168. Why Trump Can't Win This War Alone

Ving firar 70 år av resor, och det gör vi med massor av erbjudanden som är omöjliga att motstå. Bästa jubileumserbjudanden på ving.se. De bästa resorna försvinner först. Hello and welcome to the Restays Politics US. I am Katy Kaye. Anthony is swanning around California. So today I am joined by veteran diplomat Richard Haas who has worked in four American administrations.

Including advising both presidents Bush on their forays into the Middle East. So I'm very excited to hear what you have to say about that, Richard. Uh, President Emeritus for the Council on Foreign Relations, author of Substack. Home and away. The list of titles goes on, Richard, have I got them right? Have I done enough of a sales job? I think more than enough.

The embarrassment of riches. Anyway, we're very lucky to have Richard. Uh thank you for joining us today. We're gonna talk about obviously the latest on the Iran War. And what I wanted to focus on was what the options are for the president. Uh, Anthony and I have actually been hearing some pretty interesting things from the White House about splits in the White House that are emerging.

uh and we can talk about that. And then in the second half of the programme we are going to talk about how allies are responding, or perhaps not responding, to President Trump's calls for help. So

Let's start uh with the options that of what are we now early on in the third week of this campaign, I don't know, it seems to me like the president's in a really bad mood. He came back from Mar-a-Lago and spent twenty minutes berating the press. I mean, he berates the press often, but this was really berating the press, saying that, you know, some of them are obnoxious and they're peddling around talking points. And then

I picked this up from Politico. I did not count every word myself. But overnight last night, he put up more than sixteen hundred words across multiple posts on Truth Social railing against. The Supreme Court, Jerome Powell, John Roberts, Um Jack Smith. He was like on a spree of Fury, it felt like overnight. So I think we wake up this morning with the president in a bad mood, and I'm wondering why you think that might be, Richard.

He was on a as you said, a spree of fury, if you will, epic fury. Very good. Very good. No, look, it's inconceivable when he and those around him, Caddy, were planning this. that they said to themselves, in seventeen or so days, this is gonna be where we are. They uh were unprepared, if you will, for what they launched. Uh if Shakespeare could have joined us today, uh unfortunately he couldn't. Clearly your booker's a failure yet again.

Antony likes to have seances with historical figures. We had Rumsfeld on the programme the other day, so you never know. The bard might join us later. Finally, I I mentioned Rumsfeld in a conversation earlier today already. Stuff happens. And uh but in Shakespeare's case Let he Trump let loose the dogs of war.

And he did based upon all sorts of optimism, all sorts of assumptions. I think particularly after Venezuela, he was feeling uh a little bit like a master of the universe and when he could employ the US military, it would be quick and easy and successful and all that. And here we are two and a half weeks later.

And suddenly so much of his uh presidency I mean I don't know how you feel about it, but I'm struck if you look at Trump the candidate, Trump the long term citizen who was wary of big foreign policy entanglements You look at his own national security strategy, and suddenly we are doing something that is at odds

with the man and almost everything associated with him. So given that we got to where we are and we and none of us really know the reasons because we haven't had a clear reason, as we've spoken about on the podcast many times, for what's happening, it's interesting to look now

At what his options are. And I had an interesting conversation with an intelligence, a former s very senior intelligence official, who said to me that really Donald Trump's best chance of pulling back and and legitimately calling this some kind of a win, was about ten days ago. And that now it's got much harder for him to do that because the Iranians, as everyone has been saying, have a voice in this

as well. And that people in the White House, I am told, by somebody fairly close to the president, were surprised that the Iranians were able to shut the Straits of Horn Moose, whatever the sort of MAGA world is saying, they were taken by surprise by the intensity of the Iranian drones in particular. uh and that the impact that those a that's having on the Straits. So given that we're in the moment in the position where the Straits are shut, the bombing campaign is continuing.

The global markets don't like this.

