Transcription
Not even a moment has passed, and Lebanon is being provoked again. >> It must be attempted to destroy the peace negotiation process that is happening to this extent. >> Currently, there are sporadic clashes. The Israeli forces are not in a condition at this moment. >> I can't imagine why, when Trump is about to finish, Iran will also finish. >> The main thing that will cause war is the nuclear issue. >> Uh, the Donald Trump administration tried to pressure Netanyahu to end the fighting in Lebanon. But on the other hand, it appears that Netanyahu, going with the current of his own government, pressured that if Netanyahu were to follow what Donald Trump pressured, the right wing of this Israeli government would withdraw. >> And I believe that Israel has no way of allowing the United States to withdraw from the war in the Middle East. >> Currently, there are sporadic clashes. Wherever there are forces and weapons, there will certainly be fighting, because the Israeli forces are not currently in a condition to withdraw from Lebanon, and Israel has already confirmed that it will maintain its forces in the Lebanese area. And most bizarrely, Lebanon has not denied it. Israel and Lebanon are not countries with normal relations. They have never had diplomatic relations for almost 70 years, since the country was established in 1948. >> We don't know what Israel will do when it's free, because Israel still insists that it cannot accept it. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, has a problem that he has elections on October 27th, and he is letting it be like this, losing the election, because he wants Israel to have security. Now it is not safe because Hezbollah is firing rockets into Israel. Therefore, Israel has to seize territory in Lebanon, which is territory where Hezbollah has soldiers. Right? The problem is not ending, but Trump wants it to end. But Iran has one advantage because Iran is not the one initiating covert operations. Therefore, the weapons and equipment that have come in are considered sufficient to cope and can easily carry out operations against US military targets in this region. >> Now, uh, I think it's clear that Netanyahu has failed in many matters. Therefore, today Netanyahu is in a difficult position. What he must do now is to try to change Donald Trump's mind. He must try to destroy the peace negotiation process that is happening to this extent. But whether he can do it or not, amidst the situation of the American court that also wants to find a way out. The reason why negotiations cannot begin is, as we all know, because the situation in Lebanon is not yet resolved, and Israel is still advancing its attacks in southern Lebanon. Therefore, uh, I think we know this beforehand that Iran has clearly shown that the battlefield in Lebanon is like the same battlefield as the one where the United States and Iran are fighting. Therefore, I think that at this moment, Iran will probably wait for clarity on what the United States will do next in the case of Lebanon, whether it can control Israel or not. But, uh, however, I think that the deal that was signed yesterday, the 18th, can still proceed. I believe that when both sides have reached an agreement, the important thing is to try to end the military operations. Because the United States itself does not want to engage in a major war in the Middle East, which would lead to damage to the United States in the future. Meanwhile, Iran itself, I think, is a country that has been battered by wars in the past. Both sides, I think, agree that military operations between them should cease. At the same time, the global community is also pressuring. We can see that the European Union itself wants to see stability in the Middle East. Asia, many countries on our continent want to see oil flow from the Strait of Hormuz. All parties, including Pakistan, including Turkey, Qatar, many countries in the Middle East want to see peace in the Middle East. Therefore, for this reason, we see both sides, the United States and Iran, signing an agreement. This means that I think, first, both sides will probably have a joint commitment to end military operations. But that is the beginning. It must be admitted that what both sides have signed together now is an MOU. It is something that can change at any time amidst a fragile situation. Because it is not a permanent peace treaty that will lead to the achievement of various agreements together, including the cessation of fighting, sanctions against Iran, the nuclear issue, armed forces, and so on. I think today is still the beginning of discussions. After this, I think it will be a more important period. But in the first instance, I think Iran wants to see the United States show sincerity by trying to control Israel. If the United States can control Israel, I think further negotiations will likely occur. We can see that many parties, news agencies are reporting consistently that it is a postponement, not a collapse. It is a postponement for now. >> Therefore, the key variable is Israel, which, at this moment, is still reported to be attacking Lebanon. How do you view the issue from Israel's side? They are a partner with the United States, joining the war together, but at the end, it seems that the United States is finished, but Israel is not finished. Can the war truly end like this? >> It must be understood that Israel is a country that wants to draw the United States into war with Iran continuously for a long time, even though many US leaders do not want to do so. Most recently, Hillary Clinton, former US Secretary of State, a few years ago, clearly revealed that when she was Secretary of State, Netanyahu, who was also Prime Minister at the time, pressured her continuously, wanting the United States to help Israel deal with Iran. I think this is Israel's war against Iran, wanting to change Iran. When it is not successful, I think the United States must change its stance. When the United States changes its stance and signs an MOU with Iran, I think the party that loses the most is Israel. At this moment, Netanyahu is in a politically difficult position. On one hand, we see that Donald Trump, including the Donald Trump administration, tried to pressure Netanyahu to end the fighting in Lebanon, including possibly withdrawing Israeli troops from southern Lebanon. But on the other hand, it appears that Netanyahu is also pressured by the right-wing current, which is part of his own government, that if Netanyahu follows what Donald Trump pressured, the right wing of this Israeli government will withdraw. If they withdraw, it will cause Netanyahu's government to collapse, leading to the dissolution of parliament and new elections. If new elections occur in the near future, political defeat for Netanyahu may certainly occur, due to the decline in public popularity of Netanyahu. Now, I think it is clear that Netanyahu has failed in many matters, starting from the Gaza war, which led to the events of October 7th. Moreover, after fighting for two years, he still cannot fully control and occupy the Gaza Strip. And then he opened a war with Iran. At first, the Israeli people were pleased, happy