Transcription
Welcome everybody to this week's episode of Let's Talk Geopolitics. I am your co-host Cyrus Jansen and we have an absolutely fantastic show for you today as we are looking at the Iran war, uh, and continued escalation.
Now, this week in the news, we are hearing the White House is actually been preparing for some more advanced, uh, escalation in Iran. However, JD Vance yesterday has raised concerns that the United States munitions are running dangerously low and that has also caused the United States to pause temporarily with caution. So, what is going to happen in the future of Iran? Is the United States going to escalate this conflict? Are we going to see a retreat? Are we going to see a diplomatic solution? To help us all understand this, let's bring in my other co-host, Alex from Reporter Media, as he's going to make a special introduction for today's live stream guest.
Well, I mean, quite a week, Cyrus, again, it's like a slingshot. We're back to where we were a few months ago. Welcome back, everyone, and thank you again for the 19th episode of Let's Talk Geopolitics. And thanks for Cyrus and Professor Mirandi. You know, today we stand in absolute unwavering solidarity with the courageous people of Iran. Beyond the headlines and political games, our real human lives, family, scholars, and everyday citizens showing extraordinary spirit of resilience. Now, as you know, on Let's Talk Geopolitics, we refuse to stay silent while Washington's aggressive policies and relentless bombing treat innocent human lives like collateral damage. We are here to speak truth to power, challenge the mainstream narrative and stand firmly. I do especially with the Iranian people.
Well, welcoming our special guest here is Professor Muhammad Morandi. Under the horrific reality of ongoing American bombings in his country is one of the most vital voices in the region today. Professor, despite the extreme danger and the daily strikes, you continue to make sure the truth gets out to the world. I welcome you to the show, sir. Thank you for joining us today.
>> Thank you very much for your kind words. It's always a pleasure being with the two of you.
>> Fantastic, Professor. Thank you so much again for being here. We're looking forward to a great show. And you know, I wanted to start off, uh, today's show by talking a little bit about the, you know, what's going on here in the United States because there over is there's an overwhelming sentiment. A lot of people are getting very frustrated here. And the, the interesting thing is we're seeing people say, for example, I thought we destroyed their navy. I thought we destroyed the air force. Um, the United States military, we're the best. What, what's going on here? Like what, why, why are we not winning this? You know, this is this is what the, the mood is here in the United States where a lot of people are very confused and very frustrated at what's happening. Can you talk a little bit about the resilience of the Iranian state right now and and why this has been so difficult for the United States?
Well, I think we have to really go back to the revolution itself. Uh, the United States had a very dark role to play in Iran, uh, since the coup that they brought about in 1953 where they brought in a, uh, police state. They helped, uh, create a dreaded, uh, secret police called Savak. And for two and a half decades, the Iranians, uh, the Iranian people were under the boots of a brutal regime and, uh, and the United States which was standing behind it. And after the revolution, uh, the United States gave refuge to the Shah and, uh, the US embassy was busy plotting and conspiring against the Iranian people to bring about a coup or civil strife, civil war, anything to undermine the new revolution. That is what led to the embassy takeover. People saw the US embassy plotting against the country and they saw the United States giving refuge to the Shah and it reminded them of 1953. So students went and took the embassy out of fear that we were going to have another coup, another, uh, return of another brutal dictatorship which will rule over us for another two and a half decades. And then of course, as we, as things move forward, the United States supported Saddam Hussein and encouraged him to attack Iran. They gave him all sorts of weapons including chemical weapons, uh, to use against Iranians. I, too, I also among many others, uh, survived chemical attacks. But the point is that, uh, throughout this period where Iran was a country that was a victim of a much more powerful state in the United States and a, a narrative was created demonizing Iran. We saw that in 1952 and 1953 before the coup back then against, uh, uh, Dr. Musaddiq, the prime minister. The same sort of demonization existed back then, but it was directed at him because Iran wanted to be independent and to, uh, be able to use its resources for its own people. And so after the revolution, we saw the same narrative repeat itself. The United States demonized Iran for decades. It presented the Iranian people, the both the media and think tanks and analysts, uh, all of them contributed to this, this false narrative of Iran that Iran was a, a, a country of mad men, mad mullahs running around and killing people and how the, the regime, as they love to call it, is utterly corrupt. It is imploding, but simultaneously, it's an growing threat to the world. So while on the one hand, it's weak, feeble, falling apart, unpopular, it's also a growing menace and a growing threat to the world, which of course, these two are not compatible, but still, they all work because that broader narrative is one of demonization. So since both, all of these, uh, narratives or all of these threads within the narrative have the same, are based on the same assumptions, people believe them. And so in my opinion, US leaders and analysts believe their own propaganda. Those academics who are linked to think tanks who get, uh, good money, they publish books, but those books are written in a particular way. Uh, those think tankers, if they want to receive grants and money, they have to write in a particular way. They have to, uh, express themselves on television in a particular way. The mass media is the same. The, the legacy media, they too have to follow a certain narrative. I've, I've had so many, I've had years of experience with legacy media journalists who in private would say one thing to me, but when the, uh, their reports would come out or their documentaries would come out, they would be completely different from what they had said in private, completely different, whether it's Australian television ABC or whether it's the BBC or whether it's CBC or whether it's any media outlet in the United States that would be considered to be mainstream. I've had that experience time after time after time. So last year when they attacked Iran for the 12-day war, the assumption was that Iran would collapse. It's based upon a 47-year-old narrative of this corrupt regime that's imploding. All you have to do is give it a push and it collapses like a house of cards. And then when that didn't happen last year, you would think under ordinary circumstances that they would rethink their policies. But the, the narrative on Iran, the discourse on Iran is so deeply embedded that it didn't change. They didn't go and say, well, what happened that Iran was able to remain