The case for Trump's war in Iran

0:00Who doesn't love warm, carby comfort? Satisfying sandwiches, loaded bagels, rich mac and cheese. Crape-worthy and smart, Hero Bread's loaves, bagels and noodles have just 0-5 gram snack carbs, 0 gram sugar and up to 19 grams of protein and 32 grams of fiber per serving. Hero Bread bakes with heart-healthy olive oil and delivers the soft, fluffy, flavorful experience you love. Shop now on Hero.co. Use code IHEART for 10 % off. That's Hero.co. Per serving, not a low-calorie food. Some products contain allulose. See nutrition info on Hero.co for sodium and sugar content. This is a Global Player original podcast.

0:35The United States military has undertaken a massive and ongoing operation to prevent this very wicked, radical dictatorship from threatening America and our core national security interests. We are going to destroy their missiles and raise their missile industry to the ground. It will be totally, again, obliterated.

1:10There absolutely was an imminent threat. And the imminent threat was that we knew that if Iran was attacked, and we believe they would be attacked, that they would immediately come after us. We have a bit of breaking news that has just come in. Right now, the Iranian state media is telling the people of Iran that the Ayatollah has been killed. Again, Iran's state-run media is now confirming that the Ayatollah has been killed.

1:38The mission is laser-focused. Obliterate Iran's missiles and drones and facilities that produce them, annihilate its Navy and critical security infrastructure, and sever their pathway to nuclear weapons. Iran will never possess a nuclear bomb. Not on our watch. Not ever. We could call it a tremendous success right now as we leave here, I could call it. Or we could go further and we're going to go further. It has been a dizzying three weeks in a dizzying war. There is so much that is so strange about the Iran conflict. So many unbound threads just hanging in the air. So many mysteries about the biggest, most consequential Middle Eastern war for a generation.

2:24Principally and incredibly, why is it happening? What are its objectives? For many Americans, for much of the wider world for that matter, it seemed to descend from nowhere. Remarkably enough, given, you could say, there had been a 47-year preamble. Yet Trump and his administration could not even tell a story about that. Had prepared so little of the ground. Taken so few of their countrymen and women with them. did not even brief his closest allies, let alone convince them a master of marketing suddenly without a song to sing. And when he has put forward a rationale or a reason or set of objectives, they are no sooner put than changed or rejected, sometimes by the very mouths that had said them.

3:15In short, there have been few, if any, articulate proponents of why this war is happening at all, which partly explains why, unlike at the start of previous conflicts, there has been so little public support. Briefly, the lack of voices in favour did change this week, at least in one unlikely quarter. A Doha-based academic, Dr Muhannad Saloom, Professor of International Politics and Security at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, also a fellow at the University of Exeter's Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies. A few days ago, he wrote a piece for Al Jazeera entitled The US-Israeli Strategy Against Iran Is Working.

3:58In it, he argues that the prevailing narrative across much of the Western media and politics is wrong, that there is a plan, that there is an endgame and it will succeed. It seemed to articulate an argument better than anyone in the Trump administration has been willing or able to do. It lit up the MAGA online world and much of the online right, including commentators in the UK who started sharing it, arguing that it showed that the dreaded lily-livered libs were wrong. There was method to the Trumpian madness, after all. So much so that President Trump himself shared it on Truth Social to be retruthed thousands of times, again with the article's title, The US-Israeli strategy against Iran is working.

4:45It's not often that Trump shares a link from Al Jazeera. Now, if you've listened to our coverage of the war these last three weeks, and if you haven't, where have you been? You'll know, I think it's fair to say, that we've all been a bit sceptical about the war's provenance, its aims, where it's going. So we thought BBC impartiality still in our bones. We wanted to bring you a different take. So this is my conversation with Dr Saloom from Doha. The case for the Iran war in a way that Trump could perhaps never say. Welcome to the News Agents.

