Transcription
Well, th this leads us nicely uh to our uh Iran segment here. Dr. Atrita Parsy from the Quincy Institute. Welcome back to Breaking Points.
>> Great to be with you guys.
>> Where do we begin, Ryan? What do we want to start with here? Um well, Tita, we have the two two major pieces of news, the bombing of the tracks and the other civilian infrastructure. And then did you see uh Trump talking about um arming protesters? it. Jeremy seemed to think he was implying he was arming the MEK. I thought he was referring again to the Kurds. Um, did you see this?
>> I didn't see that part. Uh, but >> I could I could >> I would not be surprised that they're taking a second look, if not at the Kurds, perhaps at some other groups, the Baluchi or others, because as you know, uh, next week Netanyahu is coming. I think the Israelis have been very much pushing this narrative that all of this could have worked out so well if just the Kurds had been armed had it not been for that decision that had been pulled >> mainly because Erdogan objected but also because the Kurds objected which is kind of lost in the story.
>> Uh but had that not happened then everything would have been awesome and you know this war would have been won in 4 days which is complete nonsense. I think this is an Israeli effort to kind of give war another chance essentially to create a narrative that allows that.
>> Griffin, let me play this um let me play this Trump clip uh for Trita. Are you ready? Here we go.
>> Immediately. And that's an edict that's in writing. If they protest, if they go out in the streets, they will be immediately shot. They don't have guns. You know, we sent some guns, but the group that was supposed to give, which I said would happen to my people. I said it. I called it. Exactly. We sent guns. A lot of guns. They were supposed to go to the people so they could fight back against these thugs. You know what happened? The people that they sent them to kept them because they said, "What a beautiful gun. I think I'll keep it." So, I'm very upset with a certain group of people and they're going to pay a big price for that.
>> Very poetic for it to be the Wild Wild West. uh underneath that >> ridiculous. What a ridiculous timeline we live in. So, there are some who saw that clip and and assumed that he was talking about the attempt to arm the Kurds, which is which there's been plenty of public reporting on. Others have seen and said, "No, looks like he's talking very specifically. He's talking about January like we were arming the protesters um which would be somebody like the MEK some anti- um anti-government group and then they saying that they kept the guns uh treat your after seeing that your your reaction to it but also Leo like what what do we what do we draw from this fact the fact that he's still kind of blustering about this um their inability to kind of spark an uprising that that is successful there.
>> I do think he's talking about the Kurdish groups because there was an effort back then to give weapons to Kurdish groups that would then be part of the war effort uh as well as Kurdish groups that actually were part of uh the violent elements of the protest back in December and January. There's a group called the PAK which actually was trained by the United States back in 2014 to take on ISIS. Now, it was supposed to be an Iraqi Kurdish group, but it was an Iranian Kurdish group. I don't know if the US didn't know that it was an Iranian Kurdish group, but nevertheless, they trained and it's been a very violent group. Uh, and it was using violence throughout the protest, even before the protest. So, I suspect that there's some Kurdish groups that he's talking about, and he's mentioned in other interviews that he's very upset with the Kurds. Now, they didn't do it because at the end of the day, the Turks interveneed, but also some of the Kurdish leaders of the Kurdish government in in northern Iraq were dead set against it because they knew that it would be a disaster. They knew that they would end up paying the price for it because of Iranian retaliation. The Israelis have very much pushed this narrative that everything would have been just amazing had this operation with the Kurds gone through. And I don't believe that for a second. I think it would have been a disaster in many different ways. But it's an Israeli effort to essentially give war another chance to claim this narrative that everything would have worked out well had this just one thing been done correctly and that way go back and be able to say we still can do war because we actually didn't really fully try regime change.
>> And and we were talking about what that might mean just in terms of going back to the beginning of the war. Netanyahu seemed to convince Trump that the that that was actually a great plan and obviously didn't work out the way that Netanyahu told the president that it would this time around. Um what could we see happen if that's if that attempt at least is successful?
