Iran-Israel ceasefire – Will Trump's truce hold?

Advertising helps fund our podcasts but we know some people would prefer the shows without adverts. If that's you... why not support us on Patreon? You'll get every episode without interruptions, and you'll be helping independent podcasting to thrive. Follow the link in the show notes to find out more. Some people think investing is a test of endurance. But when you invest £100,000 or more with HSBC UK, you have access to our network of advisors.

who will make it feel less like a marathon you haven't trained for and more like a 5K that's just your speed. Because investing isn't a struggle when we're here to help. Search HSBC Financial Advice. HSBC UK. Opening up a world of opportunity. Capital at risk. HSBC UK. The 12-day war, as Donald Trump calls it, between Israel and Iran may be over, or perhaps not. The history of the Middle East teaches that optimism needs... to be tempered by considerable realism and caution.

Trump announced ceasefire was almost immediately broken by both sides. Whether the conflict is merely paused or is winding down or even perhaps a lasting peace of some sort is possible, we shall presumably begin to understand in the weeks ahead. To try to make sense of whether a new era is beginning and specifically whether Iran, its Arab neighbours and Israel can begin somehow to live side by side without wars, we'll get an expert view.

I'm Gavin Esler, and this is Not A Drill. Hello and welcome to This Is Not A Drill. Dr. Julie Norman is an Associate Professor in Politics and International Relations at University College London. Dr. Norman is also a Senior Associate Fellow at RUSI and she coordinates UCL's Israel-Palestine Initiative. Welcome to This Is Not A Drill, Julie. Thanks, Gavin. It's a pleasure to be here. So the most difficult question, I suppose, of all, where are we now, do you think?

Well, at the time that we're recording this early Tuesday morning in the U.S., I would say things are very fragile at the moment. We obviously heard last night the announcement of this fragile ceasefire by Trump. Over the course of the night, there have already been reports of violations from both Iran and Israel. And so we're really at this very tenuous moment where we are uncertain now if this is just the last salvo or if this is actually a continue.

So these next hours will be very telling. I would say that Trump has been really pressuring both sides and especially Israel in these last hours to refrain from further strikes. And we'll see if his comments have that effect. It was remarkable, not just for his use of an expletive, but how angry Donald Trump was, not just at Iran, but actually seemed to be mostly at Israel. He really wants this to work, doesn't he? That's exactly right. We heard very strong language, vocal remarks.

from Trump today to reporters, really just showing his frustration. What everyone thinks of Trump, he does seem to be in this mindset of wanting to end some of these, what he sees as these ongoing conflicts that, you know, he can kind of come in and resolve and save. And I think he saw himself as being able to do that.

despite obviously the U.S.'s very active role in dropping bombs in this conflict. But he personally wants to be seen as the one that can make a deal, that can end these things. And when he sees even his allies, especially a state like Israel.

where the U.S. has really stuck out its neck in this conflict in particular, going against what he thought was a done deal. He's going to be vocal about that. He's going to be on the phone to Netanyahu. And that's what we've seen play out in the last several hours.

Maybe we can begin with Iran first. I mean, are you surprised how rapidly this has ended? Or to look at it another way, it does seem as if Iran doesn't have many cards, does it? I mean, it's been attacked by... Israel, its aerial defences are diminished. And then the bunker busting bombs, I mean, we don't know what's happened to all those 400 kilos of...

nuclear enriched material. But we do know that this has been a major blow against Iran. But were you still surprised in the way in which they seem to have not retaliated too much? Yeah, I would say that Iran didn't have many good options. There were certain options that were on the table, but at the end of the day, to invite a continued military response from both Israel and then the U.S. was just going to be unsustainable for Iran's military, for its government.

Where I think some of the bigger questions still remain is, one, what is the status of the nuclear program? There's still a lack of clarity on how much was actually destroyed if Iran was able to move out a lot of the centrifuges or stockpiles. before the strikes, and if that's something they can rebuild and may indeed fast forward now after this conflict and actually pursue a weapon even faster than maybe they would have. I think the other question is, this is...