Energy prices are rising. What are his options and what are the time frames, do you think? You describe it kind of like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Uh you know, they're in a situation again. They hadn't uh planned on look. There's obviously continuing the war.

Is is the the most basic option. And that looks like what? Like continuing the war to get rid of all of the nuclear material, continuing the war to get rid of all of the missiles, continuing the war with the aim of doing what? Great question. Because you're up against diminishing returns.

Imagine Iran started the war with a couple of thousand ballistic missiles, presumably now they're down to maybe ten or twenty percent. So it's diminishing returns. You've destroyed a lot of their drones, but you can't get all of them. You destroyed their navy, but but so what? You don't want to really attack more than nuclear. That's not going to help you deal with uh that.

the last thing you want to do is also release, you know, all sorts of uh contaminated uh radioactive uh particles or gas or what have you. So you would continue the war if somehow you thought you could force capitulation. Seems wildly unlikely. One of the areas they've clearly got the Iranians wrong.

is that pressure leads them to capitulate. I mean that there was that line you probably remember from Steve Whitkop, the negotiator, saying, like, why aren't they capitulating? Well, that's not what they do. This is a revolution. You and I went through it seventy nine. where it was anti Zionist and anti American. So they're they're not gonna uh capitulate. I also see no evidence as yet it's gonna trigger regime change.

You could say to yourself, let's continue the war because we'll bring about massive defections from the security services. So far at least it hasn't happened. We've seen uh a new Ayatollah presumably come in, but in any case the security forces seem pretty uh intact. So I actually think the arguments for continuing the the the war get get weak. It's more that you don't wanna stop the war

without having achieved something. But it's harder to make the positive case for going. I mean, disagree with me if you will. Look, he's got it's in a way it's a binary choice. Do you escalate or de escalate? And we can get into the kind of splits that are in the White House at the moment. The biggest problem that they are waking up to every day is what to do

about the Straits of Hormuz. And my understanding is that They are thinking that they really can't afford for these straits to be shut more than three more weeks. So whichever of the options they choose, whether they carry on bombing, whether they go back to the negotiating table, uh, they've gotta try to resolve that they have a time crunch on their hands. They're sort of time limited, if you like.

because after that you start having all sorts of problems with the domestic public around oil, but it's not just oil, one of the things that was pointed out to me over the weekend is that there's a critical emergency looming on the supply of helium, which is the by product of liquid natural gas.

and helium is essential for semiconductors and chips and a third of the world supply comes from Qatar, and they're very worried that if they have the straight shut for more than three more weeks they've got a real uh supply chain crunch on that side as well. So it's it's not, as we've said before, it's not just oil. There's a whole load of things, uh, helium being one of them, that are the that are putting a time pressure on the administration. So the case for escalating

Is you wanna be able to claim a victory and that you don't want to de-escalate. I mean, it seems to me almost that at the moment the White House is thinking The case for escalating is that it's not de escalating. The case for escalating is that you thought it might bring about capitulation, so then you could dictate the terms, if you will, of the post war environment, or that you think you would trigger regime change.

I don't think either's in the cards right now. So I don't think there's a good case for escalating. And there's one other downside besides what you were talking about, the downside of a long war with all the consequences for the uh economy. would be the chance of war widening. And by that I mean we've as bad as things have been over the last two and a half weeks, imagine if the Iranians unleashed a massive uh attack on say Saudi oil installations or the UAE or gutter.

or Kuwait. So bad situations can get worse. That's the history of the Middle East. So I think part of the danger in our escalating is whether Iran, however eek weakened it is, through what missiles or drones they have left could actually escalate as well. So bad situations could get worse. One of the things I think the President always likes to do and

