Latest / Beyond the Summit with Amir Golshani / Iran War Is Entering a Point of No Return | Prof. Robert Pape
Transcript
- Amir Golshani: Professor Pape, it's an honor to have you on Beyond the Summit. Prof Robert Pape: I am glad to be here. Thank you, Amir, for having me and also the great audience you have. Thank you for listening. Amir Golshani: I appreciate that. You have spent decades studying something most people only see in headlines. How wars actually unfold, how they escalate, and why even the most powerful states often struggle to control the outcomes they initiate. From air power and coercion to suicide terrorism, and now the dynamics of escalation. Your work has consistently challenged what we think we know about power, strategy, and conflict. Right now, with tensions rising between Iran, the United States, and Israel, your insights feel more relevant than ever. Prof Robert Pape: Thank you very much. Thank you. Amir Golshani: One theme that runs through your work is that what looks powerful on the surface often fails strategically. What is it that policymakers consistently misunderstand about power? Prof Robert Pape: So they consistently misunderstand, Amir, that power doesn't equal control in all circumstances. So with great power comes just the reality of short-term success, which is true with great power. Typically, you get a short-term success, but ⁓ you have an illusion of control. And that your tactical success that you can definitely predict it's going to happen. The bomb's going to hit the target, kill the leader leads to the end of the problem. often that tactical success, but also plus the illusion of control leads the leader of the strong power to ⁓ the opponent, This is happening in this case. I'll talk about that in a moment. I just want to point out though, cause you asked such an excellent question to begin with, which is this happened to Germany before world war one. This happened to the Clinton administration when it dealt with Kosovo. This is not something unique to president Trump. It is affecting president Trump and, but, and it may be the most consequential of the air power ⁓ traps we've ever seen. But it is a dynamic that has trapped strong powers before and the reason is because the strong power is actually strong It's it's it's a real thing but that strength leads to reality of tactical success the bombs can hit the target that will actually happen and has happened in this case The bombs will kill the leader, but what I study is how the military action affects politics. So that is what's left off here. Whereas with the strong leader, they're thinking, I control the escalation, meaning I control the politics of the situation. And that is the true failure and underestimation. It's not underestimating the accuracy of a bomb. That's not what's Amir Golshani: Right. Absolutely. Prof Robert Pape: here is the hyper accuracy of the bomb, the reality of the hyper accuracy of the bomb is leading to the false sense of political control. when I kill the leader, they will certainly not have somebody more extreme take over. You heard President Trump three days after the war, he was asked, what's the worst case scenario? this was three after the war. Oh, we'll get somebody maybe just as bad as the Supreme leader. No, this is a much worse government than the Supreme leader. And that's the piece of evidence for my, my explanation here that, that he was captivated not just by the tactical idea of the bombs, but the idea that that led to political control. And the truth is he's losing political control hour by hour, day by day. Amir Golshani: Absolutely very. Prof Robert Pape: Who's gaining the control? Iran. That's the real trap here that's sucking us into what may be a major ground engagement. Amir Golshani: Very well said, that gap between tactical success that you mentioned and a strategic failure feels very relevant right now. You have described the current situation in Iran escalation trap. For someone watching this in real time, where are we right now on that ladder? that gap between tactical success that you mentioned and a strategic failure feels very relevant right now. You have described the current situation in Iran escalation trap. Prof Robert Pape: We are not heading to a negotiated settlement. I wish we were on a path of peace. We have some talks on and off, but they are collapsing. We are heading to, we are stuck in the escalation trap. This has stages, stage one, stage two, stage three. I published the stages we would go through in this war three days before the first bomb fell. It's on my sub stack called the escalation trap. can go to there about thousand word articles. This is not just a few tweets. I lay them out in detail. And what I said is when the bombs fell and I was 90 % confident the bombs would fall. Cause I saw the air armada being built and I have a lot of experience with having studied these problems for 30 years, taught for the U S air force. ⁓ it modeled the bombing of Iran for 20 years. So. I see it coming and stage one is the bombs will hit the target. They will kill leader likely. I said the Supreme Leader is like the perfect target here. I mean, tactically. the bombs would actually 90 plus percent hit. Well, that is exactly what happened on February 28, Saturday morning here. I also said this would lead to strategic failure. You would not get the enriched uranium ⁓ and regime would end up hardening that change that was going to occur would be negative regime change. I said there you have positive regime change, the regime