Trump's 'no rules' war on Iran

0:00Okay, I know it feels like he hasn't really gone anywhere because he's doing collaborations all the time. But it's actually been nearly a decade since Bruno Mars has had a solo album. Now he's finally back with one. It's called The Romantic. I'm Elamin Abdelmahmoud. And this week on my show, Commotion, I invite some of the smartest music critics I know to get into whether the Bruno we know and love is back and also whether it's time for a different Bruno Mars. You can find and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC podcast. Katie, Paul, not exactly a hard choice in deciding what to talk about this week.

0:38We're just days into what is quickly spiraling into a regional-wide conflict in the Middle East instigated by U.S. and Israeli airstrikes that killed Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and dozens of other senior officials. Remarkable how quickly this escalated. I mean, we shouldn't be surprised, but it is still remarkable. And I guess I would also say so much for taco, right? I mean, Trump did not chicken out. Here we are. And I'm joining you guys this week from Ottawa. I'm filling in as host of Power and Politics, where this, of course, is the significant topic of conversation here in Ottawa.

1:11Canada showing initial support for U.S. intervention to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. But it's a complicated moment, certainly in Canada. And there's a lot of mixed reaction here. We were wondering, Katie, why you weren't sitting next to us, but we are happy to see you on the TV screen, so to speak. And what a great place for you to be this week as we delve into this to give us that Canadian perspective. So President Donald Trump has, for the most part, avoided calling what's transpiring in the Middle East a war, choosing instead to describe it as major combat operations. And this is important for a few reasons, chief among them that he did not seek congressional approval before launching these strikes.

1:56That's got a lot of folks here in D.C. up in arms, mainly, of course, Democratic representatives. It's also putting some of America's traditional allies, including Canada, in a bit of a tough spot. Of course, people in the region will be the ones most affected by this conflict, and hundreds have already been killed. But for us today, we're asking what this new conflict in the Middle East will mean for America and its allies. I'm Willie Lowry. I'm Katie Simpson. And I'm Paul Hunter, two blocks from the White House, where all eyes are on Iran.

2:37Okay, before we get too far, I should point out that we're recording this early Tuesday afternoon. This is a quickly moving story and things may change by Wednesday. Paul, let's start with you. Just how significant is this attack on Iran? Well, I'm going to start with a couple of things first. I love when you do that. Let's just deflect it right off the bat. I think we should say it was, if past tense is all right by now, a terrible regime. And there are all kinds of expat Iranians dancing in the streets globally. And the other thing I want to say right off the bat is the W word, war. I guess we can agree, because this is a contentious word in this conversation.

3:22Just ask anybody at the White House. it's a not formally declared war. It's an armed conflict. There's all kinds of different ways different people are going to be describing this. But I think what we see playing out in real time in the real world, lowercase maybe is the way to put it, is a war. I think it is obviously massively significant. I said off the bat how remarkable it is how quickly it escalated. And again, to the surprise of no one. But look, I mean, I was following on this for the National last night, just before we went to air, we see the State Department telling Americans in like 12 or 14 countries in that part of the world to get out now while you can, you know, the fact that after they started after they started it, yeah, fair point.

4:13But because because of the response from Iran, right? Like, to me, the takeaway image right now is the hotels that were struck in Dubai. I mean, come on. Like, but then again, what did anybody expect when you start doing something like this? So it's the question is how much further will it escalate? Will these countries that Iran has struck side with the U.S. now and allow, you know, overpasses in their airspace? Will this just grow into a bigger, bigger, bigger war, to use that word again? You know, a significant part of the analysis that we've been discussing here in Ottawa and part of the conversations we've been having on power and politics, it is the calculation by Iran where it is hitting some of those Gulf nations, where it is hitting the civilian targets, that it's attempting to put pressure on the U.S.