5:22The News Agents. Well, we're joined now from Doha by Dr. Mohanad Saloom. Dr. Saloom, thank you so much for joining us on the News Agents. Before we get into the meat of your piece, I just thought given you are in Doha, It might be worth just giving the listeners and the viewers a sense of what life is like there at the moment, what it has been like over the last three weeks, because although in this piece you are arguing for the logic of the war, you and all of those around you, of course, are living with the brunt effect of it. Indeed. Well, thank you, Boris, for having me. And here life is by large normal, I would say unusually normal.

6:01Once or twice we have these missiles flying over our city, going to their targets and being intercepted, mostly most of them. I wouldn't say that it's something that we like to have or something that people can get used to or want to use to. But that is the reality now we have in a very, in a usually otherwise very peaceful and quiet city. But obviously, presumably a great deal of concern from the Qataris and the Qatari government about these attacks that we're seeing on Qatari energy infrastructure. So they are far from here. We don't see them, despite the fact that some social media and with the AI and everything, you can see that as if the city is, you know, is having some kind of fire in the background.

6:44There is nothing like that. These installations, the oil infrastructure is far away and we don't see that. We, just like you are in London, here in Doha, we see these on TV, on Al Jazeera or any other station or through social media. um let's turn then to to your piece because it's got a lot of attention and and um has an arresting argument in it this this a narrative which has been commonplace across much of the western media which is this is a war without an end game this is something that trump has fallen into that it's proving disastrous why that is in your view misplaced or wrong because the focus here is basically on other places so for example as we speak now the focus is on this trait of hormones which is critical and important for the world economy and also for the region.

7:34But that is not where the focus of the war is. And also, as you mentioned, and also I has argued in that piece, there is a focus on why this campaign is pointless and it doesn't have a strategy. But I think what the U.S. is doing, they did have a strategy, they still do have a strategy, which is basically degrading Iran's capabilities, both nuclear and military, because just prior to the war, the assessment of the U.S. and Israel, and by the way, I'm not advocating either. What I'm trying to say here is in military terms, as an operation and tactically, this war on Iran is delivering its set objectives.

8:16And the numbers show that as well support this argument. When the war started, we had hundreds of ballistic missiles flying over GCC countries and even to Jordan and to Israel. As we speak now, the number has fallen quite sharply. Also, you know, when you look at the war, yes, it feels forever, especially for us here in Doha. It's only 20 days. But in military terms and in war terms, 20 days is not very long. And what is my comparative reference here is Iraq. In 1991 and in 2003, both the aerial campaign to bomb Baghdad and other cities took more than five weeks, up to six weeks. We are still 20 days on, and the results speak for themselves.

9:05Again, I am not cheering for this war. This campaign is delivering on its terms. Almost all of the leadership of the Iranian government has been decapitated. as well as the Iranian government is struggling to replace them. Iran, as we speak now, doesn't have a supreme leader. They do have one in name, who's Mujtava, the son of the former leader of the IRGC. But we haven't seen him or heard what he had to say. So Iran now is, you know, there is a massive disruption of command and control. and Iran, unlike any other regime in the region, they don't have a normal government. So they have a president, they have also a foreign minister, and a functioning government, but that government doesn't have a lot of power.

9:55As we speak now, the IRGC is in power, its leader is missing, or we don't know where he is, and most of its, if you like, field commanders have been decapitated. So what we are looking at here is a country that is being attacked fiercely by a very powerful country, which is the United States, along with Israel. And maybe I will address the point that, you know, Israel is leading this war or there is this insinuation that it was Israel who got the US. Before you get there, Dr. Suman, I just want to just be clear for the listeners and viewers, just to put this part of your argument, because I think it is important crisply.

10:35Your argument is essentially that even if the US is not always stating its objectives, especially cleanly, and indeed those goalposts have kind of been moved by the president, President Trump, multiple times, Your argument is that in terms that there is a strategic aim, which is to permanently militarily degrade Iranian capabilities, and you think that they're succeeding. They are making massive progress in that direction, not only in terms of their conventional military capabilities, Iranian conventional military capabilities, but also in terms of controlling Iran's ambition to own a nuclear bomb.