changes toward America and Israel, or negative regime change. And I said, this is what we were heading toward. And it's because, and then I wrote a whole paper on this in the substack to really explain the dynamics here, is that for a hundred years, states have been trying to topple regimes with error power alone. It has never worked in a hundred years. That's a stunning statistic. Never in like 40 of them, 40. And that's what's in my book, Bombing to Win. How could that be? It's because when the bombs hit the target as they did, they change politics inside of the country to the disadvantage of the attacker. And that's what happens over and over and over again in these cases. The new leaders that come in. Amir Golshani: Right. Prof Robert Pape: ⁓ here are, harder, they're tougher, they're more aggressive, they're younger, they're angry, they want payback. And if they don't ⁓ have position, they typically get a bullet in the back of the head. They get a Brutus problem because you've, this is the whole dynamic that has changed here. And literally Intel could not pick it up before because it hadn't happened yet, but this is what happens in history. It happened in this case. then I said you would get horizontal escalation. So that I published in Foreign Affairs. And the horizontal escalation was the precision drones. They have the mines. They're basically attacking the GCC. not just ⁓ Israel. And they're trying to do is fracture the coalition against them politically. That's the goal here that they've been unleashing and also seize Hormuz. Kormos is not just another piece of territory. This is 20 % of the world's oil we're talking about. America only has 16 % of world oil production. Iran now is more of an oil hegemon than America. It's the biggest oil hegemon in the world, bigger than Russia. So just think about this for a moment and also imagine. If Iran starts to work with Russia, Iran has now 20 % of the world's oil. Russia has 11 % of the world's oil. Man, what a lot. think about the pot, the geopolitics of what's coming down the road. So I said, this would be not just a, a failed bombing. get a more dangerous, more powerful Iran. You're actually building super hegemon here. Amir Golshani: Absolutely. Prof Robert Pape: with nuclear capable nuclear capability. This is why don't do it. I said, it's not just, yeah, we'll try it. And then it'll be, well, you know, it won't be so bad. No, I was been very strong. And that's because I've modeled this here for so long that this was all that we're just going through the natural progression of this. And now we're pulling into what do you do now? Are you going to just leave Iran with 20 % of the world's oil? Maybe that combination with Russia, just laid out for you. ⁓ Iran then has the nuclear material still. Okay. So it's got 50, it's making now literally a billion and a half bucks every two weeks or so that's $50 billion a year that it's coming into these coffers and, and why wouldn't that want to just keep going? It's not going to hand this back. So you're facing now the prospect and this is what's gotta be really driving president Trump nuts. Of if Trump just walks away, then you're leaving Iran as a super hegemon of oil and also nuclear capable. And what will Iran do? It'll want to topple Saudi Arabia. It's going to want to topple the UAE. It's not just going to say, ⁓ we're going to go have a conference and be nice with you after you try to topple us. No, this is now existential politics of the first order, you see. So this is where I called it an escalation trap. Amir Golshani: Right. Prof Robert Pape: So you might think you have control. You might think you can get in and out and have all these off ramps. President Trump talked about, well, notice he's not talking about the off ramps anymore. He's learned that he's in a trap. And I think if he had an off ramp, he would have taken about three weeks ago. Amir Golshani: We have clearly moved past the opening phase, as you mentioned, and it feels like we are now at the tail end of retaliation, if not already beyond it. With the possibility of ground forces coming in, is this the moment where the escalation trap really locks in? Prof Robert Pape: Yes, this is the lock-in, I call it. And it's lock-in, another way to put it is, it's the real red line. What this red line represents of the beginning of the ground operations, and it doesn't really matter if it's 5,000 Marines or 1,000 paratroopers, I'll explain why in a moment, either of those scenarios and any of the different territorial objectives, this is crossing into stage three. And stage three is the... the threshold where the damage goes from being disruption, where it's easily reversible. So Iran, you might think, well, it could let the ships through to permanent damage or long-term damage where the, you're seeing this in Qatar right now with 17 % of the, that's just the beginning here though. As this escalates, as we cross into phase, phase three, you will naturally see a wider escalation, likely much more destruction of oil and gas, and I mean the actual facilities. President Trump's already talking about attacking electric power. This is one of the things I, when I worked for the Air Force, I know quite a bit about this. It may well be ⁓ here that you're not going to just knock out electric power in Iran for ⁓ day or two, cause a burnout. You might be trying to knock it out for weeks and weeks to somehow have an effect on the. ⁓ The military in Iran as it's lack gonna lash back against the ground operation. We're going to