steadfast? They said, okay, this regime corrupt, imploding, unpopular. Now, what do we do to bring it down? So they went and began a much larger war. They, this time the Americans came in and brought everything that they had, literally, and they waged war and again failed, and then they, when they failed, they imposed a siege and that failed, and then they, they were forced to sign an armistice, a capitulation to Iran in the eyes of these analysts. So Trump then went and started a war, but that failed too. So it really doesn't change anything in the discourse. And if you look at mainstream media now, none of them are going to say, "Look, the Islamic Republic of Iran is strong. It has popular support. It has popular legitimacy. Its leaders are smart. They have, they have an extraordinarily well-devised, uh, defense strategy and war plan. They're more, they're being more sophisticated than our leaders." That just doesn't register or it's not allowed to register. So ordinary people in the West, I think, being smart people, they see that something is wrong, but they're still not being fed the, the information. They know something is wrong. So those are the questions that, uh, you hear. "We're the strongest military in the world. Then why is this? How we destroyed their navy? We destroyed their air force. We destroyed everything they have." Even opponents of Trump are saying this. So what's wrong? They, they know something's wrong. But since the, the alternative media still does not have that sort of reach that the mainstream media has, think tanks have. The textbooks that are that train people from childhood to think in a particular way in school, in high school, and at university. Because of that, the, the people, most people are not getting the answers to their questions.
>> Yeah. You know, Professor, reminds me a lot of the country that Alex and I cover extensively, and that of course is China, because it's a very similar thing. You know, we hear that China's collapsing. The economy is, is terrible. Everything's going bad. But at the same time, China is this rising force. It's going to take over the United States. It's our biggest adversary. And so you, you, you see this very common. I want to bring that up in our live stream for our guests here tonight so that they can understand, you know, the power in this in the Western media and like you said, the narratives that are shifting, and it's, it's just always this oxymoron, right? You know, they're collapsing, but at the same time, they're the greatest threat. And those two truths, you know, those, those are incompatible. They can't be the same. But I want to switch it over to Alex. Alex, I want to bring in and, uh, let you ask this next question as we continue our chat. Thank you for that great answer. That was fantastic. Alex, take it over.
Sure, no problem. Thank you, Cyrus. Uh, Professor Morandi, you know, I want to add to your, uh, as you say, the Western media will not portray the right message to the citizens of their country. Of course, they won't. But where we see this come out and where the truth starts to come out is in American companies that are starting to bleed and bleed very hard. They are. If you look at Apple in its last quarter, it's had to raise prices. One of the largest software hardware companies on the planet, which you would think would have major negotiation power to it, can't do it. The prices are going up. American Airlines reported last week, prices are going up. Tesla reported its quarterly report earnings. Prices are going up. And isn't it funny that everything seems to be connected to everything coming out of the Strait of Hormuz? I mean, I'd like your insights on this. How bad is it going to get? We've been warning people on this show. We've seen companies like IBM hit, Tesla hit, Apple hit, Google hit. They're all getting dragged out on the, uh, market last week, and it continues. So, is the bleeding going to stop or is it going to hemorrhage? Over to you, uh, Professor Morandi.
>> It doesn't look good right now. I mean, uh, you know, we've been saying or hearing and I've been saying that Trump has been manipulating the markets for the past, what is it now, five months. But when you look at mainstream media, they're playing the same game. You, they're downplaying, uh, the shortages that are growing by the day. They've been doing that all along. And, um, from where, from, from what I've seen over the last, uh, uh, couple of days, that's what they did with regards to Yemen. The, when Yemen struck, uh, back at the Saudis and, uh, did lots of damage to their refinery, the refin, uh, the, uh, uh, the refinery in the south of Saudi Arabia, very important and key refinery, and other assets that are linked to the oil industry, doing heavy damage with, with, uh, with dozens of drones and missiles and cruise missiles, ballistic missiles. You, I didn't see much in the Western media. It wasn't, it didn't seem to be, uh, an important piece of news, even though the shutting of the Strait of, uh, Hormuz coupled with the shutting of the Bab el-Mandeb, or the Bab el-Mandeb Strait for Saudi shipping, and now the strikes on Saudi oil installations, you would think that this would be the top news story across the world, uh, because it has a direct impact on the lives of everyone. But it, for me at least, it, it didn't seem to be, uh, the big, the big news of the day. It was reported, uh, in a, in a way in which it seemed clear to me that it was being downplayed. So the whole five months has been one broad attempt to manipulate the markets, even by those who hate Trump. They'll blame Trump for everything, but they'll continue to, um, try to strengthen the hand of the United States in this, in this foolish war. What I'm seeing right now is, uh, the, the, uh, the increase in, in the shortage of, uh, everything coming from the Persian Gulf at a much more rapid pace than before, because now that the Saudis cannot use the Red Sea like before, and now that damage has been done to the Saudi, uh, oil infrastructure, and that may continue in the days ahead. Um, I think that we are entering a crisis point, uh, the crisis point more rapidly than, uh, than before. And the irony, of course, is that the Saudis brought this upon themselves. They started this conflict with Yemen at the worst possible time. They bombed Yemen, Yemen's international airport, the Sana'a international airport, while the Red, while the Persian Gulf was, uh, closed to business, while the Strait of Hormuz was shut, and thus they provoked Sana'a to shut the Bab el-Mandeb and to do what it did. So right now, I think that we are heading at a very rapid, uh, pace towards a, a cliff, and I'm, I'm not the economic expert like the two of you, but, uh, the, uh, the bond market apparently is, is showing signs of flashing red lights. The stock, the stock market, I mean, the real, uh, the real economy is not doing well at all, but even the stock market and the bond market, they're showing in the United States, they're showing signs of danger. But, you know, the United States has stopped bombing Iran for 48 hours now, but there's no agreement. The trade is continued to be closed by both sides, and of course, war, war is raging in, uh, in the Arabian Peninsula between Yemen and Saudi Arabia. So, it's difficult for me to assess how things will play out, but as things stand, the news is all bad.