>> You know, it's interesting on the Iranian side. There's a lot of folks there that are very worried that the whole MOU is just used to be able to uh for the United States to be able to uh prepare itself for another round of war. And given how the US under Trump has behaved, it's not necessarily surprising that they would think so. But when you take a look at the fundamentals of the situation, you're still seeing a scenario in which only a third or so of the traffic of the strait is actually up and running. We're not seeing the strategic reserve of oil actually being filled up in the manner that I think the administration was hoping for. Um the second and third uh level consequences of the previous oil shock is still being felt. Some of it has not even started yet. So to under these circumstances restart the war without having at a minimum a completely different approach and strategy to me does not seem to be something that possibly could work. If there's going to be another war, they're going to have to think it through very differently. And the circumstances are not such that there's been enough recuperation. And I don't have the data on what the levels of interceptors, etc. are, but it certainly doesn't look as if that in any way, shape, or form has managed to be uh restocked uh in order to have another war. What I think may be happening or ends up happening is that if the war is kept at this level in which it is below the threshold for the Iranians to close the strait of Hormos then the US may find a degree of benefit in the war because it is degrading the Iranians without paying the price that the US and the world economy was paying when the war actually was fully in in in shape because that's when that strait was closed. osed economies around the world were suffering tremendously. The Iranians are aware of this as well, but they're also looking at a different scenario, which is that even if the strait is not closed, uh this warfare is reducing the traffic already and the reduction of that traffic combined with the very low inventory of oil, including in the strategic reserve of the United States, which is by the way is not supposed to be used in the manner that is used, um is enough for the US to simply not have enough time to be able to conduct any of these military campaigns in a way that would strengthen its negotiating position if this is at the end of the day some sort of a negotiating strategy.
>> If I can take just a step back and say this whole thing is just so idiotic because there was I mean look this whole thing was about the fact that theou article 5 has different interpretations. I personally don't find the Iranian reading of the uh of MOU uh article 5 to be convincing but their view is that it essentially gives them control over the strait during this period until it is completely reopened and a final agreement has been signed. Um the GCC and the American interpretation is different in the sense that they say yes the Barney are responsible for making sure that this is safe passage but it doesn't mean that they're the only ones um that are in charge and as a result the US and uh is using the southern corridor in the strait, which is in the Omani waters to pass ship throughs. Now the Iranians are saying that's fine. U they can go through there as long as they notify the Iranians. The want to make sure that all ships that are transiting the straight are notifying them because according to the article they are even though it doesn't use the word responsible for >> Yeah. >> Exactly. >> Iran will make a >> So as long as those ships actually do indicate to the Iranians that they're transiting. The Iranians are saying they're not having a problem. The US position and the GCC were like well hold on that kind of gives you complete control. It's better to have a scenario in which if there is uh any type of u notification the notification should go both ways. So there should be some entity on the GCC side that also gets the notifications and someone on the Iranian side and the two sides were converging towards this agreement. Uh but then diplomacy was paused because of the funeral of the supreme leader and during the funeral a Saudi and Omar Qatari and I think one other ship was trying to transit through the southern part having its transponders off which is not uh permitted apparently. Uh and this caused this big uh conflict now because the Iranians saw that as a uh confrontation as a provocation, something that was being used while the Iranian attention was on the funeral and they eventually shot at these ships. And this is what apparently caused Trump to really get infuriated. And now this whole thing started and it really doesn't matter because at the end of the day this is just for about another 10 days out of the 30 days in which this was supposed to be uh more or less resolved. It's not entire the the it was just like 10 days left and now we're seeing the entire and everything coming crashing down frankly because both sides are overreacting. I think the Iranians were overreacting in terms of using force against these ships even though they didn't sink any of them. And I think the US is completely overreacting by restarting the war over this issue.
