Latest / INSIGHT TODAY / 'This is a BANKRUPT ideology' National security expert

Transcript

'This is a BANKRUPT ideology' National security expert · INSIGHT TODAY

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome back to America now for something completely different. As
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: they used to say on Monty Python. I love that show.
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: Our dear friend Robert Greenway. He's not with the senior
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: vice president the American Global Strategies and former National Security
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: Council Senior Director Prince barchitect of the Abraham Accords, and
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: really a sharp guy in my friend Robert, the strait
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: of Horn Mooz, nuclear weapons, this and so forth. You know,
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: I have a question for you. I've read this book.
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: It's not an easy read, Islamic Government, written by the
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: Iolakomany right before he came back in the revolution to Iran.
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: How many people do you think in government have read
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: this book. I don't think anybody's read this book. From
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: what I'm listening to, this man believes God has put
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: him on a mission. This man believes that they must
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: conquer the world. This man makes it clear that Iran
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: is nothing but a launching point. And this man makes
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: it clear that he hates the United States more than
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: any other country in the face Europe because of our
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: success as a Western power. And he makes it clear
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: he's not going to make any deals. And I don't
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: think his successors are going to make any deals that
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: are going to hold unless they want them to hold
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: for a short period of time. As a matter of tactic,
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: What do you make of all this?
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: Always good to be with you, Mark, and you're right
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: to read our adversary's viewpoints in literature. It's striking how
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: often they are clear in their goals and objectives and
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: how often they're discounted. To answer your direct question, I
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: suspect very few are even aware, let alone familiar with
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: the content of his thoughts and the structure of our
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: adversary's government system if there's any consolation in it, and
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: it's small but significant, very few, I think in the
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: Iranian system are familiar with it, and those that are
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: are fairly confident. It's a bankrupt ideology. It had very
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: little support and purchase ultimately among clerics, and that's what
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: it's about the rule of clerics, the supremacy of jurisprudence
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: over the rest of the form of government, and the
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: theocracy in its ultimate form and manifestation. But very few
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: and around now have support for this bankrupt ieology, and
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: the government itself has very little credibility, and that ultimately
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: will probably lead to the collapse of the regime. It's
• 2:14
  Speaker 2: just difficult to predict when and what specific circumstances.
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: The collapse of the regime. Are we trying to collapse
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: the regime?
• 2:23
  Speaker 2: I don't think the president's express intent is to bring
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: about collapse, but I think his goal is to put
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: them in a position in which they're no longer able
• 2:30
  Speaker 2: to threaten our interest our vital interests, nor those of
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: our partners and allies, including freedom of navigation and the
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: stability of global energy markets. And that was consistent in
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: the first administration. So I think that he is content
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: with ensuring they no longer have the means and the opportunity,
• 2:45
  Speaker 2: recognizing they'll always have the motive in the end. I
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: don't think he seeks to push them to the point
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: of collapse and regime change, but ultimately I think that
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: train is in motion, and I suspect that they may
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: not survive the transition in the next two years.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: Now, my question to you is this, if that's not
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: our goal, but you think that may happen anyway in
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: the next two years, if you were in charge, would
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: you arm the Iranian people? I mean, that's the Reagan
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: doctor and it had an enormously positive impact for the
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: free world in our country. What would you do? You
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: would just do what we're doing and then cut a
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: deal in the Strait and nukes and get out and
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: assume that they'll collapse. What would you do?
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: I think it makes sense to confront the regime in
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: Tehran with as many dilemmas as possible. The goal should
• 3:34
  Speaker 2: be to deny them the material capacity to threaten US,
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: to make sure that they no longer a missile program,
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: the umbrella of which provided them the ability to develop
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: a nuclear program, and both of which of course intersect
• 3:46
  Speaker 2: at intercontinental ballistic missiles. They should also be denied the
• 3:49
  Speaker 2: ability to leverage their surrogates and proxies like Isbella or
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: the Huthis in Yemen or the Hostel Shabi in Iraq.
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: But ultimately, I think the dilemma of arming Iranian factions
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: that are opposed to the government is logical, and in
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: the end of the day, will probably be required to
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: present the government in Tehran with an irresistible force that
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: which they cannot reconcile. Now, I think that that is
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: a difficult proposition. The President's been reluctant to do it,
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: but I think he's entertained the idea, I would counsel
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: that it merits the consideration, and I would think that
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: it's actually a very easy thing to do, and I
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: think we could also mitigate the associated risk that many
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: are concerned with.
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I know you think. I think you're right.
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: I mean, we've done it before, and we were up
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: against the Soviet Union, with all due respect to others
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: out there, that was a tougher, tougher enemy than this enemy.
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: People need to remember how powerful that military was, how
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: long that Soviet Union was in existence, the resources that
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: had had, the satellites that it had, and the Reagan
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: doctrine was victory victory, not deton victory. And you're right,
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: it didn't happen immediately, just like this may not happen immediately.
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: But there are buttons. Again, you're right, in my view,
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: there are buttons you can push to start the process.
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: But one of them is arming the people who are resisting,
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: who want to rise up, who want to overthrow. I mean,
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: tens of thousands of them were murdered when they were
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: just out there with their fists and so forth, and
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: so on. We'll be right back.
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: Be sure to like and subscribe for all the Fox
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: in his latest on YouTube, and catch full shows streaming
• 5:29
  Speaker 2: now on Fox one