do so This is about preparing for stage three and but it leaves lasting damage and when you attack the electric power That means there's no electric power for those hospitals for the dialysis people are gonna die in the next few weeks because of that There's no electric power to do heart surgeries. There's no electric power to do emergency surgeries here So you're gonna have many people die here inside of Iran. And that's just the way it is when you attack electric power. And who will have the first call on electric power? The military. So you got to take it down all the way just about to have any chance of impacting the military. And even then the military will have first ⁓ dibs on power. And then somebody will say, ⁓ well, then they'll blame the civilians will blame their own military. No, they won't. They're always blame the attacker. This is always the case. There's never a case in history where attackers always say ⁓ should blame their own government. And I'm sure Trump will say that. It's not going to apply because it's Trump who will take out the electric power. Everybody will know that. So these are the permanence of this. Now there's one more point here I want to make about the permanent damage, which is permanent military casualties, deaths, killed in action. Right now we have 13 dead American troops. That's the same number that died in the exit from Afghanistan. 13. If this goes forward, any of those options here, those numbers are almost surely going to go up and by quite a bit because the paratroop operation, the amphibious operation, these are by far the most dangerous military operations there are. There's no more danger. If you think going in Amir Golshani: Right. Prof Robert Pape: the paratroop operation, the amphibious operation, these are by far the most dangerous military operations there are. There's no more danger. assassinating Ben Laden is dangerous. Nowhere near as dangerous as taking the beach here and with these forces. This is much, much, much more dangerous here. And it has been proven in history. Now, the only way it wouldn't be dangerous would be if Iran didn't resist. But Iran just killed 20,000 30,000 of its own people in January. I find it hard to believe they're not itching to kill every American they can. And I find it hard to believe that even on, let's take Karg Island. Iran just killed 20,000 30,000 of its own people in January. I find it hard to believe they're not itching to kill every American they can. Khark Island, that thousand paratroopers, they may take the airport in Khark Island, but they're only gonna have supplies, and I mean, ammo, food, water for about three days. gonna happen to them? So let's say 50 of them die, 100 die to take the airport. Well, now you got three days. Are we just gonna leave those 900 there and they run out of ammo, and water? If we do leave them there, even... 300 people, 300 Iranians, there's 20,000 on the island, Iranians, even just 300 of them, they'd kill them all. So you really have a major problem on your hands here once you put those paratroopers in. So this idea that this is just limited, it's not that big a deal, it would only be small, and if it got bloody, we would give it up. You know, once you're in, in Vietnam, the phrase was in for a dime, in for a dollar, and this is why. Because you're really asking the Americans, those 39 % who support this war, they're going to harden their support when those boys and girls die. When those troops die for them, those 39 % are going to say, that group died for me. And they're not going to want to abandon those troops here because of that. This is what sucks us forward. Amir Golshani: Yeah. Yeah, consequence Right consequences for both sides for the region and for global economy would be horrendous. Absolutely So professor Pape if we zoom out beyond the battlefield, where do you place Russia and China in all of this? What do they gain? What do they risk and how far are they actually willing to go in supporting Iran if this escalates further? Prof Robert Pape: Well, they're the huge geopolitical winners here besides Iran. There are three winners here by far. then America and Israel are by far the biggest losers. One is Iran, and I mean the ⁓ revolutionary, new government is effectively the Revolutionary Guard. So what we've just done ⁓ is taken a mix of hawks and doves, killed all the doves essentially, and we've put in the ⁓ Revolutionary they're the huge geopolitical winners here besides Iran. There are three winners here by far. And America and Israel are by far the biggest losers. So it is, it's literally the worst possible government you could possibly imagine. And that's the folks who fought the Iran-Iraq war and we're perfectly happy to let 600,000 Iranians die, including all those kids to, you know, do as minesweepers here. So this is a very, very, very ruthless government, ⁓ they've won ⁓ But also ⁓ Russia and China are coming out ahead. Why Russia? Because it's... price of oil, what it gets for a barrel of oil. It was having to cut deals with China where it would sell China oil and Russia would make it, but it was only making about 25, 30 bucks a barrel of oil. Now it's getting full freight. Now it's getting the $100, $110 price for the oil. And so its money in its coffers has tripled or quadrupled as a result of this. here and its influence has gone up more because Russia still has intel that it can give to Iran to help Iran target those ships that are going to bring the Marines. I'm not saying Russia will definitely do that, but they certainly