that Israel could draw the United States into fighting. But in the end, what happened was that he was not successful in this war. He opened a war with Hezbollah and still could not win, because Hezbollah could retaliate against northern Israel. Therefore, today Netanyahu is in a difficult position. What he must do now is to try to change Donald Trump's mind. He must try to destroy the peace negotiation process that is happening to this extent. But whether he can do it or not, amidst the situation of the American court that also wants to find a way out, this is something to follow. >> Yes, but if Israel is operating openly now, even though it is the day Donald Trump signed and it is the day scheduled for peace negotiations, and even though the negotiation platform did not materialize, can America and Israel remain friends? >> In terms of foreign policy structure, I think the United States cannot abandon Israel. But the United States can control Israel to prevent it from operating in a way that damages US interests. And I think today, the United States is trying to do that, trying to control Israel. We see many politicians from Donald Trump's side warning Netanyahu. Donald Trump himself has directly criticized, speaking about how much the United States has benefited Israel, speaking about how if it weren't for the United States, Israel would not be able to survive. I think these are signals that the United States is trying to control Israel. But the question is, will the two sides break up completely? I don't think so, if we look at the history of their close relationship. In simple terms, US interests in the Middle East also depend significantly on Israel. Therefore, a breakup is unlikely. But what we will see is a rift at the leadership level between Trump and Netanyahu, or dissatisfaction between the leaders of both sides. This may lead to increased pressure from the United States on Israel. I think we will see that more. >> And how do you assess the future scenario of the war? Will it truly end in the American-Iranian scenario, and then continue fighting in the Israeli scenario? >> If Israel were without the United States, Israel would not have started a war with Iran directly. If Israel could do that, it would have done so long ago. Over many eras of US presidents, Israel has always tried to draw the United States into war with Iran. But previous presidents did not fall for Israel's trap. So, to answer whether if the United States stops the war with Iran, will Israel wage war with Iran directly? I don't think so. What Israel will do next is to try to control and occupy territories or establish its influence in many parts of the Arab world, such as southern Lebanon. And Israel has clearly stated that it is not part of this MOU. Israel will not withdraw its troops from southern Lebanon, and Israel will not withdraw its troops from the Gaza Strip either. But what Israel has not said is that it is still occupying territory in Syria. Therefore, today, I think the main problem and obstacle to the negotiation process between the United States and Iran is Israel. If Israel continues to insist in this manner, I think it may lead to Iran refusing, and Iran may start a war with Israel without the United States being involved. If we listen to Trump's words earlier, Trump said that if Israel continues to wage war in Lebanon, or continues to wage war with Iran, the United States will not get involved. Therefore, the chance of both sides ending the war between them is high if the United States does not support Israel in waging war with Iran. Today, I think, certainly, the atmosphere of the current situation has entered a mode of ending the war. Of course, it will not solve the structural problems of the conflict in the region, because the conflict in the Middle East between the United States and Iran, Israel and Iran, is quite significant. Israel and Iran have been at war for over 40 years, a secret war and proxy war. Meanwhile, the United States has used various methods to pressure Iran, whether by supporting Saddam Hussein in the past, supporting Israel, and sanctioning Iran. And the United States is still concerned about Iran's nuclear program. Including Iran's growing influence in the Middle East through its proxies, armed networks, and Iran's advanced missile development program. These are structural problems. These are issues that both sides have not yet been able to resolve. But today is the beginning. The signing of this MOU is the beginning of discussions and negotiations to solve the problems that both sides have not yet been able to solve. But there are still many obstacles, as we discussed earlier. >> Yes, apart from Israel, and the first point of the MOU, which is to end the war on all fronts, the remaining 13 points. How do you see this MOU? Do both sides win, or does the MOU reflect who is gaining and who is losing in this agreement? >> The United States rushed to close this deal, which resulted in the MOU that came out making Iran quite clearly the winning side. Actually, if we go back to the Obama era, the United States was part of the nuclear agreement with Iran, which we call the JCPOA. After that, Donald Trump, when he came to the presidency for the first term, withdrew the United States from that agreement. Donald Trump said that this agreement was the worst agreement because it did not cover missiles, it did not cover Iran's support for armed groups that the United States wanted Iran not to support. And at that time, Donald Trump also criticized Obama for giving a lot of money to Iran. But when we look at this MOU, this is an MOU. >> It turns out that what happened is >> Iran's missiles and armed forces are not mentioned in this MOU at all. This means that they are not on the negotiation table that will take place in the next 60 days. What does this mean? It means that Donald Trump's previous stance included these issues, but in this MOU, due to the United States rushing to close the deal, the major issues that the United States is concerned about. Meanwhile, what Trump said about Obama giving a lot of money to Iran. When we look at this MOU, it is very clear, Khun Gita. That Iran has economic benefits. First, the sanctions on oil sales have been lifted immediately. And the second, which will likely go through discussions and negotiations, is that the money that the United States has frozen from Iran will be gradually released to Iran. And not only that, but there will be an economic recovery fund for Iran of 300 billion US dollars, which is a huge amount. Many parties have criticized this fund. Some say that this is war reparations for Iran, just with a different name. However, I think that looking at the overall picture of this MOU, I think Iran has a clear advantage due to the United States rushing to close the deal. Meanwhile, Iran's nuclear issue is also important. This may be a problem in future negotiations, but the MOU only states that Iran must not seek nuclear weapons. And if we look at past IAEA reports and US intelligence reports, there is a common conclusion that Iran has never intended to develop nuclear weapons. Even though uranium enrichment has reached 60%, there is