Anthony and I are doing this uh series for our founding members on the kind of Trump early years, Trump in the eighties and Trump in the nineties. And I know you advised Donald Trump in twenty sixteen on foreign policy when he first ran for president. But one of the things we found from that founding members. uh series, and I think is very relevant today, is how Trump hates to

admit defeat. I mean it's j that's anathema to him. So I guess part of his calculation, and you know him, Richard, must be how could he de-escalate and claim victory. What what does he need? If it's not if you're if you're right that he's not at this point gonna get regime change, and I think he realizes that because he stopped mentioning it. What is the off road look like to him that is

acceptable not just economically and politically, but in terms of kind of get us back in Donald Trump's brain. Let's uh wander around there for a little bit if you'd like to. What is it that's kind of psychologically acceptable given what we know about Donald Trump? Well, I mean, he wants to be able to claim uh victory, mission accomplished. So I think that points to two things at this point.

One is the reopening of the Straits. Uh twenty percent of the world's oil, close to that amount of the world's gas flows through it. So he's gotta get the straits open. And second of all he's gotta have a s some sort of resolution. of the nuclear issue. And even though the nuclear issue was not s has not been central to the military activities of the war.

uh either by the United States or Israel, we can't go to a situation where there's no ceiling on Iran's uh nuclear activities. So he's gotta bring the war to an end, but he's gotta deal with those two issues. uh the straits and the nuclear. And otherwise it's going to be awfully hard for him uh to claim that this war left the United States better off than it did. From your time advising him

W what do you think he's going through at the moment? What do you think he's thinking about all of this? What where's his uh head at, apart from the fact that he's grumpy and sending out loads of truth socials? What where do you th what do you think he's actually thinking? I'd say it's probably closer to say I briefed him rather than advised him when he was a candidate. His views, by the way, are remarkably consistent. I remember, you know, we spent a lot of time

talking about uh an issue not central today but central to his presidency was his love of tariffs and his hostility to trade. We'll probably circle back to it here. His real disagreement and differences with allies who he thinks are freeloaders rather than uh uh helping us and so forth. And I think in general he had a suspicion of foreign policy. He saw foreign policy generically as more cost than benefit.

Again, I think here he's probably now he doesn't kick himself. I think he's more likely to be kicking others. Just frustrated that he finds himself where he finds himself. This is again so at odds. with what he promised. And what the American people care about is affordability and issues like that. He's now increasingly in a briar patch.

That associates him with policies that are gonna make uh exacerbate the affordability thing. But as you say, he's gotta figure out a way to get out of this. that he uh can claim victory, hence the call for the allies and others to join with us. in escorting tankers and so forth, which would in principle deal with the Straits problem. In practice though, I can't find a single person in the Navy or in the military on our side who likes that idea.

The idea that you would put American military vessels in close proximity to Iranian, you know, missiles or drones or mines leaves them all wildly, wildly uncomfortable. So it's not clear to me that he's yet stumbled on a on an approach to deal with the Straits that doesn't somehow involve Irani and Bayan. Yeah, that that is clearly the case. I mean what's interesting is that

He may be, you know, kicking at everybody else, and that's what we hear. And it's interesting to see how much leaking there is now going on. There is leaking from JD Vance of a kind of I told you so nature. There's leaking from the Pentagon of a We told you so, nature. We warned you that this could happen. Um, and everybody's slightly trying to cover their backs. And I think you're right that Donald Trump blames everybody else. I don't think he is sitting there saying, Oh

If I had taken longer to ask the right questions, or if I had listened to those who said to me that the Straits of Hormuz might be shut down, we might not be in this position. I don't think having, you know, covered Donald Trump for the last X number of years, that's the way he thinks. This is where what we said right at the beginning, that the strategy is not clear, is coming back to bite him. This is where reality is coming back to bite Donald Trump's ego.

The ego of Donald Trump says, I can do this, no one else can do it. Too much planning is for wusses. That's what the big state has always done. But if you do too much planning, then you end up not taking decisive action. And I am the guy who takes decisive action And as Jared Kushner once kind of told me with absolutely zero sense of irony, Donald Trump is the only person who can fix Middle East peace.