11:14And today we hear the CIA director at the Senate hearing saying that Iran was intending on acquiring a nuclear bomb. And also they had the evidence that Iran was planning to use that if it had to. So that is, you know, now coming from the intelligence community. And it's still these 450 kilograms of enriched uranium. They're being locked and monitored under the ground. They're in gas form and cylinders. And it seems, at least this is from the information I have read, that the United States and Israel are keeping a close eye on one narrow entry point into where these 450 kilograms are kept. But I suppose that the counter arguments that Dr.

11:59Salim would be to say that, yes, of course, I don't think there can be much argument that the Iranian military capabilities are being degraded. But ultimately, unless you achieve what the president said initially, President Trump, his aim was, which was regime change. Well, at some point, the Americans and Israelis will stop bombing. And if the regime is still in place and presumably its intent hardened more than ever before to survive, then they can rebuild their military capabilities. And they can certainly not, as you say, acknowledge yourself in the piece. They can't unlearn the knowledge they've gained with regards to a nuclear weapon.

12:35So on some level, you're back to square one, aren't you? Well, you would be if the main objective is regime change. The regime has already changed as I started. Has it? Has it? Well, definitely it has changed because, you know, usually regimes when they are being targeted and decapitated on this level, unprecedented, I don't think I have ever read or, you know, listened to anybody talking about a regime that has been successfully decapitated in this way, killing the leader, the top of the of the pyramid and also everyone else, including the director of intelligence. I think yesterday and Larry Johnny as well, they usually the replacement would not, you know, they would not go for being hardened.

13:23They would try to survive. So they would have a logic of survival. And as we speak now, they are fending for themselves, trying to protect themselves, whoever left of the leadership, protecting themselves. Again, it's assassinations. Again, morally, legally, that's a different argument. What I'm focused on in my work is, is this working? It is delivering. And also the war is not over yet. Whether the United States and Israel have something, some kind of a plan to, you know, for regime change and what kind of regime change. I don't know about that. I think the United States would have to make. But I suppose, you know, it depends what your metric is, doesn't it?

14:01And if the metric is to at any given moment in time, as we're speaking right now, or maybe for the next month or six months or year or who knows, to degrade Iran's military, then fine, there can be no doubt that this operation will likely succeed. But if your objective is to permanently neutralise Iran as a threat, then it's not going to work, is it? Because all they will do is rebuild their military capabilities. Their ambition, as I say, will be hardened. And actually, if anything, this war presumably tells whatever is left of the regime that actually a nuclear weapon is absolutely what they need to guarantee their own survival.

14:36So, as I say, just ultimately back to square one. That assumes that the regime stays the same. The regime does not stay the same. As I said, it has already been changed. and the campaign. Do you really think, do we, what's the evidence that we have that whoever takes over now, we've already obviously got the son of the Ayatollahs taken over, that their attitudes will be much different to that of the previous government, if you can describe it in such terms. Great. Well, previous cases and also the regime itself. If we step back, you know, it's, I understand, you know, where you come from with this.

15:12And also, I understand the argument that the regime, you know, might survive and they would be hardened and especially the son, who supposedly taken over from his father, would seek revenge. His father was killed, his mother was killed, and more of his family. But first, we don't know if he's still alive. We haven't heard, not his voice, we don't know where he is. Secondly, the regime has changed fundamentally, and the evidence to that, if we step back now to 27th of February and compare who's left of the regime today, and we are on the 19th of March, I think it would be very hard to name a few of the people left, and I mean leaders of the regime, because most of them have been decapitated, and usually such regimes would need to reconfigure themselves, and they would need a lot of time trying to survive a rebuild, especially in a country where their legitimacy is being questioned massively.