>> Yeah, Professor, I've got a question for you. You know, one of the other things that is very confusing here in the United States is the actual Strait of Hormuz. You know, we've, we've heard in our media that, you know, Trump has been able to get that reopened. Uh, other experts say that it's not. It's obviously operating at a capacity much lower before. I believe the number was around 20 million barrels a day. Uh, you know, pre-February 28th, we're going through the strait. I think that number has been reduced down to somewhere maybe around under a million. Um, and I believe that it is going to countries that have a favorable position with Iran. You know, a country like China or other allies that are, you know, certainly not waging war. But I would like to just get your assessment. Is it correct to say that, you know, since February 28th, that really has never reached back to that full capacity? Is that correct? Are we still under that threshold around, let's say, a million barrels a day or a very limited capacity as compared to before?
Oh yes. I mean, uh, it's gone up and down during the past five months or so, but it's always been very low, and, uh, especially because Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain were directly involved and continue to be involved in the war. That's why the Iranians have not allowed their ships to leave this trade. That's why the, the Iranians have only under some circumstances where the ships were heading towards countries that were friendly to Iran did Iran allow a limited amount of, uh, ships to, to leave the Strait of Hormuz through the Strait of Hormuz from these countries. Of course, for Iraq, there was no problem. For Oman, there was no problem because Iraq was not a part of the war, uh, neither was Oman, although the Americans are pressuring it to, to play a much more negative role today, and that, that status could change. But, uh, or, for example, countries that are very friendly to Iran that have nothing had nothing to do with the aggression, their, their ships go through, but the, the numbers have always been, been limited. It was only after the armistice where the numbers of ships, the ships that that were going through the strait had increased, uh, back to normal. I think probably for, uh, a few days, it, it reached, let's say, two-fifths of normal, and disproportionately though, they were taking oil out of the strait, but from my understanding, ships were mostly leaving and fewer were entering, and that, of course, will have, uh, important implications in the future if there's another agreement at some point. But, um, but no, they, it never made up for the loss at, at the, at, at the highest, uh, I think that, at, at best, you could say for those two, three weeks, uh, the, um, the shortages didn't grow, and a lot of that oil was Iranian oil, by the way. The Iranians, when they signed, they had a, a large number of tankers full of oil that couldn't leave, and so as soon as the siege was lifted, uh, these Iranian tankers left, and the Iranians exported tens of millions of barrels onto the market during that, those two, three weeks was Iranian oil. But those two, three weeks, I think you could probably say that the, the global economy was treading water. In other words, the, the shortage of oil didn't increase, and it, and it didn't decrease. But other shortages continue to grow, uh, fertilizer, uh, helium, everything, because, as I said, during those two, three weeks, the Americans were insisting that oil, uh, leave the trade more than anything else. But then after the United States restarted the war, we've, we've gone back to, we've gone back to normal, and the, the, the, uh, pre-armistice normal, in other words, very small quantities of, uh, uh, oil leaving the Strait of Hormuz, less than the average of the, let's say, four months, four months and a week before the armistice, less than below that average.