Because of his character and because he's the best negotiator that has ever been in the world. And literally that that is what they believed. They believed the shtick. Um but I had a really interesting conversation with General Mark Hurtling on Morning Joe when I was on this morning and asked him how much of this looks like poor planning, the problems that they're facing now. And he said,

This is all that that is. If they, for example, if you wanted if you'd anticipated that the Straits of Hormuz would be shut, you would have had the right equipment and the right military personnel in the region at the right time. But they didn't plan for that. And so now they're having to bring this Marine Expeditionary Unit from the Japan area, five thousand sailors and marines trying to get them over. These units don't move very quickly.

And you're in a position, General Hurtling says, where you just you can't just wing this and suddenly have ships and sailors move to the straits to shadow tankers. you have to have planned for it. And I think we're learning something as we keep doing about Donald Trump, which is that there's almost a it feels to me, I don't know what you think about this, but it feels to me like he almost has a kind of antipathy towards planning because that's what everybody else did.

That he wants to do things differently. Well, first of all, he doesn't like planning because planning locks you in. And if Donald Trump is anything, he is a he's an improviser. And he doesn't want it's one of the reasons he doesn't like international institutions, doesn't like alliances, he doesn't like things that box him in. He has, as you mo mentioned before, tremendous suspicion.

of the quote unquote deep state, which is simply a pejorative way of describing uh government. The people around him have very little experience in the executive branch, including his two principal negotiators for this part of the world. He's hollowed out the NSC staff, the National Security Council staff, and he's put one individual, the Secretary of State, in charge of both state and the uh

National Security System. No, this is the most top down administration. You know, I've worked for four. I've never seen anything in the same zip code as this. And you know, planning is good. Coming back to something you said before, one of the things planning does is it reduces the chance of surprise.

You never want to be surprised when you're president. And what Donald Trump, I think, is learning is actually a great irony here. Presidents often turn to foreign policy when they get frustrated with domestic policy. Because Congress or the courts and all these things tell'em all these things they can't do. So they turned to foreign policy'cause that's the area where traditionally American presidents have had greater freedom.

Donald Trump is now in the ironic situation that he's turned to foreign policy and now he's finding foreign policy is constraining him.'Cause this country called Iran is not playing the game by the s according to the assumptions.

that the president uh his inner circle seem to have had. Yeah, such a good point. I mean I I think you're right. I think he's been surprised and he's mad at the people who he feels should have made him not surprised, but the Wall Street Journal's reporting is that he didn't listen to those people because he doesn't like listening to people who say no to him and there's no one in the White House.

apart from perhaps Scott Bessant, who's actually able to manage him and say no to him. Before we go to a break, I want to talk about these splits that Anthony and I have been hearing about in the White House, because Some pretty senior White House people are reaching out to say that there is a real schism happening at the moment in the White House between the escalators and the de escalators.

In the de-escalation camp is JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and interestingly, all of the tech bros. And really interestingly, is not just that people in Vance's world are calling out. to reporters to tell them about this split. But also that you've got David Sachs, who's the AI chief, went on the All In podcast um at the end of last week.

and laid out this split in no uncertain terms, with even saying that there is, you know, he is in the very much in the de escalation camp, but suggesting that the escalators in this uh schism are trying to push Donald Trump to escalate the war

um, to side with Israel and that you could even end up with some kind of nuclear strike against Iran, potentially from Israel, is what David Sachs seems to be saying. I've been told to take David Sachs's comments with a grain of salt, but I do think that there is this split, and the people in the de escalation camp in kind of the Vance Rubio world.

are worried that Trump is leaning towards the escalation camp and that that camp is led by people like Lindsey Graham, Pete Hedseth, Jared, Kushner, Steve Witkoff. and that they are trying to get him to ramp up. And you're hearing it from some people in Trump world too, saying that, you know, some i the kind of some of the influencer types who were saying, right, we've got to actually go to the max now. We can't possibly back down.