have the capability to do that. China, I was in China for two weeks during the bombing of Fordow and I spent time visiting all the advanced industries. So I some idea of how they're thinking about this. Russia still has intel that it can give to Iran to help Iran target those ships that are going to bring the Marines. I'm not saying Russia will definitely do that, but they certainly have the capability to do that. And their bottom line is, ⁓ sure, maybe there'll be some disruption on the price of oil. But what people don't necessarily know about China is only a tiny fraction of their energy comes from oil. They get almost all their energy. mean, almost all 80 % of it comes not from oil. It comes from electric power. It comes from coal. It comes from nuclear power. So and the reason is because they've always been vulnerable to an oil shock. And so they've been working on diminishing their dependency on oil for some time. So yeah, there's a little bit of this and that with the oil, but they told me that they really don't care about that. They're going to have not even going to stop at all in their AI revolution. This will not hurt them. They are going to become number one. This is going to help China become number one, not slow it down. So this whole idea that somehow this was the way to really hurt the Chinese economy. I guess these folks just haven't been to China. I don't really get it how these so-called people could be saying this, but there's nowhere near the reality of that. So what you're going to see then is the possibility of a new balance of power where it's a new oil hegemon in the world of Iran, allied tightly with Russia and all its oil and then China and all its AI. So imagine now, You have China with all its AI, and now you have Iran, 20 % of the world's oil, all that nuclear capability, now fusing with AI. This is going to change the balance of global politics. And Israel's big loser here. America, big loser here. Anybody who thought the pro-democracy movement here, look, I... I am all pro-democracy, absolutely. Here, this was never going to happen this way. This was always going to hurt the pro-democracy movement big time. 20 to 30,000 of them are already dead. This is just a nightmare, a disaster on every dimension. Amir Golshani: If we follow your framework, what do phase three, four, you briefly mentioned phase three, phase four and phase five actually look like here and how close are we to crossing to the higher risk phases? Prof Robert Pape: ⁓ Yeah, I will talk a little bit about phase four. I'm going to on April 4th have another live briefing where I'll talk more about this. I'll just say a little bit about it now. I'm not going to talk about phase five because it really does matter whether we cross phase three. So I'm not here to play poly market. I'm not playing the markets ⁓ just to be upfront. I sold all my stuff in the market here when we bombed Fordow. ⁓ Okay, I you know, so I'm not trying to game any of that I just don't do that stuff now what I mean by by phase four is so you Imagine that as we go forward with these ground operations you imagine the stickiness of the ground operations I'm describing you get this war of attrition going on for months. Well, this is when my work on suicide terrorism in I'm one of the world's leaders in studying suicide terrorism multiple books on the subject first complete database of world global suicide attacks. I'm the one who put all that together. And so the biggest risk factor are ground forces, the foreign ground forces on territory, the terrorist prize. And then takes usually doesn't work like a light switch. So we say, well, we already getting terrorism and it's not so bad. Yeah. Well, this is not the terrorism I'm talking about. This would be another level ⁓ of and we need to ⁓ recognize that ⁓ Trump has ⁓ put ⁓ ice and now he's talking about the National Guard going to our airports here is ⁓ those people in those TSA lines They this is just ⁓ you know soft target we would say of the first order ⁓ and I think that probably our government is already they're not talking about But I think they're already aware because a lot of folks have read Pape and they would have, so I've spent a lot of time on this with suicide terrorism. And so this is the very dangerous world we're moving into. ⁓ when we ⁓ into Iraq, I predict, and I was the only terrorism expert to predict, we touch off the largest suicide terrorist campaign of modern times here. That happen. And it took 15 ⁓ years to stop Why? Because it led to the rise of AQI. It led to those London suicide bombs, all those international suicide attacks, and then it led to ISIS. All of that happened because of those ground operations in March 2003. And it didn't get really behind us until January 2018. That's a long way to go. Amir Golshani: So this is the dangerous zone, know, ground forces on the Prof Robert Pape: It is the real red line. And that's why Amir, I'm really focusing on that red line. And then I'll talk more about a layout on the live briefing. I'll show some of the data on every, the phase four stuff from my work. I'll do all that, but I'm not going to do that right now this second because we really need to focus here. I mean, it's all well and good and interesting, but it will become not just like a graduate seminar. It'll become like absolutely pivotal. Amir Golshani: Fantastic. Prof Robert Pape: if we cross into stage three. Amir Golshani: There is one critical questions regarding that escalation ladder at the extreme end of escalation. How seriously