5:04and Israel by these Gulf states that don't want to be dragged into this and that they might plead with the Americans to ease up on this. But we haven't seen that happen. That hasn't been the response. If anything, the analysis has been that these countries that didn't want to get involved are showing some sort of support or sympathy for the Americans, at least at this point. and apparently according to some of the analysts who study this very carefully and are watching everything very closely is that Iran is trying to make this so painful and and sort of you know spread out the the civilian sort of toll here as a way to send a message that you know if this is an existential threat and they can make it through this that the U.S.

5:46and that Israel might not ever want to do this again if it in fact the regime does make it through this moment. And at the root of it all. I've written, I've looked at my notes here and I see trust us, but I could also say trust the U.S., right? I mean, that's at the core of everything here. Trust Donald Trump, trust the U.S. when it says this, that there was an imminent threat and that this needed to be done and it needed to be done now. Yeah. And I think we definitely want to get into the genesis of this at some point because it's too important to ignore. But I'm just going to put on my former Middle East correspondent hat for a minute.

6:22I lived in the UAE for several years, spent significant chunks of time in Lebanon, the West Bank, and pretty much the entire region. Seeing these attacks, these strikes in the UAE, especially for me, where you have hotel and civilian infrastructures being targeted, or if not necessarily being targeted, being the victim of these strikes, at least, is incredibly striking. This is a place that is built on security. That is its biggest draw. And that's been pierced. And so what we see going forward, how these countries react, will be incredibly informative of what this conflict will look like and how long it will potentially last.

7:10So I want to talk a little bit about what we saw on Monday in a pretty extraordinary address that in many ways felt like a rallying cry to the troops. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said, we will finish this on America first conditions of President Trump's choosing. Nobody else's as it should be. How much of a departure is this from other conflicts in American history? I think one thing we need to talk about in this moment, particularly when we take a look at what Pete Hegseth said, what he presented to the public was sort of in contradiction with what President Donald Trump has said about what the end goals are here for the United States.

7:55When Donald Trump first spoke about this, talking about this in a video posted on Truth Social, his social media website, he talked about inspiring and encouraging the Iranian people to rise up and lead to regime change. We heard Pete Hegseth say, this is not about regime change. He explicitly said that. And then 24 hours later, Donald Trump and the Chancellor of Germany are sitting in the Oval Office talking about how they're looking forward to what comes next and regime change. Donald Trump has talked about all kinds of different goals out of this conflict. And the thing is, it is to his advantage, because if the goalposts are continually changing, He can at any time when he sees fits say, OK, well, we've reached this goal and this was the goal and we're out and I can claim victory.

8:45If you're constantly changing the goalposts, you are in control of the narrative. And that, you know, in a way is to Trump's advantage because he can define it any way he wants. Yeah, I think that shifting sands is really interesting. But we've also we've now been in a year of kind of the administration wrestling with Congress for power. Right. We saw that with tariffs. We've seen it with so many others. And now we have what really is a war. And yet the president has not gone to Congress and sought approval. What do you make of it? Which is why Democrats called it an illegal war. But what is the W word, right?

9:28Like it's – shall we dive into constitutional law? Because at the end of the day, that's what it's about. Because Congress – it says in the Constitution that only Congress has the authority to declare war. But it also says in Article 2 of the Constitution that the president can act – this is my summary of it – but unilaterally with military force. when the president deems it is necessary. And this gets back to something we've talked about throughout Trump 2.0, right, which is the testing of executive powers, right? Congress can declare war, but the president can move in regardless. And if Congress passes a war powers resolution, which it's going to vote on this week, unlikely to pass, but even if it did, even if it did, President Trump, any president, can veto it.

10:17Fun fact. When was the last time the U.S. Congress formally declared war? Katie, Willie, anyone? I want to say 2003, but I feel like that's the wrong answer. He's setting me up to fail here, Katie. It's classic Paul. 1942, after Pearl Harbor. And you know what we've had since then? You know what the United States has had since then? Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, right? So on its face, evidence that, you know, I hate to put it this way, but the Constitution can say what the Constitution says. But there have been U.S. involvement in wars around the world effectively. Here's another question. How many years since 1942, Willie?