Are you hearing anything about that split and how it's bubbling down and which way is Trump leaning? Well you're hearing it and you're seeing it. In some ways the president's caught. He doesn't want to decide between the two camps. So there's been tremendous deference to the agenda of Israel. And I would just simply say Israel has a different and a more narrow agenda than the United States. I don't think those the escalate camp

ultimately has made the case as we've already discussed. So I think the de escalate camp has the better of it. But the problem with that is then you have to negotiate. And you've got to deal with both the nuclear issue and the Straits issue through negotiation. That means we have to give up some things to do it. And I don't think the president has come to the position where he feels he can declare victory, success, and mission accomplished.

yet move towards de escalation. So my own sense is he's caught. Yeah. And he's got a a a dilemma, shall we say. I think again though, for his presidency

moving towards the side of trying to resolve this makes a lot of sense. And then the devil's in the details. What is it he would sign up to? It's'cause it's the Iranians have put some really awkward things on the table in terms of uh reparations. uh questions of uh non attack pledges, questions uh about sanctions uh relief and about American presence, military presence in the Gulf.'Cause I think they sense

that we there are those around the president who want this to end. So that's their leverage here. So for the president, he's got some uncomfortable choices. It's exactly where he didn't want to find himself, going back to what we were just talking about. But now he's got a set of options in either direction, escalate or de-escalate. Neither one is wildly attractive, neither one is without risk.

That's where he finds himself. And I think at the moment he's stalling because he doesn't like he doesn't like the choices in front of him. Yeah, so he's hoping that the choices will resolve himself. The trouble is the longer he stores, the more the economic situation

Uh makes his choices even more difficult. One person I hope that he is not listening to, I feel a little bad about calling this individual out, but Chris Wright, the energy secretary, was on the Sunday shows. Here's what he said, because I'm a little worried about the quality of the team.

of some of the team around the President. This is what mister Wright said. There's no guarantees in war. I can guarantee the situation would be a lot worse without this operation. I swear to God, he said those two things back to back. Then he said on another show, He was asked, Should Americans be bracing for the price of oil to go over two hundred dollars a barrel?

So Iran calls us the great Satan. I don't think we are the great Satan. In fact, clearly we're not. So that's a no on two hundred dollars a barrel. It's a I would pay no attention to what Iran says. I mean I swear to God, that is the quality of the people that the White House is putting out. That is how deftly, undeftly, that's ironic.

they are handling the Sunday shows at the moment. I mean but the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Energy should stick to their knitting. It doesn't do them or the President good when they start getting outside their lane and talking about military issues and escorting tankers And the rest. I think though this is an administration, this is more your ballpark than mine, where people feel this endless pressure.

To demonstrate their fealty and loyalty? To perform to an audience of one. Yeah. And you know, they have to you know even wear floor shimes that don't fit. I mean there's there's no limit. to uh to what they have to do and it just it's not if you buy if guys, if you don't know what Richard is referring to, look him up. This is a pair of shoes. Look up Marco Rubio's whose and the shoe does not fit, quite literally.

Uh the president has been handing out shoes. If you happen to go to the White House you may come back with a new pair of shoes at the moment. But the problem is they may not fit'cause the president simply guesses what size you need. And maybe he likes it that they don't fit after all. Okay, we're gonna take a quick break, come back and talk about how the rest of the world is responding to this.

Welcome back to the Rest is Politics US and my conversation with Richard Haas on the latest on Iran. We are going to spend this half of the program looking at the Allied and International. to what Donald Trump is asking for, but first We have some very exciting news. Both of Goalhangers political podcasts. The rest is politics, both UK and US. Alistair Campbell will kill me for calling it the rest is politics UK, so it's just the rest is politics, and the rest is politics US.

are joining together at London South Bank Centre for a live show. It's gonna be an amazing transatlantic summit. Uh the special relationship has never been this strong on stage. at the Rest is Fest. We're bringing all four of us together, that's me and Anthony, and Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart for full length live show. packed with analysis and debate. It's gonna be so fun, trust me, when you get the four of us in one room, things get well. ¿Noisy? Interesting, heated, all of that.

