Putin would like to
18:46
live in. And I think the more that
18:49
powerful countries act as if international law doesn't
18:53
matter, the less it will. I never said that we would get
18:56
Security Council authorization. What I said is that countries go
19:00
and make their case ahead of time.
19:03
They lay out the arguments for the use of force.
19:06
Otherwise, if the basis for using force is potential
19:11
assassination attempts, that turns right back around and
19:13
gives other countries a green light to target the United
19:16
States. And so we can go down this
19:19
rabbit hole of, you know, discarding legal frameworks.
19:22
We also have very clear legal frameworks about the laws that
19:25
apply to targeting. And I was reassured to hear
19:28
Secretary Higgseth say that the United States does not target
19:32
civilians. That's a very important bedrock
19:35
principle. And there's absolute be no
19:38
reason to throw it out the door. And if we do, the United States
19:41
is going to ultimately actually be much the worse for it.
19:46
General Sir Richard, can I bring you in here on on the targeting
19:49
question? There are two very big incidents
19:51
and I wonder how you feel about them as a military man.
19:53
There is the school and it's not clear who who hits it, but it
19:57
looks like it might have been the Americans, but they say they
19:59
weren't targeting it deliberately.
20:01
And then there is the ship of Sri Lanka, which was on its way
20:05
back from a sort of diplomatic. Exercise with India there's some
20:10
suggestion it wasn't even armed and those sailors were killed
20:14
how do you feel about those two big incidents well that's.
20:17
That's the consequence of war. War is not a clean, clear, clear
20:22
cut business. It's a dirty, vile, ruthlessly
20:25
brutal, violent exercise and and sinking a ship and and and and
20:32
collateral damage or a failure to target correctly and, and if
20:36
there's you know, and and and and destroying the school.
20:39
If that was the case, other consequence of launching
20:42
launching an attack on a scale along the lines of the one we
20:46
are just witnessing. And if I may just pick up one of
20:49
the tread carefully into the legal world.
20:52
Of course, the national security of the United States has stated
20:55
quite explicitly that the international rules based order
21:00
is a cloud based abstraction. That says to me that that law
21:05
doesn't matter, that might is right, and that's the end of it.
21:08
That's the end of it I regret. I have another interview so I
21:11
have to run, but it's nice to be with you all.
21:13
I enjoyed this debate. OK.
21:15
Thank. Thank you, Fred Flights for
21:16
joining us. I'm sorry you have to go, but
21:18
thank you for your time. Professor Keitner, what is the
21:20
legality of these two big incidents that you can see so
21:23
far? We would need more facts in
21:26
order to determine for sure. As Richard says, mistakes do
21:31
happen in war. The targeting of the boat, it
21:33
was was clearly not a mistake. The targeting of the school
21:36
appears to have been. But I, I was concerned about
21:40
hearing this might makes right. And again, I, I don't understand
21:43
you to have been advocating that, but simply stating what
21:47
you perceive to be the current reality.
21:49
I mean, NATO troops, every country's troops are trained
21:53
meticulously in the laws of war, the laws of armed armed
21:57
conflict. And a war is never humane.
22:01
But we have long predating the United Nations system, very
22:06
clear parameters for targeting, particularly because civilians
22:10
can so often be the victims of war.
22:13
And So what I would like to see from the United States again,
22:18
and this is something that prior administrations have done,
22:22
whether or not you agree with the rationales they've put
22:24
forward, they have been very transparent or tried to be in
22:29
terms of explaining what happened, how it happened, and
22:32
then what they can do better next time.
22:34
And so I think what the public deserves, both the Iranian
22:37
public and all of those watching from around the world, are
22:41
explanations. And those explanations are going
22:45
to go a long way towards reassuring people that there
22:47
actually is some sort of plan here, some sort of long term
22:52
vision. Or it's going to reinforce the
22:54
perception that I think so many of us observers have that this
22:58
is wildly out of if I. May make it 100% clear that when
23:03
I say that the National security strategy, this is the American
23:07
National Security Strategy recently published describing
23:11
the international rules based order as a cloud based
23:14
abstraction, that is not my view.
23:16
I have a soldier and they and and and the law of unconflict,
23:22
the Geneva Convention are all fundamental to the whole issue
23:26
of just war theory and the way this ghastly phenomenon of war
23:32
can somehow be, if not controlled, at least ensure that
23:36
the innocent do not suffer. But as soon as you start talking
23:41
about the international rules based order being an
23:43
abstraction, you're effectively divorcing yourselves from the
23:47
framework of the law of armed conflict on the Geneva
23:49
Convention. And that is a very dangerous
23:52
slippery slope the Americans are going down by doing so.
23:55
Because obviously British troops are being drawn in.
23:58
They're flying defensive missions rather than offensive
24:01
missions. I don't know what the difference
24:03
in, in real terms is. If they're shooting at, you
24:07
know, it's Iranian missiles and potentially positions in the in
24:10
the future. What do you think?