no intention to develop it into nuclear weapons. Therefore, Iran has nothing to lose. The US can state in the MOU that Iran will not seek nuclear weapons, will not engage in nuclear weapons programs. But the issue to be discussed later is how much uranium enrichment Iran can do for peaceful purposes. In the JCPOA, back in 2015, it was stated that Iran could enrich up to 3.6%, or 6%, if I remember correctly. I think there may be negotiations during these 60 days, and I think Iran is ready to comply with IAEA measures. Overall, I think Iran is the beneficiary of this MOU. And what Iran wants most is money. Iran has been sanctioned for a long time and wants economic relief. The United States must lift sanctions against Iran. This is what Iran wants most. The JCPOA, back in 2015, even though Iran was a good child, followed the rules, followed the regulations, followed what the IAEA recommended strictly, but in the end, the United States reneged on lifting sanctions because the JCPOA was about controlling Iran's nuclear program in exchange for lifting sanctions, but the United States did not comply. Therefore, today, I think what Iran is concerned about is whether, after negotiations, the United States will fully lift sanctions. I think this is something that Iran is quite concerned about. >> Is it because of the issue of Lebanon? Khun Rangsi, how do you view the phenomenon or events that have occurred in this round? Ultimately, these negotiations did not happen. >> It is in the first point of the MOU, Khun Gita, that was signed electronically. Point 1 clearly states that Iran, America, and their allies must end the war on all fronts. And even before that, Netanyahu announced that Israel does not need to listen to America on everything, because Israel needs to protect its interests and security in Lebanon. This is just after signing, not even a day has passed, and a violation has occurred. That is, an ally of the United States, Israel, is still attacking Lebanon as before. And I ask, how will the remaining points be discussed, Khun Gita? And importantly, looking at the details of the 14 points of the ceasefire, it is clearly written in point 13, Khun Gita, that if the negotiations in points 4, 5, 10, and 11 are not clear, then do not discuss other matters. And today, we haven't even discussed points 4, 5, 10, and 11 yet, and point 1 is already gone. And especially in points 4 and 5, I see it becoming even more difficult. Why? 1. The Strait of Hormuz must be opened within 30 days, and Iran must clear the mines floating in the Strait of Hormuz. 2. The United States must withdraw from the Gulf of Oman. Withdraw troops from the Gulf of Oman. Points 11 and 10 are that the US Treasury must exempt Iran from selling oil, meaning stop sanctioning Iran's oil sales. As for point 11, the US must unfreeze Iranian assets worth 24 billion. This does not include anything, Khun Gita. The 300 billion that is claimed to be for Iran's recovery, who will host it? Where will the money come from? When will it be paid? How will it be paid? I see it as difficult. In the 14 points, even the first point is violated within a day. And I believe that Israel has no way of allowing the United States to withdraw from the war in the Middle East, because if it withdraws, how will Israel survive? Right? Because Iran, Lebanon, Hezbollah, and the Houthis are also attacking Tehran, Haifa, Jerusalem, causing immense damage. And the Gaza Strip is not over yet, because Israel cannot enter the Gaza Strip. There are many more problems. But I see this as buying time, because 1. Donald Trump wants to fight the midterm elections first. Because if he loses, Donald will be finished. He won't be able to do anything for the remaining two years, because Congress has veto power, presidential power. Therefore, they must be united. Therefore, he must win first. 2. The US inflation rate is currently soaring uncontrollably, from 3.8% last month to 4.2% now. Inflation affects the cost of living for Americans, affects unemployment and employment, according to the CPI index. The yield on 10-year and 30-year bonds has skyrocketed to 4.7% and 5.2%. Therefore, I believe the US must retreat, but it may be a temporary retreat. Because I observe this: how is it possible that Iran stopped Moscow, Ukraine attacked, the German Prime Minister declared readiness for war, a decisive break with Russia? And another thing to note is that Minister Xi Jinping met with Kim Jong Un. I believe it is purely about war, and China knows that China and North Korea are about to enter a war in the Korean Peninsula and the South China Sea. These are all things we need to follow to see if they match our analysis. But what happened is, simply put, it collapsed before it even started, right? >> The issue of Israel that has been discussed as a key variable in the past. But this time, even though a signing has occurred and a peace negotiation platform is to be set up, Israel continues to attack Lebanon without stopping. Khun Rangsi, what is Israel's goal, and can no one stop Israel? >> Khun Gita, have you noticed that Zelensky and Netanyahu are acting in the same way? Do you remember when Trump first came and wanted to create stability with Putin to stop the war? Zelensky also started the game like this. Netanyahu is also like this. When it's time to stop firing, he attacks Lebanon, attacks Syria. I think it's like they have a script, where one person's role decreases, and another person increases their role to prolong the war with excuses and reasons. >> What is Israel's excuse? >> Israel knows that if Israel is abandoned by the United States, Israel will be destroyed. Or even Netanyahu, remember when Trump told Netanyahu to handle it himself, the US would not be involved? They argued fiercely, right? But in the end, from the G7 summit, I believe they are acting. Today, the side that upholds ideology or clear policy is China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, saying that if you fight, I fight back. If you shoot, I shoot back. But the American side, you see, they constantly adjust their plans. When they are at a disadvantage, they will do something. Negotiate, and there will be negotiations in a serious manner. Let's stop for 60 days, then we will consider. And it always fails. Since the Russia-Ukraine war, it has dragged on for 5 years. Everyone said Russia and Iran would be finished in two weeks. Now it's the fourth month. Everything is going wrong according to what the United States or the NATO-Israel side thought, because I see it this way: they underestimated the other power. >> Yes, Khun Rangsi, but if Khun Rangsi analyzes that they are acting, does this mean it's a strategy? Separate actions, joint attack. America knows that Israel will never agree, Israel will be the attacker, America will be the negotiator. >> That's what I said. Which national leader dares to say one thing and do another? How many times has this happened? And they speak in a way that the listener becomes more confused. One day they say peace is in the ICU, the next day they say it's much better. Then they criticize leaders like Putin, Xi Jinping, and Modi, but in the end, they come back and say