The state, this is the government making certain calculations and decisions based on their ability to survive and kind of ride this out. But what we've seen over the last 12 days, I would say, has galvanized so much additional. resentment to both the U.S. and Israel than was already existing in the region in the context of the Gaza war, that I do think in the long run, you know, this is not just going to go away. There is going to be other actors.

some affiliated with the state, some outside the state, who are not just going to be okay with the way this is settled. But I would say the government itself seems to have played the rational actor here and said, we need to find an off-ramp. And Trump, at least for now, as we have seen, seems to be willing to offer that sooner than I think some expected. I managed to visit Iran a few years ago. And one of the things that really struck me talking with...

essentially Iranian intellectuals and thinkers, was one said to me, you know, any country that's got a nuclear weapon, like Pakistan and North Korea, has not been attacked. So maybe we need one. to secure that for our future. And that's still a view within some people within the Iranian hierarchy, it seems to me.

That's exactly right. And that is much of what some of Iran's calculation has been. Obviously, Iran publicly says that their program has always just been for civilian purposes. But even for those who acknowledge that there are... capabilities to ramp it up to weapons grade relatively quickly. That is the mindset. And this is what...

you know, galvanize many states, as you said, India, Pakistan, North Korea, I would say even, you know, even Israel to move in that direction. If that needed to be reinforced anymore than it already was, I think even the Ukraine. war showed this, that states like the U.S.

would not get actively involved against Russia, largely because of the nuclear threat there. And so this is always a calculation for states and for Iran, especially in their region, a region where, again, Israel is known to have nuclear weapons. the sense of, you know, if we are going to be a regional power, if we are going to have active deterrence, we need that as well. I will say, of course, in Israel, it is not viewed that way. Israel did see...

nuclear Iran as a very direct and existential threat. And I do think that it's a very different reading in Israel than it is for most of the rest of the world. But certainly for Iran, it was this sense of... at least having this from a deterrence point of view at minimum was something that I think they felt was justified and rational.

I noticed that many people are tiptoeing around the idea of regime change in Iran, because it's easier to talk about than actually to get it done, because it's a very complicated country in very many ways. I just wondered what your thoughts are about that, because... One way of looking at it is that people are very patriotic in Iran and they may feel they don't like the regime, but they don't like being attacked by other countries either. Yeah, I think the one thing that...

If we can learn anything from regime change efforts is that it has to come from within. And certainly there's many grievances within Iran against the government. We saw these come out full force several years ago. People may remember the woman life freedom protests where. The population across the spectrum was out protesting and many people really paying for that uprising. So that sentiment is certainly there. I do think there's a potential for that to resurge at some point in the future.

I would say usually at a time that when a country is being hit by airstrikes, by... Other countries, that is not the time that that happens. First and foremost, people are just very focused on their own survival in those situations, you know, evacuating major cities like Tehran, getting out if they can. But it also does.

impute a certain rally around the flag effect where, again, if you are seeing your country being attacked by adversaries, that's usually not the time that we see people rising up against the state as much as almost like protecting one's sovereignty. do think that was a card that was going to be difficult to play.

I think obviously for Israel and many countries, they would still like to see that. But in terms of operationally forcing that to happen, I think we're hoping that cooler heads have prevailed in that objective that was at least hinted at multiple times in these last years. weeks. Hello, it's Gavin Esler here. Today's edition of This Is Not A Drill comes with support from Incogni, the online personal data removal service that helps you take back control of your data privacy.

Data security is incredibly important in the digital world and your personal information could be up for sale right now without you even knowing it. Growing numbers of data brokers are packaging up personal information, including names, aliases, passwords, financial information, online activity and more, and selling them on both to businesses and criminals.

This means everything from people finding they've had huge loans taken out in their names, to having their private health premiums being raised because of leaked data, to having their home addresses published, opening them up to stalking and even physical violence. The good news is that you have the right to demand that data brokers delete the information they hold on you. The bad news is it would take you years to do it yourself. And that's where Incogni comes in.

Incogni contacts data brokers on your behalf with legal requests for them to delete the data they hold on you and their systems go back and check to make sure your private data stays off the market. It's all automated. You can follow the progress of every request online and you can use Incogni risk-free for 30 days. If you don't like it, you can get a refund. There's a special offer for our listeners. Use the code NOTADRILL.