>> So, it's, it's very little, and I think, and I think we, I think we are heading for a fall. Um, I have to step in and add to this. You know, being here in China, people don't realize that, of course, China is the warehouse to the world, but also China is a strategic partner when it comes to logistics, and it will decide where it places its ships and cargo. Now, an interesting point that has come up lately is the amount of new, uh, vessels being built by the Chinese. In an overwhelming number, somewhere from 70 to 80% of all the new tankers that are being built moving forward are built from the Chinese. Now, the Chinese are going to be able to have quite a bargaining power here coming up over the next decade. Forget tariffs. Forget sanctions. If these ships aren't sailing to your port of call to bring you oil, gas, or, uh, let's say commercial goods, you better be very careful, America and the collective West, who you do damage to, and you need to understand geopolitically what countries are aligned. Another thing that I want to add to the oil aspect, China actually did the world a favor here over the last couple of months by reducing its imports of oil by almost 5 million barrels per day. That softened the blow. Now, on this show, we thought potentially oil could hit $200 a barrel. Now, paper trade is one thing when it's manipulated by the US government and the US stock markets, but landed Brent dated oil that lands in countries has to come with the new premium, not just the current trading fictitious price on the CME and the COMEX, but you must add in insurance. All one has to do is look at an ETF called BWE and see that that ETF has gone up over 600% in the last six months. I've been watching it. It is pretty much strategically placed on futures of insurance. So, not only do you have oil that is at a premium, you have insurance that is at a premium. And then the countries that, and that have companies that run these lines also take into consideration that, wait a second, if one of these tankers sinks in the strait, what's the cost of that? And we have, uh, some data on that. Just go back and look at the Exxon Valdez that sunk many years ago. It almost bankrupted three insurance companies just in one, uh, VLCC. So, the Trump administration is messing with fire here. And I'm saying any day now, any day now, and I'm not being dramatic about this. I'm saying something catastrophic can happen there, and people are going to starve. And this is no longer a joke. We've seen it happen, uh, yes, on the, uh, listed companies on the stock market. People might say, "Ah, who cares? A couple hundred more for a laptop, no big deal. Another $200 a month more for gasoline, no big deal." Well, wait till you have to buy food and it's not coming, and it's going to be a big deal. Uh, let's bring in Cyrus as well. Cyrus, I mean, we've had this discussion on this show, Let's Talk Politics, for months here. I don't see an end to this. Uh, you know, we had this discussion before we brought, uh, Professor Morandi on this show about how serious this is going to get. I think you may have some questions also for Professor Morandi around this topic.
>> You know, I think, I think all of us are aligned in the sense that we, we, you know, we know this is a, a disaster for the global economy. Um, you know, the longer that the United States wages this war, um, it's, it's just going to be, you know, dangerously moving forward into what we call the escalation trap. You know, and I think, I think Donald Trump is in a position where I think on one hand, he, he needs a victory, right? He wants to have some type of victory to sell to the US people. U, you know, for example, when it started, it was regime change, right? We need to change the regime. That's what he said day one. Then it quickly said, okay, maybe, um, you know, let's, uh, the uranium. All right. Now, okay, we can't do that. Why don't we just return? Now, the goal of the war is to return it to how it was February 27th, which, which was quite remarkable when Marco Rubio said that's the new goal of the war. So, I don't see a, a situation where the United States can get a victory. I mean, you know, they're not going to get one on the battlefield, but they can't even spin one to the American people because there's nothing that we're looking at right now that actually justifies in our eyes, okay, wow, we've actually made some changes. Okay, we actually won this war. You know, the best thing is we could probably just cut our losses and get the heck out of the region and, you know, hopefully that would restore some order to that. Um, you know, Professor, I want to, you know, what I love your insights is, is you're on the ground there. So, I'd like to know what the people are thinking and kind of, you know, we, we talked about last time on our show is that we knew that the armistice really wasn't going to last. I think all, you know, kind of everybody knew it was a little bit of a facade, you know. Okay. Yes, it allowed some oil to get through the strait temporarily. There was a couple weeks there where pressure, the pressure valve was released, but it's a temporary, it's a temporary pressure valve. You know, the situation is certainly not resolved. You know, what is the sentiment going on right now in Iran? What are people thinking? Um, you know, last time we had chatted, we, we thought a lot of people were expecting another attack from the United States. And I think that's certainly, um, you know, what a lot of people are speculating that there might be some type of ground invasion in the future and an escalation. What are people thinking right now in Iran? What is the sentiment going on in Iran?