should we think about the risk of something like nuclear use, especially from Israel? What would you have to happen? Prof Robert Pape: Well, I'll talk more about things that would be like phase five. For the moment, the key thing to say here is that what you are seeing with the nuclear material, this thousand pounds of 60%, the 10,000 pounds of 5 and 20 % that is now likely dispersing inside of Iran, well, it can also disperse outside of Iran. Going outside of Iran can be dispersed not you don't have to wait inform it into a nuclear weapon You can this stuff is extremely radioactive. This is one of the big dangers for sending our troops in I mean, ⁓ my goodness gracious That's basically a suicide mission if there's any leakage and any of those canisters because of the bombing They're not coming back from that. Okay, so this is very very very dangerous here. So this is radioactive of the first order that means it's material that could be fashioned into radiological bombs, where it's not a nuclear bomb, Hiroshima, but it is basically radiological pollution that blows up. And that would say go off, you could imagine, and say Tel Aviv. Well, that would then affect city blocks in Tel Aviv. even if you ⁓ imagine that ⁓ Iran would try to secret in like three or four of those and only one went off. That's enough to probably make people evacuate Tel Aviv. And they're not just going to go and sit on the outskirts. When I'm talking about evacuation, I mean come to the United States. Amir Golshani: So when I ask about use of nuke, I really meant, you so from Israeli side, what would Prof Robert Pape: No, I understand. No, understand, Amir. And I'm going to resist this right now. And I understand that people are already talking about it But again, I don't do crystal balls. I'm doing risk assessment. And trying to focus. I'm not just commenting. I am us on the escalation dynamics and the stages. ⁓ And I'm you frameworks. I'm giving you language. And people are using my tactical success, strategic failure language, not just me anymore, that wasn't true a few weeks ago. And I'm gonna really work on this and I'm gonna be disciplined. And I hope, Amir, we don't have to have that conversation, because if you got Professor Pape talking about it, this isn't just like curiosity. Amir Golshani: No, no, I appreciate that. There is something from Iranian perspective, especially if we step back from the strategy and look at what's actually happening inside Iran. It didn't start with this war. For years, we have seen waves of protests, millions of people asking for very basic things, a normal life, dignity, economic stability, freedom, and many of them were brutally suppressed. So. Prof Robert Pape: Yes, please. Yeah, please. Yes, please. Yeah, please. Amir Golshani: if we step back from the strategy and look at what's actually happening inside Iran. ⁓ It didn't start with this war. For years, we have seen of protests, millions of people asking for very basic things, a normal life, dignity, economic stability, freedom, and many of them were brutally suppressed. So. Prof Robert Pape: Yes. Yes. Amir Golshani: Even before this war, this situation wasn't sustainable. Now, after a month of war, destruction, economic pressure, daily life getting harder, this feels even more fragile from everything you ever studied about conflict and regime survival. How do you actually see this evolving? Even before this war, this situation wasn't sustainable. Now, after a month of war, destruction, economic pressure, daily life getting harder, this feels even more fragile from everything you ever studied about conflict and regime survival. How do you actually see this evolving? Prof Robert Pape: This is what happens when the, when it. I see it becoming a garrison state. So what's as bad as it has been, Amir, and believe me, I have nothing but sympathy here, but let me also, a little bit of history. So when Clinton started to bomb Serbia ⁓ and to take out the Milosevic regime in March 99, I was a professor at Dartmouth and I had lots of ⁓ people from who contacted me. and said how wonderful it was President Clinton was bombing Milosevic because how bad he was. Very similar to what you're describing. Okay? And I told them, do your best to protect your families because bad things are almost surely coming your way. And that is then those very same people who were then kicked out and expelled and cleansed and 3,000 of them killed. in just a few weeks and there was nothing no calvary came to their rescue you see what i mean so so is i i really hear how bad it was i understand that that you know from especially the diaspora they they have so much emotional tie and they're seeing the pain so much in real time they have communication and i know i get copies of it some of my email here but that doesn't mean ⁓ the bombing is always just gonna help. In fact, it's almost always the opposite, Amir. And there's no reason they would know that. They're civilians. They're moms and dads. They go to work. Okay, this is... ⁓ Amir Golshani: So then the real question is, what does a real path to change look like in case like Iran? If military pressure is clearly not enough, then what is it in your opinion? the real question is, what does a real path to change look like in case like Iran? ⁓ If pressure is clearly not enough, then what is it in your opinion? Prof Robert Pape: Well, we were, I think, had we been able to resist sticking our nose in it here, and I don't just mean with the bombing. I think that when President Trump in the middle of January encouraged the protesters and said, we've got your back, that was a mistake. And it's a mistake because it encouraged those protesters. 