To get an exclusive 60% off your annual plan with Incogni, go to incogni.com slash notadrill. That's I-N-C-O-G-N-I dot com slash notadrill. Or just click the link. in the show notes. Take control of your data privacy now with Incogni. Terms and conditions apply.

No chains, no stress, no delays. At Holmes by Esch, moving on to our Bluebell Gardens development in Trimden Village is a no-brainer. Because with our part exchange scheme, we'll be a cash buyer. Plus, until the end of July, you can enjoy. free flooring so you can move straight in. We'll also pay up to £20,000 stamp duty for you. Explore our stunning show home and chat to our expert team now or visit homesbyesh.co.uk today. T's and C's apply. Subject to valuation. and survey.

I suppose the other place where regime change seems a bit unlikely at the moment is in Israel itself. I mean, if you look back at Benjamin Netanyahu at the end of 2023, there's a horrors of what had happened on the borders of Gaza to all those Israelis kidnapped and killed. He seemed to be in great political trouble. There were the corruption allegations against him. And now, over the past year or so, he's...

it appears, neutralised Hezbollah in Lebanon. He has severely damaged Hamas, whatever one thinks of the Gaza conflict. And now the greatest strategic threat to Israel, it seems to be somewhat in abeyance. Yeah, so I would say that Netanyahu has very much changed his position in Israel from even a year ago, definitely neutralizing some of these what, again, many see in Israel as very ongoing, even existential threats.

Netanyahu has really survived a period that I think many people thought he would not still be in a leadership position now. And this last... Conflict that we have seen has buoyed him even further. Even many Israelis who wanted a hostage duo, who have been extremely frustrated with Netanyahu over the course of the Gaza war, supported this operation and this conflict, this war. Iran. And so I do think it's buoyed him substantially.

What I am looking at now is if that is going to give him enough political wiggle room, so to speak, to actually reach some kind of resolution in Gaza, or if he is going to continue to dig in there and to refuse a settlement there. One thing that we've heard is that now with this Iran situation pretty much in Israel's favor, will this give him the leeway to actually make a substantial move on Gaza? And I'm hopeful about that, but I'm not fully optimistic about it.

time. I will be watching that very closely. It's difficult to see where that goes, though, isn't it? Because, I mean, we've heard every day now these horror stories of people who are very hungry. being shot for various reasons because there's chaos at the points where they can possibly pick up food. And that has not gone away and there seems to be no abeyance for that.

Absolutely. And I would just underscore this, that while the world has very understandably been focused on the Israel-Ran conflict over these last two weeks, nothing has changed in Gaza. It has only gotten worse. And this has come after. a two-month full siege on the Strip, followed by this very unusual, quote-unquote, humanitarian distribution situation that is controlled mostly by Israel and U.S. contractors, where we've seen, again, deaths every day because of...

of just the level of devastation and just the lack of being able to accommodate it. And that has to change.

Well, I won't quote Donald Trump exactly, but he did suggest that neither the leadership of Iran nor of Israel knew exactly what they were doing. So is there a scope here for Donald Trump to really almost... tell Israel how they should behave? And how would that go down with Mr. Netanyahu? Yeah, well, Gavin, I think that's something that Trump would like to be able to do. And I think what...

me and many others are watching is not just what he is telling Netanyahu about where this conflict should go, but also what should happen in Gaza. And I do think that the fact that the U.S. committed to this operation... essentially did what Netanyahu wanted the U.S. to do. I can only hope that that was...

with some kind of quid pro quo from Trump to Netanyahu saying, OK, if we do this, you need to wind down that Gaza war. So I and others are looking to that. Again, the extent to which any U.S. president has that kind of level. over Netanyahu, I think is really uncertain. We saw this during the Biden administration and even with Trump, I think it's really unclear. You know, again, when you talk to Israelis, especially those who are sympathetic to Netanyahu, there is a certain degree.

to which there's deference to the US, but there's also a need to not be seen as driven by the US and just... larger priorities there that sometimes went out over that. But certainly Trump will want to be seeing, I think, something in return for the US's operation here. Is Donald Trump a really surprising interlocutor in all this? I mean, he has whatever one thinks about... jets going from Qatar for the White House use and so on.