>> Well, for your viewers who I'm sure, uh, many of them being, uh, suspicious of Western narratives and mainstream media narratives. I'm sure they followed the, uh, funeral in Tehran and, uh, in the holy cities of Qom and Mashhad, and also in the Iraqi cities of Najaf and the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala. And they saw the tens of millions of people who participated in the funeral, uh, in the, in the height of summer, uh, under very difficult circumstances. Uh, a lot of these millions of these people are people who are struggling as a result of the war. You, when you have siege, when you have, uh, maximum pressure sanctions, when the United States bombs hospitals and schools and factories and so on, you, it's obviously going to have a, um, all of this is going to have a major economic impact. But people went to the funeral to, to make a statement, both out of admiration to their martyr leader, but also to send a message to the Americans, to the, to its allies that we're going to remain steadfast. So, it's clear what the sentiments are. Yet, the United States, as I said earlier, they can't move beyond those narratives that they helped build. I think once before on, on your show, I discussed the book "Going to Tehran," which I advise people to purchase and read, or "Resistance" by Alice Crook, "Going to Tehran" by Flint and Hillary Lever. The reality in Iran is far different from those narratives that exist in the West, and they simply cannot see through, through those narratives. So just like when they failed in the war, when they look at the, and they don't learn, when they look at the funerals and the numbers, they try to explain it away in a way in which their narratives are preserved, in a way in which those old and worn-out, uh, talking points remain, uh, valid on their, on their shows or in their articles. So in Tehran, people are resilient, of course, and this is the same across the country, but that doesn't mean that the economic situation is good. The economy is, is, is suffering, but at the same time, you see people who, who know that this is a struggle for their, um, survival, for the survival of the country. They're going to remain steadfast regardless of what the Americans throw at them. On the other hand, the Iranians have, uh, uh, their, you know, thousands of years of heritage of civilization. It is a Shia Muslim country, which makes them particularly resilient against oppression and against, uh, the oppressor and supportive of the oppressed. That's a part of their religious, very key to their religious ideology. And on the other hand, you have the United States that is fighting a war that's not their war. They're fighting for a genocidal regime in West Asia. And the American people are suffering, and there's no benefit. Iran's no threat to the United States. It's no threat to the American people. So the, uh, the American people don't have a strong incentive to, to support this war unless they are part of the MAGA cult or they watch Fox News and the nonsense that they, uh, say day and night. They don't have that sort of incentive to, uh, to make sacrifices for a war that means nothing, uh, for them, and in fact, is just, uh, a crime against, uh, the Iranian people. So I, I have, uh, you know, I, if life in Tehran is normal, if you, if I leave home and drive to my campus, you, there'll be heavy traffic right now. Um, and, and, uh, you go, if you go on the streets, the shops are full. If you go to restaurants, they are full. Doesn't mean though that things are great. That's not, uh, the case. But life goes on. Life is normal, but more difficult than before. And one thing that in the West, people don't often understand, and across the world, because Western media has a very powerful impact, and this is something that the two of you can well appreciate, as both of you, uh, have, you know, lived in China and seen China. Iran is very different from what people think it is. Often, when colleagues are invited to Iran or people come to Iran, they think it's a rundown country. Tehran is a poor, impoverished city. Nothing works. Every night they take the rubbish, the, the, the trash. Every night, the metro stations in Tehran are decades ahead of metro stations in Western countries for the most part. Those that I've seen in, in London or, or, or New York, decades ahead. Not quite like China. I mean, we have a shortage of, uh, of, um, of, um, for the, we don't have enough, um, trains, um, for the, uh, for the population. But the metro stations are absolutely beautiful. We have multiple lines. But, uh, u, you know, because of the sanctions, we don't have enough capacity to move passengers around as we would like. But if you, if you travel through the city of Tehran, it looks, it looks like a very advanced and beautiful city. If you go to Isfahan, it is probably one of the most beautiful cities in the world. If you go to the north of Iran, you will see forests. If you go to the northwest of Iran, and forests and mountains full, you know, Iran is not a desert. Iran is a country where you can, you have four seasons. In the, while in the, during the summer, the south is extremely hot, but in the north and in the mountain areas, it's cool. It's a very diverse country with different languages, with different ethnic groups, and it is a beautiful place. And there is, it's, it's very dynamic. You have, you, I mean, you've seen the, the Lego, I'm sure you've seen the Lego videos. This is the, this is how young people in Iran are innovative. How innovative they are, how smart they are. These young kids who are of the generation that the Americans and the West have been targeting, trying to turn them against the country for the last 10, 15 years. These are the ones who went and created these videos that have done more to dent the American and Western media narrative than anything that people like me could do in a hundred years. So it just shows that Iran is very different from that, the stereotypical Iran that you read about or you, you watch on, on Western mainstream media.
>> Profession, I recall and this, I'm just saying it, I, I'm just saying this sort of like a, uh, it was, it's, it's a funny memory that I have. Once I was, uh, when I was doing my, uh, PhD back then, we, in my field, there wasn't in the English literature, there wasn't a PhD program in Iran. So I gave an exam here, I got a scholarship, I went to the UK with four or five other Iranians to do our PhD in literature, English literature. And I, we were having lunch once at a gathering of a number of us families, and there, it was like the 2:00 news in UK, in the UK, the BBC, and I said, you know, whenever they talk about Iran, they, the first thing they do is they show a donkey, like, like someone walking alongside a donkey, and then the news began, and there, the first, I don't remember what it was about, but it was showing, it was a report on Iran, and there was this man walking with a donkey. So it's like, they depict us as like 50, like we're 100 years behind the rest of the world, that we're a broken country, that we have these mad, crazy, fanatical leaders. You have these mullahs, you know, the, the Ayatollahs. I mean, the, the government cabinet, there's not a single religious scholar in that cabinet. In the parliament, there are a handful of, of, of clerics or, uh, religious figures. They're all engineers, or, I mean, the president is a heart surgeon. The speaker of parliament is an associate professor at my university. You know, it's so the narrative that exists in the West, and which is promoted by the Western media, is completely different from the reality on the ground. And as soon as you leave the airport and enter, you'll figure that out.