16:07Only like six or eight weeks ago, they had a demonstration. Yes, but those demonstrations have stopped because the regime is using the occasion of the war to tighten their internal control. And there is no evidence, as far as I'm aware, at least, of whoever is going to take over having a fundamentally different disposition to those who came before. And as you say, you know, you could argue you're dealing with a slightly different regime and you could argue that this is worse than we had before, because we see a country which is now basically acting not like a state in war, but acting effectively like a large scale guerrilla group, destroying key pieces of economic infrastructure, which is going to create all sorts of economic and political consequences the world over.

16:52So is this any better than where we were three and a half weeks ago? great so what is better what is not i think that is also another different argument what we are looking here at is iran that has been changed fundamentally um a regime that has been weakened to a large extent and also i just want to focus on this you say that iran has been changed fundamentally how can we know that how do we know that the leadership in iran is unlike anything else um it's there are very few cases in the world that resembles the leadership in iran So, for example, Ayatollah Khamenei, he wasn't a normal leader of a group because, you know, he was in the president.

17:30He has religious authority, and this religious authority has been removed. That's why also proxies in the region, they're acting out in ways that are not in line with Iran's interests. And whoever takes over has to have that kind of authority. And his son does not have that. Even if he's being elected, he's being elected by the IRGC, not by the Hausa, the religious. The Ayatollah was an old man. I mean, frankly, he was an 86 year old man and death presumably was coming for him in the near future. Come what may. We didn't need thousands of tons of American and Israeli bombs to achieve that. Yes, but the war did not go only for him.

18:09He was killed. It's different than, you know, he passed away and he had a lot of authority. And I would maybe take another example to compare. Look at Iraq. We have Sistani. Sistani is 90 plus years old, but he still holds a lot of authority in Iraq. Actually, he's more powerful than the government in Baghdad. And, you know, because they come from a similar haza, which is the religious, if you like, center in Iraq. And they have a similar one, Al Qum. That is one. Two, the regime, you know, the demonstrations did not stop because of the war. The demonstrations stopped because the regime killed more than 32 ,000 people of, you know, Iranians.

18:47And that had to, you know, the war had the sorry demonstrations had to stop. And Trump himself says something. He said that the Iranian people, even though he called on them to rise against their own government and take over later, a few days ago, I think he said that the Iranian the Iranian people are still weak. and they wouldn't be able to rise against the government. And we need to finish the job by weakening and dismantling the Iranian government so that the people take over. And also, I don't see the U.S. administration really having that as their strategic objective. What they would go for is degrading Iran's military capabilities, making sure that Iran does not own a nuclear bomb, and then they will see where this goes.

19:32Because I would say my assessment that over the next few weeks, this will be an intensive military campaign and then it would go into low intensity conflict. To be clear, then, you do think that in order for this effort to be successful on some level, it will require a form of regime change. I know you're saying, well, to some extent, perhaps that's happened already. But in order to basically escape the trap of degrading the militarily now only for them to rebuild or perhaps try and obtain a nuclear bomb again in the future, you do accept that on some level there needs to be regime change. And if it is the case that the Americans and Israelis conclude that whoever has taken over now, whatever form the Iranian government now has, if they conclude that actually it hasn't changed very much attitudinally by comparison to the old regime, then that logic necessitates actual regime change, doesn't it?

20:30So more intense military force, perhaps even boots on the ground. I don't see the US sent in boots on the ground. That would be strategically unattainable. It would be a massive mistake. thousands of American soldiers would be slaughtered in Iran. Iran is a massive country with 90 plus million population. And the U.S. and its allies had their experience in Iraq. But yes, they would have to go for the hard options, basically pressuring Iran more, bombarding Iran. And that explains maybe the next phase, which started already by targeting Iranian infrastructure. And by the way, whether it's wrong or right, that's, you know, that's another issue.

21:15But the U.S. would go for that for that phase. At this point, what they are doing, basically, they decapitated the leadership and now they are degrading the military capabilities and they will move even further. Probably the U.S. and Israel have also people on the ground. We have seen this last June that Israel and the U.S. had people, agents and people who are against the regime, causing a lot of trouble for the Iranian government. And they are still executing people and arresting people. Earlier today, I read in Iranian media that they have arrested 139 so-called CIA agents. agents. And this very war that it started started with a human source informing the CIA that of the location where Khamenei was.