The rest is fest is running from the fourth to the sixth of September at London South Back Centre. Members can get tickets early on the 19th of March at 10 a.m. So if you want to make sure you get a ticket, do sign up at therest ispoliticsus.com. And we're going to email you then your exclusive pre-sale link.

General sale goes live on the twenty sixth of March at ten AM on SouthBankcentre.co.uk. Don't miss this historic meeting of political minds. Right, with that sales pitch over, let's get back to the show.

Okay, so here we have Donald Trump reaching out to American allies, and we're in a phone call with the FT on Sunday, our friend Ed Lu saying that NATO will suffer if the NATO countries don't respond and all he's asking for is a little bit of help. trying to get the Straits of Hormuz back open. So lay out for us Richard, what it is exactly

that Donald Trump is asking for and what's the state of negotiations at the moment with foreign countries? Uh beyond his truth social posts. What he appears to be looking for is some type of uh multinational armada, to use his favorite word. of NATO countries and potentially others who would guarantee safe passage of tankers on the assumption that Iran

would not want to shoot at them for fear of the retaliation. The problem I would think is twofold. One we've discussed, which is uh to put expensive naval vessels inside the Straits is a a really dangerous thing'cause they're It's twenty, twenty one miles wide at its narrowest point and they're just vulnerable.

To being overwhelmed, swarmed is the word that's often used by drones, speed boats. So there's the just a real risk. I think the Allies, and here you'd know better than I am, they're uh they're also not of a mind to do it.

Uh, you know, we used to have an expression that uh with allies that it's not enough that they're you know, you can't ask'em to be involved in the landings unless they're involved in the takeoffs. And I think there's a general sense here that they shall we say were excluded from the takeoff. They didn't have much of any say in this war. And that implies, by the way, not just to Europeans, but to Asians and the Middle East countries, but they're affected by it.

And again, it doesn't come against a a slate of goodwill and good feeling thanks to tariffs, Greenland and a million other things. Uh presidents threatening, as you saw, that it'd be really bad for NATO. I expect there's some in NATO saying, How will we know? Um, what have we experienced? But look, I could imagine this president saying if the Europeans don't help us more, we're gonna reduce the American presence in Europe. I I don't think

that is an unimaginable consequence. You know what's already happened is obviously consequential f for the Middle East. It's not inconceivable before this is done. It's in it's consequential for Europe in a geopolitical as well as economic sense. So this this is super interesting to me because

When Anthony and I were at the World Economic Forum in Davos, it was all at the height of the Greenland stuff. And I remember interviewing the Norwegian Prime Minister for this program, who was basically saying, Look, Europe is united. Uh, this has shown us our kind of resolve, and this will make it harder for America to ask things.

of its allies in the future. There will be you know it's it's Th as Mark Carney said, you know, the kind of era of the rules-based order is over and uh America can't won't will regret this decision because there are actually things that it needs. So here we are, about a month later.

or two months later, and America needs this now. Donald Trump is making the ask. I mean, having just literally a week ago telling Keir Starmer that we don't need your aircraft carriers any more because you came too late to the party, and getting kind of snippy with Keir Starmer, But It's not clear to me that you've got a coordinated response, particularly amongst European allies, saying, actually

Mr Trump, you have squandered too much goodwill, those tariffs have to come down, you have to give security guarantees to the Ukrainians, you cannot behave like a bully and expect us to respond. Because this would be wouldn't this be the moment where America is making this very dramatic ask? And very and ne desperately needs help, clearly. I mean, they've got Donald Trump on the ropes. But I'm not hearing a kind of I'm not hearing Europe play Donald Trump back at himself.