>> Yeah. You know, Professor, Alex, let me add one more thing. I think it's important before I throw it to you, you know, I, I want everyone to understand just the importance of these, these ancient civilizations because I, I always draw these comparisons between China and Iran. You know, I just spent two months traveling through China, went to 12 different cities, and one of the things that you'll notice when you're traveling through China is this tremendous pride in the Chinese people that you often hear. You know, they talk about the 5,000 years of history. And, you know, you know, I talked to a lot of people, uh, they know that, you know, once they find out I'm American, you know, we start discussing America's role around the world. You know, they talk about Iran, and that's something that I think a lot of people understand is when you look at, you know, China, these are two of the oldest civilizations in the world. So there's a tremendous amount of pride, you know, amongst these people. There's a, a rich and deep history. You know, we have to remember, you know, the United States, we have a history of 250 years. We just celebrated that on July 4th. We're a very young country. And, you know, we tend to be a little bit arrogant. We tend to think that we're superior. And, and this is why it's, it's amazing. You know, I, I'll share videos on Instagram of China, and people still have that perception, you know, wow, I can't believe that that China is so modern. Similar thing, you know, BBC, you know, that they try to find, you know, the, the, the, the side street, you know, that that is a little bit run down. It's like, we're in Beijing today, guys. The bicycles around us. Look at this alleyway. You know, this is the real China. And it's like, okay, you found one random street. No different than if I go to a rundown street in Detroit and say, "Okay, this is what America is." Okay. Yeah, one street does not represent the country. Um, you can, you could easily make a news report. You know, I could make America look like an absolute piece of crap country if I go to the really rundown parts of the city. Or I could go to Beverly Hills and try to say, "Okay, everything's grand here." Right? There's always more nuance. There's always more, you know, insights to share. But I want people to understand the, the amount of pride that is existing in these ancient civilizations. And that's a huge drive, uh, you know, in their survival, you know, because again, this is, this is something that Iranian people have been dealing with for for decades and decades. You know, they've, they've been under United States sanctions for, you know, 40, 50 years. This is not something new, you know, for the Iranian people. But I just wanted to add that context in, is just how important these ancient civilizations are and just how long they've been at this game. You know, they've been at this for a long time. But let me throw it back to Alex here for our next question.
>> Well, it's more of >> Before Alex continues, >> just one thing, Alex. Uh, last, uh, I, I think a year ago, maybe a year and a half ago, I was invited to Guangzhou, uh, to an exhib, to their, uh, to their mu, the Guangzhou, uh, museum, the, not the city museum, but the province, the province's museum, and, uh, it was an exhibition on Iran and China, and they did comparative work between Iran and China. It was, I, I'm not much of a museum person, unfortunately, but I was really stunned and very impressed. So, they were showing how 3,000 years ago, goods were going back and forth between Iran and China by sea. And so let's say a vase would go from Iran to China, and then they'd show vases made in China that where they tried to copy the Iranian vase, and they couldn't because there was a special type of sand or whatever used, and but they tried. And then the, the Chinese, someone imported something from, uh, China, and then in Iran, they would try to imitate it. And this was, uh, all of this was happening 3,000 years ago, 3,200 years ago, 2,500 years ago, 2,000 years ago. That's how old the, the links between these civilizations are. And that's, this exhibition was not about the Silk Road. It was about Guangzhou. It was about Guangzhou and Iran. So, exactly as you put it, these, these civilizations go back thousands of years. And it is, it has an impact on the way in which countries and people see themselves.
>> I mean, the relationships are solid. We've seen it today, and I think it will continue moving forward. Now, I want to go up another level here in this live stream and just be honest with the viewers here about economically what's going to happen in North America. I'm going to say it one more time. I have no idea why the Iranians are even in negotiations with the Americans. Why? If you sit down with Jared Kushner, 48 hours, you are assassinated later. Uh, that's why I call him the undertaker. But when it comes to the seriousness of this, is when the Americans, the collective West, are going to feel the financial pain, there is no reverse gear here. Now, the American administration always says, well, if we, you know, crack the will of the people in Iran, they will overthrow its government and it will crumble. That's not going to happen as far as I can see. But what I can see is our negotiations going to start up again. I, if it was me, um, I couldn't trust the other person sitting across the desk, which is the American administration, to take their word honestly, because they've done the armistice, next thing you know, 14, 15 days of aerial bombardment happens again. "We'll crush them. We'll take the lights out. We've killed their, uh, all the navy." I think honestly, and maybe you can help us out to understand this, is how is Iran going to go to the point where it will break the global economy and teach finally this aggressive, uh, approach from the Americans once and for all? You've picked the wrong country this time. Iran doesn't want to break the global economy, and something that, uh, was alluded to earlier when we spoke about ships leaving the, uh, strait. Some ships do go, and they are ships that are, that belong to countries that are friendly to Iran or that countries that have not been involved, because Iran does not want to shut down the global economy. It wants, it wants a solution, but a just solution. So if Iran wanted to make this crisis worse, it all it has to do is just shut it down completely, and then Yemen too could shut down the strait, uh, the Bab el-Mandeb completely, just for a couple of weeks. Maybe they could, uh, have China as an exe, is separate. So that if someone says, well, you know, China is a superpower, I don't think it would change if they shut it down. But let's say they just left it open for China. They could make it more wor, much worse. But the Iranians don't want that. They want the Strait of Hormuz to be open. They want business to go back to normal. Um, but the problem is that the United States is simply, uh, completely untrustworthy. We, first of all, as we all know, Iran didn't start the war. Iran never escalated. It wasn't Iran that began bombing critical infrastructure, carrying out war crimes. Uh, even when they began bombing, uh, Iranian schools and hospitals, Iran waited for weeks before it began retaliating. And then finally, when they bombed the Iranian South Pars gas field, and Iran had warned them for weeks that, you know, if