Modi is a respectable and strong leader. The third generation is considered to enable Iran to proceed with peace negotiations. Not even a moment has passed, and Lebanon is being provoked again, right? It violates point 1 of the MOU. This is the problem. And I believe they are changing faces. I observe it this way: why is it that after the electronic signing is completed, the ceasefire is declared, and then Europe immediately starts the war? And this time, Khun Gita, they even attacked Moscow, right? And they claimed it was a thousand targets, according to the news. >> Yes. >> And if Putin decides to attack Europe, oh, this is a big problem. Because NATO's charter states that if you attack one NATO country, it is considered an attack on all of NATO. And the German Prime Minister has already declared that NATO is ready for a decisive war with Russia. And I believe that Zelensky has no hesitation in sending drones to Moscow. >> Does Israel have the capability to fight Iran alone without America? >> Without America, it would be very difficult, even to send weapons. Because, Khun Gita, Israel has only 7 million people, its territory is limited. Iran has 90 million people. >> And Iran has strategic weapons that I believe even the US cannot solve, which are hypersonic missiles, which have been proven twice, Khun Gita, causing immense destruction. Therefore, there is only one way: America must continue to be involved in this war. But I believe Trump also said he needs to rest first, because there are midterm elections. If he loses, everything will be lost, right? Therefore, this is a continuous drama, allowing the war in Europe to erupt. They alternate. You notice, when the war in Europe is quiet, the Middle East is active. Today, when the Middle East is quiet, they bring the explosion to Russia again. Therefore, we have to keep watching to see what happens, and the negotiations on these 14 points, as I said, the chance of them happening is not easy, but it is buying time. But can it buy enough time? Because the midterm elections are in 5 months, Khun Gita. Can they really endure it? Right? And if this attempt fails, I believe there will be a complete mess, because no one trusts anyone anymore, no one listens to anyone anymore. Because even after signing, oh, they can tear it up within a few days. How can they negotiate? >> It's the most complicated, Khun Gita. I myself don't have much knowledge. Before, I talked to 2-3 experts in this field. Now they are retired, and they have moved to higher positions than usual. So, the nuclear issue, there are few nuclear experts in Thailand. Some are in the UN. But right now, a few hours ago, Iran announced that it will allow the International Atomic Energy Agency of the United Nations to inspect again. This issue needs to be investigated. First, to find out if the enriched uranium with 60% radioactivity is real and where it is. Most experts believe it is real. Where is it? Where is it buried? It's hard to find. Second, if found, what will be done? Will it be ground into powder to end it? Iran probably won't agree. Or will the enrichment level be reduced from 60% to make it normal? Or will it be hidden and buried somewhere? These have not been seriously discussed yet, but there are many ways to discuss it. And if nothing is done, this can be used to create nuclear weapons. If we look at China's method, many years ago. This 60% can be increased to 90% within 4 weeks, and within that time, about 10 nuclear weapons can be produced. Many people, including the G7, who argued about these things yesterday, asked what the decision is. When will sanctions be lifted? It is still not clear. The opposition in America says that this is going back to Obama's JCPOA agreement. This is a waste. It is the same old agreement that Iran was in, the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Now it's back to the same point at a huge cost. They attack the Republican party severely. Even some believe that this nuclear agreement is not clear, not transparent, difficult to inspect, and how can victory be claimed? But the US will claim victory, saying that in the end, almost no program or equipment is left. Scientists have almost all gone. They have been assassinated. It will take a very long time, 10 years, to return to making nuclear weapons if they intend to. This is something that Europe should be comfortable with. But Trump did not provide details. So there is discord. I don't know if you saw Trump's drama at the G7 meeting, Khun Gita? A lot, many issues. >> And the issue of President Trump, Khun Rangsi. From the content you mentioned, 4 categories out of 14 points. There is a question from Asia News, which conducted a special interview. They asked that President Trump said he would end the war only when Iran surrendered unconditionally. Unconditional surrender. >> Yes. >> Which, according to the current MOU, does not seem to be the case? But the President reiterated that this is Iran's unconditional surrender and America's victory. Do you see it that way? Is this Iran's unconditional defeat and America's victory, achieving all its goals as intended when it went to war? >> No, nothing is unconditional. Americans are adept at creating conditions. For example, in Gaza, they proposed 20 conditions. For Iran, initially 24 or 20, now 14. For Ukraine, America proposed 28 conditions. Therefore, there is nothing that is not a condition. And the two conditions that America holds, and the conditions that Iran officially holds, are interpreted differently. They must be interpreted to favor themselves to win. President Trump will interpret it that way. But the backdoor channel negotiations, what they are really like, no one knows for sure. We don't know the real situation. But all of this, we have to listen to both sides. When the conditions for ending the fighting, for opening discussions, become clearer within 60 days. When the conditions for guaranteeing sovereignty become clearer. When the technical details of sanctions, lifting sanctions at various levels and forms become clearer. And finally, when the conditions for nuclear weapons become clearer, another agreement will be signed with conditions. And an agreement will be signed to create a mechanism for control. And then it will be agreed to enter the United Nations according to point 14 of the 14 points, and the UN Security Council will issue further conditions. So there are only conditions, and these conditions are waiting to be violated, as we understand. Therefore, we have to accept it a little, Khun Gita. >> Yes. >> And which conditions do you see as fragile and at risk of being violated? >> I think it's the cessation of fighting, because the Israeli forces are not currently in a condition to withdraw from Lebanon, and Israel has confirmed that it will maintain its forces in the Lebanese area. And most bizarrely, Lebanon has not denied it. >> Ah. >> Israel and Lebanon are not countries with normal relations. They have never had diplomatic relations for almost 50 years. It's almost 70 years, since the country was established in 1948. They have never had diplomatic relations, but now they are cooperating to talk in