11:01Do the math in your head. Wow. For decades. I'm so glad I'm not sitting in the studio for this. So all of this to say. You can't be eye contact me and ask me to do math. 84. All of this. You may be right. All of this to say, it's very complicated, but what President Trump is determined to do is test the powers of his office, and so far he's been successful at it. I think you're absolutely right. And I'm going to be a little vulnerable here. We're doing this podcast three days after the start of what is really a significant conflict in the Middle East. I would call it a war. That's going to be decided by history.

11:38But this is a really hard time to be talking about this because we just don't know what's going to happen. And I can't help but think about 2003 weapons of mass destruction. Obviously, that proved not to be true. And that's why the genesis of this conflict is really important. And I want to play a clip of Marco Rubio, of course, Secretary of State, speaking to reporters yesterday, explaining about the timing of the strikes and the reasoning behind it. It was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, the United States or Israel or anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States.

12:16The orders had been delegated down to the field commanders. It was automatic. And in fact, it bared to be true. Trust us. Right. Believe us. We're telling you that they were they were trying to read. We, the United States, saying that they're trying to rebuild. And if we don't do that, if this isn't done now, what, what? You know, wait till it's too late. Should we not do this? Hello, world. Should we step back and let Iran prepare itself to annihilate everybody? I mean, that's the argument. That's the argument. He also referenced the Venezuela strike. And it seems as though they feel that event turned out so positively that they're very happy with Delce Rodriguez, who, of course, is now has taken over the presidency there.

13:00But Iran is an incredibly different country. It has a well entrenched system of governance like it or not. They had contingency plans for eons, it seems. And Trump acknowledged that they already killed the people that they had thought could potentially replace Khamenei. So it feels as though they haven't really thought out the next day, the day after. Unlike Venezuela, Iran also has the power and ability and the willingness to fight back. Exactly. And it was – I mean we now know that they were in talks with Delcey Rodriguez ahead of the strike. We haven't learned of any kind of covert intelligence discussions with Iranians ahead of these strikes.

13:44But, you know, Paul, I want to talk a little bit about the fact that he didn't talk to Congress ahead of or didn't seek their approval ahead of time. We know that later this week there are going to be debates and votes around the War Powers Resolution. This was pre-scheduled ahead. Because of the buildup. Exactly. What are you going to be looking for? For it to have no impact. I mean, to be blunt, right? I mean, it's a dog and pony show, even if it passes. Right. I mean, it can be vetoed by Trump if it you know, they're not going to have veto proof majority, I don't think because you're even seeing some Democrats.

14:21John Fetterman, for example, out of Pennsylvania, supporting what Trump is doing, effectively making saying the same thing as Rubio. Like, why not? A bad regime like like this is not inappropriate to go double negative. But, you know, they'll put people on the record. You're going to stand up and, you know, every like in every country, Canada included, you're looking for quotes to put in your Christmas cards to people who may or may not vote for you to say, here's where you stood on this vote. For history, exactly. But it won't change anything. It's not going to change anything that's going on right now.

14:53And Trump knows it. Katie, you think it's just going to go along partisan lines? I think that I agree with Paul's point there, but I do think there is some risk here among Trump's most loyal supporters when it comes to the MAGA base, because a significant part of his and particularly J.D. Vance, when they were out on the campaign trail in 2024, they talked about how the U.S. is not going to get involved in forever foreign wars. I recognize that the way the Trump administration is trying to brand this, they're saying we're not going to be in there forever. And but, you know, that was a key selling point of the Trump administration of Americans who were frustrated of seeing their tax dollars go to things like bombs and foreign wars and those kinds of things when they'd rather have that money used at home to help better the everyday life of Americans.

15:41And now we're in a situation where we've got the foreign entanglement entanglement in Venezuela. Now we've got this much larger conflict in the Middle East. And it is a risk for Trump if Americans start to sort of say that they don't like this, because, of course, it is a midterm election year. Donald Trump needs his base to show up at the polls to continue to elect Republicans so that he continues to have a hold on Congress and can continue to implement his agenda. I think that's interesting, Katie, because I think it's – on the one hand, I think Trump's gambit is, well, who else are they going to vote for, right, if he looks at the MAGA base?