you do this, we're going to hit back at those regimes that are hosting you, and they struck Qatar's gas field and, and, and, and other installations, but the gas field was the most important, and Trump backed off. So Iran, I mean, if Iran wanted to bring down the global economy, it could just start bombing all of these countries and destroying their critical infrastructure, their oil and gas installations, their, um, their electrical power plants, and these regimes would all collapse. They're desert countries. Everyone would have to leave, and the global economy would immediately collapse because, again, the two of you know this much better than I, and correct me wherever I'm wrong, but it would create panic. The, the, the manipulation would end immediately as soon as all these installations are being wiped out. Then no matter how ABC or NBC or CBS or MSNBC or the BBC or Fox News tries to frame it, people will, you know, they will, they will see what's going on, and the markets will collapse. But Iran doesn't want that. And it's, you know, no one wants to create devastation. But the problem is is that the, the, there's not a solution at the moment that we can see on the horizon that can bring this to an end because we signed the armistice, and the United States was supposed to force the Israeli regime to leave Lebanon and to stop the killing. They didn't do that. They were supposed to immediately hand over Iran's assets. They didn't do that. They were supposed to stop threatening Iranians. In the, in the armistice, it says it, they didn't do that. They were supposed to lift sanctions on Iran's oil, uh, exports. They lifted it for a week, and then they returned it. They, they reimposed it. Another violation. Then they went and expanded the, the sanctions. They imposed new sanctions. This was all during those two weeks, those two, three weeks, and which was another violation. Then they went and tried to create a, a corridor of their own in the Strait of Hormuz, which is a violation of Article 5. Iran was to normalize trade in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran was to control the Strait of Hormuz. But the Americans and the Saudis, the Emiratis, and the Kuwaitis, they went and created an alternative corridor. Iran warned them time after time, and then finally Iran had to strike three of those ships after many warnings because that was a violation of the deal. So when the Americans are violating everything and then ultimately restarting the war, then what is that paper worth? And then if tomorrow we sign another piece of paper with Americans, what's the worth of that paper? How much is it worth? So a solution becomes much more difficult because when, when it is Iran and Brazil, and the two leaders say they don't even have to write a piece of paper. If on the phone, the president of Brazil and the presidents of Iran agree that something will happen, it will happen. They don't need to follow up on it and say, you lied here, you didn't do that. The two sides, when they say they'll do it, they'll do it. If it's between the Iranian president and the Chinese president, it'll be done. It may be slow. There may be some bureaucratic obstacles that have to be resolved, but the, the intention will be to do it. In the case of Trump and the United States in general, this is not just Trump, but Trump is more crude than previous presidents. But when it's the United States, their signature doesn't mean anything. I mean, Obama, when he signed the JCPOA, when his government signed the JCPOA, they didn't abide by their commitments. Never from day one. But Obama was much more sophisticated than Trump, so he could get away with it. And of course, many people wouldn't know, and they would think that the United States is actually abiding by its obligations. So this is going to be very difficult. There is a possibility for a deal, but only if Trump is forced into, uh, implementing his side of the bargain. And from my understanding, if there is a new deal, Iran will be demanding some certain things upfront, and it will probably add things to the deal such as Yemen, such as Gaza, and it won't be like the armistice. The Iranians will be demanding more, but as I said, they'll be demanding certain things upfront so that the Americans won't be able to refrain from implementing the deal.
Cyrus. >> Yeah. I think, um, I mean, the one thing that is remarkable right now is how the United States has lost its credibility in, in this entire war. And I think it's really coming out here in the wash here, you know, domestically in the United States. Uh, you know, we we've seen a lot of interesting things. You know, for example, the mayor of New York City has come out with a very strong statement, uh, you know, basically calling Netanyahu a war criminal, uh, stating that, you know, under the ICC, there is an arrest warrant for him and that, you know, if Netanyahu were to ever come to New York City, that they would certainly execute that, u,, you know, warrant and they would certainly arrest him. And I, I, what I'm really seeing right now, and I think it's a difficult position for the United States, is the tide is turning, most specifically under people under the age of 30. You know, the young Americans have really become very frustrated because they're they're trapped in the middle of this economy. They're in a in a position where they can't afford housing. They can't afford the rising costs of living that are so astronomical here in the United States. They're seeing a government that is, you know, really putting Israeli interests above, um, our own interests. And I think that is a very difficult thing. I mean, we, I saw, for example, a news clip from the professor John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago where he was debating Piers Morgan and he just simply said, look, you know, Iran is not our enemy. I, I, you know, for example, I'm an American. I believe in America First, and this war is not putting America First. But there's the only propaganda that can come from the Trump administration, you know, is in regards to a nuclear bomb. You know, this is a similar thing that we see is, look, we have to do this because Iran is going to have a nuclear weapon, and if they have a nuclear weapon, they're going to use it against the United States. And that's really the only thing that that that Trump is kind of clinging on right now. But I think, you know, what's interesting here is I, I, I like you stating to our audience that Iran doesn't want to strangle the global economy. You know, it's not their goal to wreak havoc on the global economy. Obviously, they want to find a way to work. You know, they want to make sure that they can, you know, they have to put Iran First. And and again, they were they were attacked. You know, Iran was attacked first. Uh, you know, the United States made the first move. Um, what my next question, professor, would be in relation to this nuclear, you know, weapon, and I think this is just an important thing to get out because I want you to really help more people understand what is Iran's you [clears throat] know goal right now with with uranium, you know, what is their goal with this nuclear, um, you know, potential bomb, and and what, you know, what what is the sentiment going on right now in Tehran regarding this, you know, how, how are the Iranians looking at this particular issue moving forward?