But I think if Europe were to do that, they take some risks. I would recommend how to course because they're being hit by these g energy prices. I get that, yeah. In terms of Trump's retaliation against them. So I would recommend not as this American who uh lived in your country for six years. As a nice mild mannered diplomat, what would you say? I would say the answer should be yes, but.

Or yes so long as. And Europe should say, Well, yeah, we actually would like this'cause we have some common interests here. Now it'll take us this amount of time and so forth, but we want to have some greater details.

about the military operation and then all the things you were saying about how we provide for you know guarantees against this and assurances there. And this all may go away because again there's not a lot of enthusiasm. But I think the Europeans would be wise not to simply stiff the president.

and say, no way,'cause we're pissed off at you over Greenland and tariffs and what have you. I think they would be much smarter to say, Yes, so long as it's wrapped in a larger policy unless, by the way, consult.

about how we're gonna deal with the nuclear issue and so forth. They basically make make themselves, if you will, a party to the larger policy in the hopes of influencing it. And then if if the way to g get in that conversation is to say yes If we can agree on the whole, then we will join you in this part to deal with the straits.

Do you think there I mean I have heard that there are discussions going on Um with s with somebody who's pretty close to Trump told me and also kind of close to the Ukraine part of this, has Ukrainian uh clients that he's dealing with. that there is some negotiation around Russian oil in particular because the Americans don't want to just rel re the White House doesn't just want to reduce US sanctions on Russian oil. It would also like

the Euro EU and the UK to lift their sanctions on Russian oil. So is there a trade to be done where Ukraine is given security guarantees of the nature that they asked that the Biden administration was prepared to offer? in exchange for something that would help Trump get more energy onto world markets.

Possibly, but it's risky. If I were Ukraine I would be uncomfortable with American security guarantees. I would think so too. I would want to have more American guarantees and provision of air defence systems. Uh m m m it's for j understandable reasons. It is driving Mr. Zelensky, shall we say, crazy. that all these air defense systems are suddenly available

for this war of choice that the United States has launched, but we're net what we're not available on scale for Ukraine, which is facing Russian barrages. So but yeah, there might be a a deal there. But again, that's that's consistent with what I said. I mean I hate the idea that we're relieving Or easing Russian sanctions or Russia's already getting enormous benefits simply from the p the price increase. They're getting almost, you know, fifty percent or more revenue than they did uh

three weeks ago. Mm-hmm. But if but again, if the Europeans wanna come back and say, we'll do this and this so long as and they want to tie it to helping Ukraine or for again a diplomatic dimension to what we're doing, here's here's a here's an approach to Iran that we would support. I would say sure, make it a package constructive offer.

The one thing they want to avoid is simply a no, no, we're not gonna get involved in this because we don't like you or disagree. That would be a mistake. The other reason presumably

Forget Greenland and the terrace for a moment. Even parking though is one of the things I have heard is that there wasn't much from the UK side. I don't know as much from the European side and from say Australia and China and Japan, but There actually is a lot of reluctance, anyway, about getting drawn into a wider war in the Middle East, where all the things we spoke about in the first half.

what the exit strategy might be is still a problem, even if it weren't for the lack of goodwill. So I what's your hunch? D do the uh do foreign countries come to Donald Trump's rescue? Do they get him out of a jam here? I think it's unlikely. Uh You think it's unlikely? Yeah, I think it's highly unlikely. But I think the Europeans should would be smart. if they did put forward ideas

about how to wind this down. And, you know, there's different approaches to the nuclear issue. There's not a military answer to the nuclear issue. So the question is What is it we demand of Iran? in terms of a ceiling and what kind of inspection regime and so forth, and maybe it's best if that not come from the United States, given that the last two times we had negotiations with Iran, we interrupted the negotiations to attack'em. So maybe there's a large European role

uh here with dealing with the nuclear file. And maybe is there is something in a larger arrangement with uh with shipping and so forth. some sort of rules of the road there. But I think, you know, the Europeans would be smart to get involved diplomatically. And again, it might mean in principle Imagine there was some new regime set up for international guarantees about the openness of the strait. Okay, there could be a role in that. But all this oughta be on the table.