He seems to have a very good relationship with some Arab leaders. Perhaps he's got something in common with some of those Arab leaders. He seems to have a good relationship with Benjamin Netanyahu. And Iran clearly takes him very seriously. Trump is such an unusual and unpredictable kind of president to have in a conflict like this. And what moves he made were very unknown, even to himself and those around him at various points of this. And I think it's not very reassuring.

when you're dealing with the kinds of things we were dealing with in this conflict. With that said, he took a huge gamble. I think if the ceasefire does somehow hold and if this is the winding down, then... that will be seen as a success for him. Again, there are still many unknowns from where this goes and many different directions that it could have gone that I think still need to be considered. And again, I think some of the repercussions from this we won't see.

for some time. But again, Trump as a president who I would say was put into this position by Netanyahu, who kind of launched this war and kind of put any U.S. president who was in that role into a very difficult position where... are you going to stand by during what could be a very long war of attrition, or are you going to try and take a shot that could end it, was not an enviable position for any president. And again, I...

Trump's decision-making process, I think, is extremely troubling to many of us. But if the outcome is what is needed to wind something down sooner rather than later, I think it will be welcomed by many. There was one other thing about American politics that struck me. I remember people talking

to me about the Nixon administration and saying one of Richard Nixon's great strengths was he could be unpredictable. I mean, he was the guy on the right who went to China. So maybe Trump's unpredictability is his strongest suit.

actually just haven't got a clue what he's going to do next. Yeah, I would say there's actually this idea of so-called madman theory. That's actually a real theory where it's seen as an advantage when if you don't know what...

another leader is going to do, it can actually be a strength because there is that element of unpredictability, of surprise. You really do have to take their threats at face value because you don't know when they will or will not actually move on it. And I will say in the short term, that can work. I will say in the long term, it can be very dangerous and it can alienate our allies because our allies also don't know what we're going to do. And even adversaries, when you're entering into...

what are actually supposed to be negotiations, diplomacy, long-lasting settlements, and even adversaries don't know how committed you are, if you're going to stab them in the back, if you're being deceitful. And I would say in this conflict as well. There was certainly that impression by many, not only in Iran but around the world, that the U.S. was intentionally...

pretending to negotiate, pretending to offer a diplomatic window, and then really working out something else, you know, with the other hand. And so I do think those things carry repercussions, even if they can get... a short-term tactical success very quickly.

Start your week from the bunker is your essential guide to the news you need to look out for in the week ahead. I'm Jacob Jarvis and this week I was joined by Gavin Esler. Gavin, what did we discuss? Well, we discussed everything from Trump's major party in Washington.

Party, or sorry, I should say his great parade of not very many soldiers and not very many people watching it. We also discussed much more seriously the Minnesota shootings, which a number of politicians were attacked. Israel and Iran of course, and we discussed the new person in charge of MI6 and therefore Britain's spies abroad. Not that we have any, but if we did, she'd be in charge of it. Let's start your week from the bunker. Listen now wherever you get your podcasts.

Looking across the region, I mean, Syria is also on a new path. Iran, whatever happens is clearly much diminished. And maybe Israel will sort out its domestic problems. It still leaves Gaza. I'm not minimising that in any way. And also still leaves a great deal of hurt in Lebanon too. But maybe there's some grounds to be optimistic.

Yeah, you know, Gavin, it's a super interesting moment in the region because Syria is on a new trajectory. Even Lebanon is on a new trajectory with a new government this year and really trying to stabilize things there. The Gulf states.

again, even prior to this war had, you know, had some reconciliation with Iran. We're looking for stability. And moreover, we're looking for better relations with Israel. And we still have that on the table, potentially a normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel. for the first time ever. But again, the link in all of this, I would say, is not just Gaza, but Palestine, the larger Palestinian question. And right now, I would say the region is poised for a new era, a sense of stability.

but that's going to be very difficult to come by if the Israel-Palestine conflict is not readily addressed. And I would say at this point, an actually good faith effort towards some kind of... two-state solution, Palestinian self-determination, which so far Netanyahu has not been open to discussing. We have both been cautiously optimistic about this, but...

the core problems still remain. The Palestinian question, what to do about Gaza, and the fact that organisations like Hezbollah and Hamas just don't go away. You can't just shoot all these people. It just doesn't work. That's exactly right. And I think you can have the majority of... states, the majority of governments, even the majority of the region, wanting stability, wanting peace. But all you need are several spoilers to prevent that from happening. And that's where it can come from.