>> Um, something else crossed our desks that I would love you to react to. This is from CNN which says that Israel shared intelligence with the US that Iran had devised a new plan to assassinate President Donald Trump. Two sources familiar with the matter told CNN. And how are we supposed to uh consume this news? You know, it's been used in the past, assassination attempts on Trump as one of the reasons that we have to go to war with Iran. Uh what do you know about this alleged new assassination attempt?
>> Obviously, I have no idea what they're talking about. Um uh but let me put it this way. Someone should do a graph of looking at the moments in which the Israelis are releasing this type of intelligence and how it coincides with massive Israeli campaigns to get the war restarted. I think the Israelis are very astute at playing Trump's psychology. They see that he is right now in a very bad space in general. He seems to have been very upset having to spend the the last week with a bunch of EU leaders in NATO that he hates. Uh and on top of that, the Iranians are shooting at ships and Ukraine, Russia is not going well. So he just seems to be in a terrible, terrible position.
>> And the funeral probably the funeral clips they were all my assumption is that those were all over Fox News where they were saying assassinate Trump, death to America, that sort of thing. So they probably realized ripe.
>> Certainly. Yeah. Um but also I think the size of those crowds may have made Trump a little bit jealous. Uh it may not have played very well with him either. Uh but you're right uh there were slogans etc during the funerals calling for revenge against Trump undoubtedly what was important to notice is that it was never any senior or even mid-level official of the government that was issuing any of those different threats. uh and and that difference is of course uh uh important but personally you know we've seen it before that they have tried to say that there is these assassination attempts and perhaps there are when Trump wanted to go towards diplomacy he completely ignored it when he wanted to go towards a military confrontation then he apparently was uh impacted by it um are there any attempts I have no idea but I think if there were I would suspect that the US intelligence would know more about it than the Israelis You got something, Ryan? Ryan.
>> Oh, yeah. I wanted to ask you about the strikes themselves. Um the it it it appears like the US is attacking a lot of civilians infrastructure um in Iran, particularly bridges and train tracks leading to the latest site of the Ayatollah's funeral. What What do we know about and what do we know about what damage Iran has done to you Bahrain, Kuwait, um and facilities there? And then there were also these reports that somebody was attacking Iran back from Bahrain and Kuwait and it may actually have been Bahrain and Kuwait themselves. What like what what do we know about the specifics of the fighting?
>> Sure. So, first of all, um let's remind ourselves attacking those railways, bridges, etc. These are war crimes, right?
>> Uh not that that's something new, but unfortunately it it's continuing.
>> Those specific railways were repatched and and fixed within 24 hours. So the damage was not longlasting. That's different if the if the US if the Trump administration targets bridges etc. that's going to be uh much uh more difficult to rebuild. But the reason why those were very important was because they had really gained significance during the period in which the US was blockading the Persian Gulf. It turned out that the Iranians started to shift a significant amount of trade and export of oil through the rail system that had been built that was not, you know, fully operational or had not been used to its full capacity, started to be used to its full capacity. So, I think the Iranians probably are viewing this as a signal from the Trump administration that if war goes back on, not only will the US close the Persian Gulf again with his blockade of the blockade, but it will take out Iran's alternative paths. uh uh to export oil or to import uh uh different things. So I I think it was more of a warning particularly mindful of the fact that the Iranians could rebuild it in 24 hours clearly was not you know aimed at doing longlasting damage when it comes to the idea that the Bahanis and the Kuwaitis are striking at the Iranians. These this information came from Israeli media. doesn't mean that it's false, but I personally doubt very much that the Kuwaitis and the Bahinis would do that on their own >> because I would really invite a completely different type of an attack. What the Iranians have done so far is they're going after the US bases and their argument is that if there weren't US soldiers there and there weren't any US bases there, they wouldn't be attacking them. If Bahrain and Kuwait themselves are attacking, it's a completely different story. uh then the the set of uh legitimate targets from the Iranian perspective will of course grow significantly including uh military targets that own are owned by the Kuwaitis and the Bahrainis. So I'm skeptical at this point. We'll have to wait to see. But this is part of the imbalance that exists. Whenever something happens in Iran, we get images out of it because Iranians are not censoring people using their cell phones to film the damage. whereas that is taking place throughout the entire GCC states at this point certainly in Dubai and of course in Israel in which we hardly have any images coming out uh of what is happening there particularly during the exchange of fire between Iran and Israel just a couple of weeks ago and I really you know I think folks should go back and just do searches on videos from October and April 24 to June 2025 the amount of images that came out of Israel of ordinary people just filming it to the essentially zero videos coming out right now. That is because of military censorship. That is not because damages are not done. That's not because the missiles are not hitting. It's because there's an near total censorship that does not allow us to see what actually is happening.