Washington, cooperating to push Hezbollah to reduce its role and influence. This is very contradictory. Israel is not part of the agreement. Israel will not withdraw its forces. Israel is cooperating with Lebanon. Israel is even secretly cooperating with Saudi Arabia, according to the initial agreement of the Abraham Accords. It looks very worrying, Khun Gita. And who will control Israel? Who will control Netanyahu? Even the United States can barely control him. This is the first thing that is most fragile, and now there are deaths, sporadic clashes. Wherever there are forces and weapons, there will certainly be fighting. That is the first issue. As for the second issue, I think it's the nuclear issue. If you, Khun Gita, dear viewers, dear listeners, were Iran, who would agree to let nuclear weapons slip away? Then they would have no bargaining power. Therefore, to some extent, I think Iran will have to insist on maintaining control over radioactivity to some extent. Uh, sorry, uranium with radioactivity that has been enriched to 60%. To some extent. This is a defensive weapon, a shield. Who would agree? It will be difficult to negotiate. But looking at the current trend, the United States has softened a bit on this. These two issues. As for money, it's all gain and gain. >> Khun Gita gains, I gain, Iran gains, America gains. This may not be difficult, but there will be tricks, they will hold back, they will try to use this to stimulate desire and get concessions. This is another issue that is not too difficult. Between the two difficult issues and one easy issue, there are moderately difficult and easy issues, such as the strait. The opening of the strait, the new order, the new organization established by Iran and Oman to cooperate. My heart wants them to collect some money, because each country has expenses, but it shouldn't be too much. But it will change the form of maritime law, international law. But if it can be done, Khun Gita, and I can join in collecting fees for the Strait of Malacca for the viewers, if Iran can do it. It's like a doll. I think Indonesia will move forward, Malaysia, Singapore will collect some fees. Oh my, the Strait of Malacca is much larger than Hormuz. And we are already involved, even if not directly. If some money can be collected, it would be better. It's like paying for online services, a monthly membership fee. Nowadays, new generations hardly have money to invest in assets because they have to pay membership fees every month. Money disappears every month. Who can pay the fee for the strait to us and Khun Gita every month and receive money every month and be happy? >> Right. >> So, we must hurry. We must hurry to open the strait, hurry to talk to Iran, to buy oil, to renew old concessions, and to see their model of collecting money so that we can hurry to the Strait of Malacca. This is just a dream, but nowadays, dreams that we once had have come true, such as America is no longer the greatest. For example. And small nations can play a greater role. The money that has disappeared may return if the government is serious, adjusts the formula for compensation, oil subsidies, reduces stability, does not make it too high, does not pay too much to the fund. I think we will have income. Buy oil at a cheaper price, especially gasoline. This is clear. From this crisis, we should even thank this crisis for making Thai people realize that the formula for compensation and stability maintenance is too rigid, too high, and there are loopholes for some to benefit when oil prices rise, even though they bought old stock at a non-increased price. All of this shakes the old system completely. >> And it will make the new system better for us if it can be done. >> Yes. >> The category of money and gold for Iran, which you mentioned earlier, Khun Rangsi, that this part is a clean victory for Iran. That is, sanctions are lifted, oil can be sold, and there is a fund to invest, as much as 300 billion. Some American analysts say that this is a very good condition for Iran. Iran will be able to restore the country, get money, and may increase its power economically, and consequently, may also increase its power in terms of weapons. Is this not beneficial to Israel and America? >> No, I didn't say that, Khun Gita. You misunderstood. I said a clean victory is in the second point, that the United States insists on not invading Iran again. >> Yes. >> Not violating territory, not violating sovereignty. This is Iran's clean victory. >> They have fought all along to survive. >> Right. But America's victory is that it has managed to deal with nuclear weapons more than in the past 20 or 30 years, even with immense damage, and started again. But what I said about everyone winning is the lifting of sanctions. Everyone wins. Iran gets money. We can sell goods to Iran. Iranian tourists will come to Thailand more. Banks will have circulating money. The recovery fund will restore the country, make profits. It's a victory for capitalism. It's a victory that brings Iran back into the global trade system. It's a victory for China and Russia too. Therefore, but yes, it won't be easy. In the past 47 years, there have been sanctions at two levels, and almost 10 types. And they will be used as bargaining chips. The recovery fund is one thing. That is a loan, aid money. But the frozen assets, about 200-2,000 million, the exact figure is unknown, that's another matter. And allowing oil sales, and buying some military equipment, that's another matter. Ultimately, of course, Khun Gita, when there is money, it must be used to build fences. Iran must have an army. But it must be within international rules, within defensive regulations, like Japan. After losing World War II, it had an army for self-defense and did well in self-defense but did not invade others. Iran must do the same. So, to accuse them of using money to buy weapons, they must buy them. But how to buy them to be defensive weapons, defensive weapons, is not easy. Yes, but every country has the right to self-defense. And who knows, they might even buy weapons from America, because they sell a lot. Therefore, this is also a victory for American arms companies. >> Who knows, they might even buy weapons from China, and Chinese technology comes from Russia, from America. Therefore, it all revolves around this. That's why I said it's a victory for everyone, for the capitalist system, if you like. But if you don't like the capitalist system and think it's corrupt capitalism, then it's worrying that capitalism will become stronger. And it is capitalism that Iran talks about so much as Satan, as a devil, but now it has to rely on the devil to restore itself. >> If we look at the military strategy, does the United States still have the potential to attack or wage war with Iran? Because it has been 4 months, and Iran has not been seen to be more damaged. Or does the MOU ultimately reflect that the United States is at a disadvantage? >> Actually, in terms of military power, we must admit that the United States has more than enough. But to destroy it completely, that level would require the use of nuclear weapons. If not to the level of using nuclear weapons, it cannot