16:19But the question isn't who else are they going to vote for. They're not going to turn Democrat. They're not going to turn out. It's that they might stay home. Exactly. Yeah, it very much seems like it's the antithesis of what he – of the way he sold himself to the MAGA base and to the American people.

16:39Add a little curiosity into your routine with TED Talks Daily, the podcast that brings you a new TED Talk every weekday. In less than 15 minutes a day, you'll go beyond the headlines and learn about the big ideas shaping your future. Coming up, how AI will change the way we communicate, how to be a better leader, and more. Listen to TED Talks Daily wherever you get your podcasts. anytime you have a fairly long history in public office or the public sphere there's a lot of comments that can be brought up when events happen i want to go back to one in 2011 donald trump put out a video criticizing then president barack obama let's take a listen our president will start a war with iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate he's weak and he's ineffective.

17:31So the only way he figures that he's going to get reelected and as sure as you're sitting there is to start a war with Iran. Two quick questions. How far out are we from the midterms and what are the polls looking like? Paul? What are you supposed to think when you when you hear clips like that that are getting replayed all the time now and old tweets by Trump that sort of made the same kind of point? I mean, cue writers on Saturday Night live, right? I mean, it's like it's and why it underlines, you know, the frustration you hear from voters all the time, which is why should I even bother? Right.

18:07Like what to believe and when what to take seriously and what not to take seriously, what is being said simply to get elected and then what is being done once they do get elected. I brought my own audio, Willie, because yesterday this is from the East Room yesterday when Trump came to conduct a ceremony, want to give a medal of honor, I believe, to three war veterans, one posthumously from World War II, one from Vietnam, I think, and one from Afghanistan. You had their families there. And during this ceremony, Trump gave an update on the situation in Iran. And then he started talking about curtains.

18:46I picked those drapes in my first term. I always like gold, but I think we can save a lot of money. I just saved curtains. And it will be. It'll be spectacular. It'll be the most beautiful ballroom. I believe it's because I built many a ballroom. What do you think when you hear things like that? So now when you consider what the U.S. president is saying about curtains, but also about the justification for what's going on in Iran. Like, can you blame someone for thinking this isn't a serious person? It's kind of mind boggling in its own sort of Trumpian way. There's a disconnect. There's a disconnect.

19:27I also thought there was a significant disconnect in when you heard him talk about how he's expecting more American casualties. And he sort of seemed very just casual about it. And matter of fact about, you know, well, this is sort of the cost of this. And it wasn't the same sort of gravity we've heard from presidents of the past when these service members make the ultimate sacrifice, following orders, doing what they are, you know, they sign up to do this for their country. And the thing is, Donald Trump has never been like that. I don't know if the public is conditioned to expect that from him or not expect that from him at this point.

20:06But, you know, he can talk about Iran and then so quickly flip to talking about curtains in the East Room and the building of a ballroom. And that's the kind of baffling thing about the appeal of Trump, isn't it? That is part of the appeal of Donald Trump, is that he is not like everybody else. And he says weird things and crazy things and funny things. And, you know, yes, he's low in the polls. Yes, he's struggling mightily right now with the American electorate. But Donald Trump has ridden that kind of stuff his whole political career, and it's kind of worked for him. It remains... It's disarming.

20:39impossible to explain. He is disarming. That's it. There's a kind of weird charm. It's a charm to his supporters. But when the people that do not like them hear it, it gives them goosebumps. It makes them angry. It has that sort of immediate polarizing moment. He would call that Trump derangement syndrome. People who see it that way. But yeah, I went back, I watched Bush's declaration of war, essentially, I think it was March 19, 2003. My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grave danger.