24:14
What do you think the British position should be in the next
24:16
weeks? Well, this is the opportunity to
24:20
pick up the line that Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada
24:24
articulated so inspiringly in a way at Davos a couple of months
24:29
ago now when he talked about about the, yeah, the
24:34
international rules based order may be fractured.
24:37
He talked about the rupture with the United States and he talked
24:40
about the need for the middle powers to come together on a
24:45
sort of pragmatic, values based approach.
24:48
And the middle ploughs are involved here.
24:50
And this was the opportunity for Canada, for Germany, for
24:53
Australia, for France, for Italy, other European powers to
24:57
come together to protect their interests in the Gulf, to
25:02
protect and to support their Gulf allies, but not to get
25:05
involved in the prosecution of the war.
25:08
Now it's got much more complicated because if there are
25:10
Iranian drones flying against British bases in Cyprus, then
25:15
you get the whole principle of self defence comes in and there
25:20
is a right to self defence. And if self defence means
25:23
targeting the missile launchers from which those drones or
25:26
missiles are launched, well that is a complication.
25:29
But I would try and put as much Clearwater as possible between
25:34
that role of self defence, that mission of self defence and
25:38
engaging with America and Israel.
25:41
Because I said, I said earlier, at the end of the day, Trump's
25:44
going to walk away from this. And anybody who has worked
25:48
alongside and been part of that US Israeli coalition will be
25:52
left owning the problem. And there's going to be a
25:55
problem for generations to come as a consequence of this.
25:58
Do you do? You think, do you wonder what
26:00
they've learned from Iraq? No, clearly not, clearly not.
26:06
And that's the point I'm making again and again.
26:08
But yet again we see a war of choice.
26:11
No clear strategy, no understanding of the cultural
26:15
implication, no real effort, no effort to try and build any form
26:19
of civil society. Reach out to civil society, no
26:23
effort to protect the people. And, and, and this has and, and
26:27
and you know, you're your your previous guest who's left us now
26:30
talked about the threat Iraq, Iran has been posing.
26:33
And yes, it has been a pernicious, vile terrorist
26:37
state. But what is left at the end of
26:40
this could be 10 times worse as a consequence.
26:44
Well, and. Just to to echo that Davos
26:46
speech, I think I've been very disappointed to see the Canadian
26:50
government throw its support behind the United States in the
26:53
absence at this point of a direct threat to Canada.
26:57
As Sir Richard says, I think the UK is in a much tougher position
27:02
because of some of Iran's recent targeting, which by the way,
27:05
also very much violates international law to be
27:08
targeting countries that are not part of this or the
27:10
installations of countries that are not part of this attack on
27:15
Iran to begin with. And the UK absolutely does have
27:17
a right of self-defense against those attacks.
27:20
So this is precisely the concern that we have about the out the
27:26
ripple effects of the United States starting something that
27:29
is as you opened this podcast with it really has not shown any
27:35
path towards how this could finish.
27:37
I mean. In terms of how it could finish,
27:39
I suppose Donald Trump is again talking about how he wants to
27:42
choose the Iranian leadership in the future.
27:46
I mean, how can there be any sort of legal basis for that
27:49
there? Isn't certainly.
27:50
If there were to be a negotiated peace settlement that could
27:55
involve various prongs, it could involve United Nations
27:59
peacekeepers. We've seen what different
28:01
arrangements there are for post conflict societies.
28:04
But just one more indication of the lack of forethought here is
28:09
that we've been told that a number of folks the United
28:11
States had in mind as potential success successors, again, not
28:15
for the United States to choose, were also killed in the initial
28:18
wave of bombing. And so, like Sir Richard, I'm
28:21
extraordinarily concerned about what we're going to see
28:24
internally. And it is not for any other
28:27
country to determine what the Iranian regime will be.
28:30
It is for other countries to identify threats, to push back
28:34
with all lawful means against those threats, and to support
28:39
democracy in Iran again through lawful means, led by the people
28:43
who are, who are actually there and who are actually affected by
28:46
this regime's actions just. Finally, Sir Richard, can I ask
28:50
you what you make of the communications and the language
28:53
around this? I don't know whether you've seen
28:54
any of the Internet stuff that the White House is pushing out,
28:57
but clips of Hollywood films, lots of sort of, you know, gung
29:01
ho clips, you know, pictures of bombs to music, Hex F talking
29:07
about Iran being toast. Has all dignity gone out the
29:13
window? Yes.
29:14
It's tasteless in the extreme. The.
29:17
Callousness and and nonchalance with which President Trump has
29:20
discussed both US fatalities, past and future is also really
29:26
unprecedented, I think and and is very much part and parcel of
29:31
the Hollywood ification of what is a real war with real impacts.
29:36
Professor. Shimon Keitner, General Sir
29:39
Richard Sheriff, thank you very much indeed for joining us.
29:41
That's the forecast. Until next time, bye bye.