20 to 30,000 of them were slaughtered. America did not have their back. We didn't go in. The cavalry didn't arrive and President Trump just brushed it off. And this then sent really horrible signals to everybody inside of Iran. And so I think we should have just simply a mere stayed out. Now to get back to that situation. ⁓ my goodness gracious. We're now on the cusp of a huge war that's going to be global consequences, not just for the people of Iran. your probably set back the pro-democracy movement five or 10 years anyway. This hasn't just been set back by a day or two. big part of the reason is ⁓ now have this garrison state, the nationalism that is infused here, it's gonna get closer to the Iran-Iraq war. You're gonna get, ⁓ if don't go and fight here against the Americans, there will be shots. And ⁓ if go and fight, they might be put on suicide missions. So you're really moving to the Iran-Iraq war mindset here. This is gonna be, I think, just a real, it's unbelievably tragic, which is why I fought so hard, Amir, to... Amir Golshani: At this point, any plausible solution for that? Prof Robert Pape: Well, the one solution still is, and I've articulated this before and I'm glad to do it for your group here, is that there's only two ways to settle this. Battlefield negotiation. Battlefield negotiation. No other real way to do this. ⁓ don't think the regime will, maybe there's some 5 % chance it will some way magically disappear. But I think it's obviously unlikely. What would a negotiated settlement look like? Well, I've said, there's only two to settle this. Battlefield negotiation. Battlefield negotiation. No other real way to do this. ⁓ I don't think the regime will, maybe there's some 5 % chance it will some way magically disappear. from the beginning, you'd have to give up the sanctions and Scott Besson has done that. But I said even more though, you'd have to militarily contain Israel because this war isn't just about America and Iran, it's Israel and Iran and Israel's got a lot of power here to go and wreck Iran over and over and over again. So unless you militarily contain Israel, what have you really done here? you can't have it just paper promises, no one's gonna believe in Netanyahu ⁓ Right? So what this would mean is you would have to have an enforceable military containment of Israel. and this is going to mean something like Israel would have to join the nonproliferation treaty. That would mean except on-site inspection. So tit for tat on-site inspection at Esfahan on-site inspection ⁓ ⁓ Demona. And then it would have to not attack or lose its aid from the United States. And that is what we're talking about here. Now, that's a pretty big price here. I'm not I want Israel to go away. I'm not anti-Israel. I'm just saying you asked me the question. I'm giving you the actual answer. And this is something that if there's any president who could do this, much like Nixon went to China, it would be Trump with Israel. And it's because he's Trump. ⁓ Trump is the big supporter of Israel. But the bottom line here is the idea that you're going to get these sucker moves or you know, we're just going to kind of talk them into it and we're just going to send JD Vance over. No, this is not going to work. And I tried to explain that on my sub stack. These are not realistic here because what they are is expecting Iran to bail us out. Iran will take advantage of those negotiations. They're not likely to use them to bail us out. Amir Golshani: Professor, last thing, if you had to give one clear message to policymakers right now, something they must understand before making the next move, what would it be if there is someone listening? something must understand before making the next move, what would it be if there is someone listening? Prof Robert Pape: It is the number one move. The number one thing to hear is if we go into phase three ⁓ bond prices are going to go up ⁓ that $40 trillion in debt is going to come and that will be the shoe that will really, ⁓ wreck ⁓ world, the American economy, the world economy. They need to understand. So that means this deal just as ⁓ I'm glad you asked about the deal here. It is I'm glad asked about the deal here. As bad as that is for America, as bad as that is for President Trump, it's possibly recoverable. You can possibly recover from that. If you go and go across the line into phase three, that red line is unrecoverable territory now. Trump's presidency may be unrecoverable. The American economy may be unrecoverable. The global economy ⁓ may unrecoverable. As bad as that is for America, as bad as that is for President Trump, it's possibly recoverable. You can possibly recover from that. If you go and go across the line into phase three, that red line is unrecoverable territory now. Trump's presidency may be unrecoverable. The American economy may be unrecoverable. The global economy ⁓ may unrecoverable. The war of attrition may be unstoppable. The war of attrition may be unstoppable. That's what I'm trying to explain. And so this really is that there's no other stronger thing to explain than the importance of into stage three. for having me. Amir Golshani: Professor Pape, this was incredibly insightful. Thank you for joining us on Beyond the Summit. Prof Robert Pape: Thank you so much, and I look forward to coming again when we can. Thank you very much. Bye bye. Amir Golshani: Thank you, appreciate