be absolutely decisive. And it probably won't reach nuclear weapons. It's just at this level. But Iran has an advantage because Iran is not the aggressor. It is a defensive war. Therefore, the weapons and equipment that have come in are considered sufficient to cope and can easily carry out operations against US military targets in this region. That is, using guided weapons, missiles, long-range, and at the same time, using drones is sufficient for operations and to counter the fleet. You see, with just fast fleets, they can operate and counter. Because they are on the defensive, the weapons they have are sufficient. They don't need to show off any more superior weapons, because what they have is sufficient for operations and to carry out operations against targets in the Arab Gulf countries. They have already shown their capability that they know where the military targets are, strategic targets, power plants, etc. Nuclear power plants. They know, and they can destroy them with the weapons they have, which are sufficient. And most importantly, behind them, they have allies: China, Russia, North Korea as security guarantees. Therefore, I believe Iran is sufficient. And the United States knows this. They are waiting for the right moment. They won't attack because it's the moment they will get their benefits back and restore the country. The more they restore, the stronger the army will become again. Yes, I agree. >> But if we look at it directly, by today, the MOU has been signed, the war has ended. June 18th, the end. Who lost and who won this time, Khun Phad? >> At this moment, if we are to look at who lost and who won, honestly, if we are neutral, I think it's a draw, because it means they both gained something. But the biggest gain is that it has brought peace of mind to the whole world. And this peace of mind for the world has made both Iran and the United States look better. And as I said, Iran is its own battlefield. The United States comes from afar. Therefore, to execute strategies to this level is extraordinary. Because no country in the world can execute strategies like the United States. It shows its military power, which is ranked number 1 in the world. And of course, even its economic power has been shown. That hey, their power is truly high. Here, I consider that actually, Iran has also shown that hey, I have the capability to cope beyond your expectations. But okay, even if I am at a disadvantage, now, from this battlefield, which is seen as only involving three countries: Israel, the United States, and Iran, now the United States and Israel must think hard and understand. Hey, it's not like that. Iran's future tools that will confront us will not be from conventional warfare. It will use geopolitics, the Strait of Hormuz, and major power allies like China, North Korea, and Russia as factors to confront us. Therefore, if we are to fight in a conventional military way, with these military weapons, hey, it cannot be managed, because it requires all dimensions: social, economic, political, military, foreign affairs, because it has to deal with the rear support, which is not easy. But the events that have occurred on the battlefield make the United States and Israel have to re-evaluate, to adjust their military strategies in all dimensions again, if they have to confront Iran again. Yes, I agree. >> Yes. >> This is interesting. If Khun Phad says they will have to adjust their approach and strategy, are there any wide gaps, any weaknesses, and any points that prevent them from winning decisively? >> Winning decisively is very difficult because there is a chance of opening multiple battlefronts. And currently, there are already fronts that create limitations for the United States. But it can be said that Russia also has limitations. That is the battlefield where Russia is facing Ukraine, where the United States has to be involved in supporting NATO. The US knows that this limits us. Russia may also have limitations, but Russia considers supporting Iran to be a matter of technology. While China and North Korea can supplement with personnel and target lists, the United States is thus diminished in that battlefield. And what needs to be careful about is the battlefield that has the potential to occur in the South China Sea. Because if China causes a flare-up in the Taiwan case, the United States and its allies, including South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, etc., will have to support each other, and they will have limitations. Therefore, if the other side, the allies are strong, they can signal for situations in many regions. Then the United States will have limitations. Because the United States has to go to every front by itself. Therefore, this is a limitation. So, we have to keep an eye on this battlefield. Even with this signing, I still believe there will be undercurrents, because Israel cannot be forced. It will be a troublemaker, but it will remain within the scope of not escalating to overt waves. Yes, I agree. >> Yes. >> And will there be a risk of conflict erupting again, leading to another war? In the past, the 12-day war ended and then started again. How will this time be different? >> The chance of it happening is low, because the main thing that will cause war is the nuclear issue. And this nuclear issue will be negotiated and resolved after 60 days. Meanwhile, in the initial agreement, there are indicators that it will not escalate, that it will not escalate into a problem, because the agreement involves the IAEA, the UN nuclear agency, which will act as a central body to assess and signal that Iran's development will not be escalated to a military level. If that is not escalated and the central committee confirms it, Israel will have no legitimacy, and the United States will have no legitimacy to claim that Iran will escalate its capabilities to military nuclear weapons. When this condition fades or the chance of it happening is low, then the reason for it to erupt again, the main cause, is only one: not to let Iran have nuclear weapons. But now Iran sees that it is not necessary to have them. It only needs nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for electricity, for the country's strategic use, whatever. Because it sees that it can use geopolitical tools, that is, the Strait of Hormuz, and it has nuclear-armed allies: China, North Korea, and Russia behind it. Hey, we are safe. We don't need to have it ourselves, we are safe. And especially North Korea, which has it, the United States and Israel must think hard. This North Korean ally, will it start firing around Japan to make them dizzy, like firing missiles? So, I believe that now Iran will use this opportunity to focus on its economic recovery. Because in the matter of nuclear weapons, they consider that they only need nuclear power for peaceful purposes. And there is a central committee to take care of it. Because now it is clear that in the short to medium term, our best tools are geopolitics and allies with nuclear weapons behind us. This is enough. Therefore, it will not create a condition that Israel can raise again, because the central committee, the IAEA, will say, "Hey, you