rather than them simply saying again, pushing back and and and being negative. By the way, not that they have that much capability to bring to the party, let's be honest. European. I think Britain's got like minesweepers, right? Which which the Americas Anthony was telling us last week America's a little short of because you've decommissioned them. Yes. No, so that would be an example of a capability that would be that would be relevant.

Again, it doesn't all it takes is a couple of mines to make insurers unwilling to insure. So we should be careful about thinking there's a a physical solution to this. Again, I think the most likely scenario is one that Iran essentially agrees to some arrangement. but possibly this dispatch of minesweepers and the like would persuade the Iranians that

their efforts to limit use of the straits weren't going to work. Anyhow, it would be good for US European relations uh if they did this. Richard, can I before we go, can I pick your brains on China? Because one of the other things that Um, Donald Trump said in this interview with the FT was that this China summit that is due with Xi Jinping in China, Donald Trump's meant to be flying to China at the end of March. that that might get delayed. And I think something that's been quite interesting is

how quiet China has been during this whole uh operation for the last we really have heard very little from China. How Is it too simple to say that this whole Escapade. I think isn't that what Trump likes to call it? No, excursion. Excuse me. Excursion. Excursion. Like it's a sort of, you know, tour boat thing. Th this whole military operation, this whole war, let's be honest.

that this whole war has weakened the Americans' hand, but has strengthened the hand of both China and Russia. Is that overly simplistic, do you think? No, I would call it overly accurate. Uh Russia for sure. Anthony never says I'm overly accurate. That's very good. You can come back again. Uh the easing of sanctions, the raise the increase in in oil prices, the using up of American munitions and equipment.

The fact that the American military is once again enmeshed in the Middle East rather than in other theaters is fantastic for Russia. Uh, I think the Ru what the Russians were all ready, shall we say, in no hurry. to negotiate in good faith on Ukraine. Now they have zero interest in doing it. And for China, many of the same things. Look, China's priority, you know, for Xi Jinping is is Taiwan.

The fact that we're United States, again, its military is in the Middle East. The fact that we're taking troops from Japan. And bringing them to the Middle East. That we're not you know, we're using up munitions that at least in principle could be provided to uh Taiwan. This could also, if this doesn't go well, think about another thing. This could strengthen isolationist forces in the United States. You know, you before were talking to me about the splits in the White House.

Well if this doesn't go well and I would say so far at least it's not gone terribly well in the strategic sense It may, shall we say, further curb our enthusiasm or appetite for other sorts of ventures. So from China China's point of view, this is not bad at all. even though we have demonstrated great military proficiency.

and a willingness to use military force effectively. I would think on balance, if you're China, you're in no rush, particularly if you can continue to get your oil from Iran, which you have been. And also the Chinese have insulated themselves from the potential for cutoffs. they've they've got their equivalent of a strategic petroleum reserve. So they're they're in pretty good shape.

Yeah, well on that cheerful note, I think we will leave it there. And of course the Chinese can then sit back and see how all of this might potentially impact the midterm elections. as well. And we will talk about that uh I think later this week in another episode. Richard Haas, thank you very much for ably and nobly f stepping into the breach.

For Anthony. I can't make a second joke about stepping into shoes and the rest. We've already done one, but uh but thanks for having me. Great to be with you. Uh and thank you all for listening. Anthony and I will be back on Wednesday with our final episode Of our series Becoming Trump for founding members. If you would like to listen to that series all about the backgrounds of Donald Trump and what got us to where we are today. Do sign up at the rest is politicsus dot com