Netanyahu and the right-wing Israeli government. It can come from Hamas. It can come from Hezbollah. It can come from whatever next iteration of resistance groups we see. And what I would underscore is just that on the... The civilian level, the level of anger, et cetera, at Israel, at the United States for the Gaza war in particular, and even for this last round, is something that is not going to go away no matter what.

governments say. And I think, again, as long as there is still an occupation in Palestine, there is going to be resistance in the region. And that's just a given. take the form of different groups. It may take different forms of resistance, but that is not going to go away. Those threats are still there. And even though they might seem small in comparison to a state army, those are...

Often the movements that last the longest, because all they have to do is not surrender and to just say we are still resisting and the conflict continues because of that as well. And to return to the start of our conversation.

We still have to find out what, if anything, has happened to the 400 and something kilograms of 60% enriched uranium that the Iranian government seems to have still, or maybe it's buried in Fordo or somewhere, or maybe it's in a...

safe location. I mean, it just isn't clear. And the question, I suppose, is whether international inspectors will be allowed in, whether there is a way of reviving the kind of deal that was already negotiated with the Iranians a few years ago by a previous American president, President Obama.

That's exactly right, Gavin. And I do think that's so crucial to remember right now is that while we seem to have this fragile ceasefire to this war we've just seen play out, we should be remembered that right before this, again, the U.S. and... Iran were at a sort of impasse with what to do about the nuclear question more broadly. And if we can assume that...

Iran's nuclear capabilities wasn't completely eradicated or if that knowledge is still there, that question is still going to remain. Will Iran still... be able to enrich uranium as states are allowed to do under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty at civilian levels? Or is the U.S., Israel, other actors going to demand a complete withdrawal of everything? And so I think we might still be back to...

that drawing board. And so this may not necessarily be the end of these kind of conversations that we're having. But again, there's still, I would say, just a lot of unknowns on what the state of the program is, what moves Iran might make around it and how.

public or non-public some of those moves might be. There's one further imponderable, which is about Donald Trump himself and the MAGA base. I mean, we do know that whereas it tends to be in Europe, the left who don't like foreign wars and entanglements. In the United States, it is the right and it's part of his MAGA coalition who don't like the idea. And Donald Trump boasted...

endlessly about no wars on his watch when he was first elected in 2016. Do you think this changes things? Because it may be that he can present this as being, I was drawn into a war, but maybe I've solved it. It's definitely true that the Republican Party is very split on both this issue and I would say foreign intervention more broadly between the so-called hawks and those who tend to especially be very hard on Iran.

very shoulder to shoulder with Israel on the one hand, and then the other hand, more of the MAGA base, which is much more isolationist, which doesn't want to see U.S. involvement in really any intervention overseas, especially ones that aren't directly linked to a threat to the U.S. so to speak. So I do think Trump was...

pulled between those two wings of the party. I think the way that he and his administration will try and massage that, so to speak, is to say, look, we did a one-off operation. We wound this down quickly. No U.S. boots on the ground. You know, we showed our strength. We used our military. We used this like unprecedented weapon for the first time. But we got out fast. Like we didn't draw the U.S. into some kind of forever war. So I think that's going to be the way.

that they frame it. And I think for many in Trump's base, I think that will be good enough. Polling did definitely show a lot of concern, trepidation about the U.S. entering this conflict in any meaningful way. And again, if this is it, they'll get out of it okay. But if this starts up again or lingers, this could be something that would affect Trump. But right now, what we're seeing, at least as of this morning, is that I imagine his base will be pretty fine with how it played out.

Very interesting, Julie. Thank you very much for your insights and your expertise. Dr. Julie Norman is Associate Professor in Politics and International Relations at University College London. And thanks to everyone for listening to This Is Not A Drill. I'm Gavin Esler. Goodbye. This is Not A Drill. It was written and presented by Gavin Esler.

and produced by Robin Lieber, with music by Paul Hartnell and art by Jim Parrott. The group editor is Andrew Harrison, executive producer Martin Boitosh, and This Is Not A Drill is a Podmasters production.