say you don't have it, but I'm inspecting, and there isn't any. It's only this much, not exceeding the specified percentage." Yes, Khun Gita. >> Yes. >> And what about the balance of power in the Middle East? Khun Phad, how do you see it changing after this war ends? >> It will remain in a state of tension. Because the 6 Gulf countries, and the United States guaranteeing their security, and Israel using their services, there is mistrust among all of them. This side does not trust Iran, and Iran does not trust Iran because when this battlefield occurred and fighting broke out, Iran attacked both military and strategic targets. They knew that Iran had something, and it was playing with military targets. These military targets are military targets because US bases are located here, and they were hit. But at the same time, hey, they are also playing with our strategic targets, oil terminals, power plants. Therefore, these 6 countries will find it difficult to trust and become allies with Iran. But at the same time, they are also afraid for themselves, wondering if the security guarantee from the United States can truly guarantee them. So, I believe they will walk with two legs. They still expect security guarantees from the United States, but at the same time, they will also strengthen their own armies to be strong. But to mix with Iran's side, no. They will still lean towards this side. But strategically, they will have to adjust the limitations. Because Iran uses Hormuz as a tool, right? Hey, let's adjust. Let's cooperate on pipelines, oil pipelines. Let's go through the Red Sea, or through Oman. Like the UAE, have you seen them cooperate with Oman on pipelines? They will use that service and not worry about Hormuz, but go through Oman. They will have to adjust this. But it will be a standoff, and they will have to balance. The United States will still have to balance and guarantee security, but emphasize that "Hey, I am in this region to guarantee peace, not to invade." Of course, Israel will be relieved because it has a big brother, the United States. And these 6 countries will also be relieved. But in the case where Iran uses geopolitical tools, they will have to adjust. Saudi Arabia has an advantage because currently, pipelines are used in two ways: through the Persian Gulf and through the Red Sea. But now, among the other 4 or 5 countries, they will have to position themselves accordingly. Regarding pipelines that go through Oman or the Red Sea. Therefore, in this region, there will be a standoff and balancing. But the fighting escalating to a larger scale, I believe the reason to cite nuclear weapons will not be an issue to cite. Therefore, the chance of a large-scale war is low. Yes, I agree. >> Yes. >> But according to the MOU, Iran will have sanctions lifted, be able to sell oil, and even have a fund to invest as much as 300 billion. Some American scholars say that this MOU empowers Iran, increasing its economic, financial, and geopolitical power. With increased power, the opportunity to develop missiles, armies, or even weapons that Israel fears, such as nuclear weapons, becomes possible in the future. What are your thoughts on Iran's power in the coming period and the potential threat to Israel? >> This will be a very long-term process because economic recovery, as Iran has been sanctioned for a long time, will take a very long time. And at the same time, as we mentioned earlier, the nuclear issue is the main reason that could lead to a major war. But with the IAEA as a witness, they cannot increase their enrichment to military nuclear weapons. So, there is no need to worry. >> But if the IAEA indicates that "No, Iran is secretly doing it," then a major war will occur again, because Israel and the United States will not accept it. But I believe that's not the case anymore. They have to focus on recovery, and recovery takes a very long time, Khun Gita. It's not something that can be recovered quickly in 4 or 5 years. Therefore, this situation can be continuously monitored closely. >> Yes, I agree. >> Yes. >> And if not nuclear weapons, but missiles, long-range missiles, or even armed forces, non-state actors. There is no confirmation from Iran in the MOU that they will not support them. Will this still be a problem? >> This will always be the case because these types of allies, non-state actors, are necessary for them to use. Hezbollah is one of them. >> But in any case, it's still like an unconventional force, a guerrilla force, which Israel can face and deal with. And weapons, I assure you, they have assessed it from the Gulf War. They see that what they have is sufficient to cope and attack comfortably. Therefore, they don't need to secretly show off new tricks, because from this, it is seen that the existing missiles have the capability to destroy military and strategic targets in this region and can cope. What is most important is that they should increase their drone capabilities, because they are low cost but highly effective, and sufficient to cope in this battlefield. Yes, I agree. >> President Trump and the President of Iran have just signed an MOU to continue peace negotiations. If, on paper, the war has ended, can we relax about inflation? >> No, no. Read the MOU carefully. Oh, Trump wants to stop. He wants to stop. He doesn't want it anymore. His stocks are falling. >> Yes. >> But it is hollow. I repeat, it is very hollow, hollow in a way that there is a risk that something can erupt again. There are 3 main issues. There are many points, but for us, there are 3 main issues. The first is that it says everyone must stop fighting and attacking. But Israel will not agree, because Israel still occupies parts of Lebanon, especially Beirut. And Israel will not withdraw its troops. And Hezbollah will not stop attacking Israel. Israel will retaliate. Therefore, there is a high risk that it will erupt again. When it erupts again, there is a risk that this agreement will be violated. That's point 1. Point 2 is that the agreement clearly states that the Strait of Hormuz should be opened freely for the first 60 days. But after that, it says Iran and Oman will manage the strait, meaning Iran will collect tolls. This is point 2. And I don't know if America should accept this in principle, but it is implied. That's point 2. Point 3 is about nuclear negotiations, which are very loose. Very loose. And on the contrary, America has to listen to many things. It has to lift economic pressure on Iran in many aspects, including America having to participate, but saying it will not provide funds for Iran to use. And it has to unfreeze Iran's assets. This point is like this. Oh, the Republican party itself, it might cause a lot of ripples. It might not be accepted. It might not be accepted. These 3 points make me feel that it is an agreement that has a high risk of being violated or canceled. And importantly, the longer time passes, the more bargaining power will shift to Iran. Because Trump cannot keep his aircraft carriers, warships, airplanes, etc., in the Strait of Hormuz for another 7-8 months. He will have to withdraw. Because now, America, sending warships and reinforcements, the cost for