>> Um well, you mentioned earlier uh the crowds for the funeral blanketing Fox News. Now, Fox News uh has also recently Brian Kilme was on a Fox News segment saying he's not really sure if Witoff and Kushner are the men for the job. Let's take a listen for your reaction.
>> Also don't think that Witoff and Kushner should be the ones doing this. They're business guys. They have not been effective in Ukraine, not been effective in Gaza. They have not been effective in this. They can't have three portfolios to begin with. We have a State Department for a reason. Marco Rubio, even Democrats admit, has looked at as a genius internationally. He's a the he is the guy that most people would want. Even if you were if you gave truth to Democrats, he should take the lead on this because you can't see this like a business deal. You have to understand the history of the region and how distrustful the Iranians have been. They will only make a decision if they have no other choice.
>> I like all of those. Well, I like that of all of Brian Kilm's reasons. the fact that they're massively corrupt and like financially tethered to the people they're negotiating with didn't come up. But yes, your reaction for business guys. I I think this is actually a very important clip because the fact that he is very explicitly saying that whole, you know, this file should go to Rubio and the State Department tells you something about what's going on here because you do have a a split in the administration in which you have a camp that is favoring the negotiations and the one that is much more skeptical of it. And he's essentially saying take the negotiations out of the hands of those people who believe in negotiations and put it in the hands of those who never have believed in negotiations with any of these people uh with any of these different countries. And that tells you something about, you know, what they're really looking for. But it also makes me wonder, I mean, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that it was Hexet and Rubio that went in and and informed Trump uh of the fact that the Iranians were starting to shoot at some of these ships again for going through the southern corridor without coordinating with them. And that that prompted this whole beginning of uh him deciding to take military action, etc. It does not appear at least from the Wall Street Journal reporting that the actual negotiators the ones that are in charge of the file were particularly participant in uh uh in at least in the initial discussions in which this was done. And I think it adds to the picture in which we have seen in the past week or so. Rubio after theou was negotiated suddenly emerging into the scene here both in Lebanon and in the GCC despite the fact that prior to that he spent most of his time focusing on Venezuela and Cuba. But now suddenly he showed up. He mediated a deal between Israel and Lebanon that completely contradicts the MOU and it appears to me at least to be an effort to sabotage the MOU. He went to the GCC states and got them to sign this um uh public statement that completely closes the path towards one option of resolving the uh uh the issue over the straight of Hormuz. So both of those to me seemed as an effort uh of undermining the negotiations and now you have Fox News saying actually put the negotiations entirely into the hands of the person who was opposed to these talks from the outset.
>> Hita, we appreciate your time. I know you had to get out of here pretty sharply. Um but always uh helpful to have have you on.
>> Thanks so much for having me. Appreciate it. Thank you.
>> All right. Have a great weekend.
>> Check out True to Substack as well. Hey, if you like that video, hit the like button or leave a comment below. It really helps get the show to more people.
>> And if you'd like to get the full show ad free and in your inbox every morning, you can sign up at breakingpoints.com.
>> That's right. Get the full show. Help support the future of independent media at breakingpoints.com.