21:18So vastly different than what we've seen out of this White House. The somberness of it all, really a striking kind of thing. It was terrifying back then. It was terrifying back then. And also, you know, the amount of protests. We saw some of the biggest protests in human history over the Iraq war. Where's the outrage today? I mean, that's a good question, to which I don't have the answer. I mean, everything is so upside down here and now. You know, I was thinking about, you know, going back to 03 and the argument that was being made then and how it all turned out to be false. Right. But at that time, you take the president and the administration at their word until it was ultimately obviously proven otherwise.

22:07I get back to the central thing here. On the one hand, they're saying trust us with Iran. But we're in a time when we haven't been given reasons to trust time and time and time and time again. I would say maybe we give it some time in terms of whether the American public is frustrated here. But I do think that we need to keep in context, even if the American public has questions about what is the reason why America is doing this. If there are people who are not supportive of American military intervention in foreign conflicts, you know, questioning why this is happening. I think we need to give it a minute, give it some time.

22:44But the other thing to keep in mind here is this is the Iranian regime. And for decades, the Iranian regime has been known for, you know, the oppression of its people, for the killing of citizens, for the killing of protesters. You're right on the money, Katie. Iran's antagonistic, and that's a generous word, it's far more than antagonistic behavior over the last 47 years. 47 years. Makes it a really easy decision from countries like Canada to come out and support ensuring that they never possess a nuclear weapon. That being said, as this conflict drags on, if it drags on, I think it will become a harder and harder question for Canada.

23:26Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense, had a pretty remarkable press conference on Monday where he essentially untethered his troops and encouraged them to prosecute a war without being encumbered by the rules of engagement. Let's take a listen. Unlike so many of our traditional allies who wring their hands and clutch their pearls, hemming and hawing about the use of force. America, regardless of what so-called international institutions say, is unleashing the most lethal and precise air power campaign in history. All on our terms, with maximum authorities. No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy-building exercise, no politically correct wars.

24:17We fight to win and we don't waste time. No stupid rules of engagement. So how do you really feel? I mean, this is the secretary of defense of a country that is just instigated a regionally wide conflict. It's quite a striking statement, Katie, and I can only imagine it would make it an even more difficult sell from Carney kind of going forward in terms of any Canadian support. Well, it sort of speaks to the broader point in terms of the concern that is emerging in the immediate aftermath. You know, what does that exactly mean? Does that mean that the Americans are not going to adhere to the standards of international law, those kinds of concerns and those kinds of questions?

25:03And that is why we're starting to see, OK, hesitation, perhaps, even though the Iranian regime is horrible and good luck finding a Western ally that, you know, doesn't want to see that Iranian regime gone. But when you hear the Americans talk like that, whatever they're trying to do to get from point A to point B here, there are concerns about the how and there are big concerns about the how. We support the efforts to end the Iranian nuclear program and its decades-long process, regime's decade-long process of state-sponsored terrorism. But we remind that international law binds. It's the central question for all U.S.

25:46partners, Canada, Europe, all of them, or as Hegseth would put it, pearl clutchers. Is this legal or is it not? Are you woke and PC or are you with us effectively, the world's biggest superpower? Are you with us or are you with the Iranian regime? It's either us or the Iranian regime. And that makes it problematic for every other country that is a U.S. ally, whether to stand with it or not, because you're being framed as the U.S. would portray you unless you stand with them. There are two sides to this, obviously, and we just don't know how long the Iranian regime can hold on, how long they'll want to hold on, or what their capacity is to fight back.

26:31Whether the proxies, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen, the militia in Iraq join this fight. But a lot of unanswered questions and scary days ahead, most certainly for the people of the region, the people living in the Middle East. Katie, Paul, thanks again for another great conversation. I love hearing your perspectives. But before we say goodbye, I want to remind our listeners that you can drop us a line at WashingtonPod, all one word, at cbc.ca. That's our email address. Once again, that's WashingtonPod at cbc.ca. Or you can leave us a comment on Spotify. And don't forget to follow us on your favorite podcast app.

27:14Have you got one yet, Paul? I do. Oh, please pray do tell. That's my secret. Oh, next episode. We miss you, Katie. Thanks, Willie. See you, Katie. Bye, guys.