over 100 days of fighting with Iran is over 100 billion dollars. Averaging a billion dollars a day. Okay, at first it was 2 billion a day, then averaging maybe 500-600 million dollars a day, but dragging on for a long time, it's not possible. And the soldiers, you want them to stay on the ship, stressed on the ship for 2-3 months, and then you want them to be stressed on the ship for another 2-3 months? It's not possible. They have to withdraw. The more they withdraw, the more bargaining power Iran will have. They will ask for this, that, and the other. Israel will be dissatisfied seeing this, and Israel will become more defiant. Therefore, I am not sure if it can really stop. I am not sure if it will help oil prices fall back to $60. I am not very confident. >> Yes. >> But if on the US side, as you said, President Trump is eager to end it, which is why he accepted the MOU that gives Iran such an advantage. There must be pressure for the war to end. If it comes back with conditions that may be disadvantageous in some ways, but in exchange for no war, which is heavier? >> Trump doesn't want it anymore, and he will die.
My problem ahead is that, Mr. Guitar, please think about it. Originally, on February 27th, Trump even sent his friend, the real estate developer Steve Bannon, with his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to negotiate on the 27th. They were still negotiating on the 27th, and on the 28th, he betrayed them. He, P' Bom, he, Bom, killed his father, the father of the current leader, and killed the leader of Iran. And you think Iran won't retaliate? Why do you think, okay, wow, Iran will negotiate with America amicably and try to compromise? I can't imagine it. Because what Trump did was betray them at least twice before. He had previously joined with Israel, no, joined with Israel to bomb, to bomb their nuclear sites in June last year. And the most recent one was his son-in-law and friend were still negotiating with Iran, and you attacked them on the 28th. I can't imagine why, when Trump is about to finish, Iran will also finish. I'm not sure. Iran has gained something because now many sanctions have been lifted, and Iran can sell oil. And when they can sell oil, they will surely use some of the money to rebuild the country. But another part, I guarantee, will be used to build drones, build rockets, and they will want to have nuclear weapons. And now they have a new weapon, which is to close the strait whenever they want. So, this geopolitics has changed. The oil premium has gone up, and it's unlikely to come down easily. Let's just say, for simplicity, in the first 60 days, you have to close the strait because Iran has planted mines. You have to go in, they pretend to be slow, and only allow Iranian ships to sell oil. And what can you do? Will Trump dare to dismantle it again or not dismantle it again? Only Iranian ships will be able to take Iranian oil out. Other people's oil might be difficult to get out. American oil, anyone's oil might not be allowed out. And the price will go up, the price will not go down. We don't know what Israel will do when they are free because Israel still insists that they cannot accept it. Prime Minister Netanyahu has a problem because he has elections on October 27th, and he lets it be like this, losing the election, because he wants Israel to be safe. Now it is not safe because Hezbollah is firing rockets into Israel. That's why Israel has to occupy territory in Lebanon, which is territory where Hezbollah has troops, right? So, the problem is not over, but Trump wants it to be over. But the problem is not over, and Trump has created karma for himself, hasn't he? He has created karma for himself. He hasn't made Iran admire America, saying, "Oh, we've agreed, I'm like you, a friend." You just killed their father, the father of the current leader. Why do you think you can agree within 60 days? Obama took 2 years to negotiate. America never harmed them, yet it took 2 years. Yes, Professor, but the conditions are beneficial to Iran, such as the lifting of sanctions, the return of frozen assets, and allowing Iran to trade oil again. Even though it cannot fully compensate for the losses, in terms of the economy or regaining strength, it is the best condition Iran has had in 50 years, isn't it, Professor? Now they have a new tool, which is to close the strait. Why wouldn't they use that? Or if not, then impose heavy sanctions, right? That strait, which originally everyone could use, they are starting to have power over it. It has changed. It has all changed. And in this way, won't they try to help Hezbollah? They will help. What about other countries in the region, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, saying, "Get out, American bases, we can't take it anymore"? Will America lose? It will lose its geopolitical status in that region significantly. Later, America itself will be shaken. The Republican Party itself, the senators of the Republican Party, may not agree. It's not easy. It's not easy. And what you're saying about not lifting sanctions, or what? But Iran will dare. If you don't lift them, I will close the strait. Do you understand? It doesn't sound right. We are talking to the market. Okay, they have a page and a half, and everything is finished. It's not like that. Because when Obama made the JCPOA Agreement, it was 159 pages, very detailed, only talking about nuclear. This one has nuclear, has Zion, has the Strait of Hormuz, a page and a half. It's done carelessly, just to finish it, but it won't finish. I think so. Even though the last clause states that the final agreement will be ratified by a resolution of the United Nations Security Council and will be legally binding, does that not make the agreement more stable, Professor? Mr. Guitar, the Security Council has had how many resolutions? There are thousands, tens of thousands, that have been violated. They are not sacred at all. In America, it's possible that the weakness of the JCPOA that Obama made was that it wasn't passed by Congress, it wasn't American law. It's possible that this time the Republican Party will, and even Democrats themselves might say that the agreement must be passed by Congress to have weight. Otherwise, like last time, when it wasn't passed by Congress, it was a disaster. When Trump came to power, Trump could cancel it. Otherwise, normally, to cancel it, it has to pass Congress again. I think the Security Council is useless. Because when Obama made the JCPOA, the JCPOA is an agreement between America and Iran. All permanent members of the Security Council were in that JCPOA. That's even more than a UN Resolution. Because in that agreement, Britain, Germany, France, and so on, signed it. Trump still canceled it. Why do you think just passing it through the UNSC will make it sacred? That was canceled. It's useless. Thank you everyone for following us all along. Our goal is to take this channel to 1 million subscribers to broaden the society of learning about economics, business, and investment. Now we have YouTube Membership. By subscribing, you will receive exclusive content and seminars from PRP and Team Business Tomorrow. Please subscribe.