22:01Stay with us. I will be talking more with Dr. Saloum after the break.

22:09From a range of trusted voices and award winning journalists. Good morning, I'm Nick Ferrari. It's time to get to your calls. Find out the latest news and hear every side of the story. There is no question. Ending the war is the quickest way to reduce the cost of living. That is my first instinct, my first priority. Is the best way to help us with petrol and fuel costs for Keir Starmer to say yes to President Trump and send the Navy to protect Hormuz? The fallout of the Iran war. Follow it live on LBC. Listen on our free global player app or the LBC app.

22:49Crepe-worthy and smart, Hero Bread's loaves, bagels, and noodles have just 0-5 gram snack carbs, 0 gram sugar, and up to 19 grams of protein and 32 grams of fiber per serving. Hero Bread bakes with heart-healthy olive oil and delivers a soft, fluffy, flavorful experience you love. Shop now on Hero.co. Use code IHEART for 10 % off. That's Hero.co. Per serving, not a low-calorie food. Some products contain allulose. See nutrition info on Hero.co for sodium and sugar content.

23:19newsagents. Your argument extends to suggest, and I think perhaps this is something that viewers and listeners will find surprising, because your argument is that not only is there a clear objective, but you think that there is an endgame and that that is misplaced commentary that there's been to say that Trump doesn't have an endgame. Why do you think he has an endgame? Well, you don't go to war without an endgame.

23:45Putin didn't have an endgame, Did he or did George W. Bush have an endgame, particularly in 2003? I mean, it wouldn't be the first. He wouldn't be the first leader to go into a war without being sure how it ends, would he? Well, I think every war starts with an endgame. But whether they would attain that or reach that endgame, that's a different story. So with President Trump and Israel alongside him, they went with with the aim of not regime change. That would be, if you like, a bonus. But they wanted to make sure that Iran does not pose a threat. I mean, Trump did say it was about regime change on the first day, of course.

24:20Well, maybe I wanted to address that earlier. So Trump, you know, and I think I mentioned that in my article, that Trump communication is really hard to analyse. So if you listen to Trump every day, the narrative would be changing. So he has not been doing very well in terms of communication. But this war has been planned for decades. This is not new. And also Iran's defence has been planned for decades. And both parties are talking about this. Everybody knew that Iran is a problem for the U.S. and Israel, and this has been done by Obama and other countries. Every president or administration had their own way trying to deal with this issue.

24:58Now, Trump took the decision to go to Iran, supposedly based on the intelligence community reporting that, you know, Iran is planning to weaponize its nuclear capabilities. And I think Jared Kushner and Barack Tom Barack, they said that during the meeting in Geneva, Araqji, the foreign minister of Iran, says something very direct to them at the very beginning of the negotiations. He said that we have 450 kilograms of enriched uranium that would enable us to make 10 nuclear bombs. And these negotiations collapsed. And I think it was brokered by Oman. and so the war did not come out of the cold.

25:46This has been built up over decades. But I mean, to be clear, in terms of his endgame, are you clear as to what it is? Even if you think the Americans on some level are, are you clear as to what it is? Yeah, but President Trump, he's not leading the military operations on the ground. It's consistent. The consistent message coming out of the White House is that what they want is to degrade Iran's conventional military capabilities, and to make sure that Iran does not weaponize its nuclear capabilities. And these two, to me, they seem to be the main objective of this war. And the US and Israel alongside it, they are progressing very well so far in that direction.

26:26But again, if this is about, let's leave regime change to one side, if this is about what it's always been about, which is an Iranian nuclear weapon, I mean, you mentioned the missing uranium. on what level i mean and you say in your piece you mentioned this in your piece but on what um on what level can we be assured that whatever replaces this iranian government that has just gone will simply not resume what iranian governments have been trying to secure for decades which is an iranian nuclear bomb and that this war will have just convinced them more than any period before that that is necessary.