>> Well, in addition to the book "Going to Tehran," which I, I would really like the two of you to to read too and tell me what you think, and the book by Alistair Crook, "Resistance," there are two books on the Iranian nuclear program that I think are worthy of reading. One is called, uh, "A Dangerous Delusion" by Peter O'Dowd, who is a a a very serious journalist in the UK, a conservative journalist, and the second is by Gareth Porter, uh, called, um, "Manufactured Crisis," and it says a lot about the nuclear program. If people read it, they'll they'll understand that the West is very dishonest in its whole approach towards the the program itself. The program began before the revolution, and the Iranians paid a lot of money, too much money, to Western companies to build a nuclear program. And when the revolution happened, for the first decade, they didn't do much because they were busy defending the country against Saddam Hussein, which the West supported and who invaded the country. But afterwards, they they saw that they had this infrastructure that was half-built. Billions of dollars had been spent in back then, which would be, I guess, tens of billions of dollars now, and they had trained thousands, many thousands of people for this. So they decided to take it forward. And of course, the United States tried to block it. So the Iranians, uh, had to try to push this forward quietly and silently. And if you look at Iran post-revolution, not pre-revolution, it is a country that has always been trying to develop, uh, in in the high-tech industries. So, for example, in nanotechnology, Iran is one of the, uh, top countries in the world. In in stem cell research in general, and as we see in the in the in military, Iranian missiles and drones are among the best in the world. So you, so the nuclear program is a high-tech industry, and the Iranians were pursuing it just as they've been pursuing other areas. Uh, the Iran is also building, uh, large, uh, uh, clean energy, u, programs as they're developing them as well, including, uh, solar energy and and so on. But, um, the the United States made the nuclear program, and the Israeli regime in particular, Netanyahu for over three decades has been saying that Iran is a year or two away from a a nuclear weapon, for I think like 33 years now. He's been saying Iran is weeks away, a couple of years away, a year away, a few months away from the the 19 early 1990s, if I'm not mistaken. I mean, people can just use a a AI, you know, DeepSeek or any anything else to to to to look at the list of the things that have been said and when they've been saying them. So, these lies have been promoted in order to corner Iran, in order to be able to impose sanctions on Iran, in order to isolate Iran. Yet the Iranians continue to, and and the Iranians made multiple deals with the West. They said, "Okay, if you're seriously worried, let's do a deal. We'll have extra inspections for Iran." After the nuclear deal in 2015, the Iranian nuclear program was by far, by far, no comparison to any other country. It was the most closely watched nuclear program in the world by the International Atomic Energy Agency. If you put all their activities across the world to one side and their activities in Iran to the other, this was greater. That's how that's how much they were inspecting and and probing, and they didn't find anything. And even the Americans have always admitted that the since 2003, Iran was not, uh, producing, trying, or moving to produce a nuclear weapon. The IAEA shows that there's no evidence of that before 2003. Or Tulsi Gabbard last year, she, when when she was in charge, she said under oath that Iran is not producing a nuclear weapon. Joe, Joe Kent, in his resignation letter, the head of counterterrorism, uh, a Trump appointee, uh, at the beginning of this war, almost 5 months ago, he resigned. And in his resignation letter, which you've read, he says that Iran is not a threat to the United States and Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon. This war is because of the Zionists and the the Israeli regime, the Zionist lobby, and the Israeli regime. So the Americans know that Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon. And then last year, they bombed Iran's peaceful nuclear installations. Nuclear installations where the IAEA inspectors visit regularly. They went and destroyed those. They said they were obliterated. Gone. Finished. And now again, they're talking about the Iranian nuclear program. Why? Well, if it's a if if it's obliterated, there's nothing to talk about. But the point is not the program. The point is to justify aggression because they don't like Iran because Iran is independent. And Iran is probably the most fiercely independent country in the world. And they don't like Iran because Iran supports Cuba, because Iran supported, uh, the the South Africans under apartheid, who were resisting apartheid, because Iran was was supporting Venezuela, and Iran, but most importantly, because Iran was supporting Palestine, and that is unforgivable. So they'll do whatever they can to make Iran look like a backward, dangerous regime where we're, you know, murdering children at night, eating, I don't know, women in the morning, and cutting up, uh, uh, I don't know, men, dissidents in the afternoon. I don't know, whatever. Uh, this madhouse with, you know, crazy people killing people, beating up people day and night. But for some reason, this country, which is so horrible, which is so evil, and which has, it has one of the highly most highly educated people in the world after the revolution, universal education. It was in the new new constitution. They they pushed forward with that immediately. And now Iran is one of the high, most highly educated countries in the world. So these highly educated people who are living under this really evil regime, all these people go in the tens of millions to this funeral. It doesn't make sense, but it won't change the narrative in the West.
>> Well, you know, interesting enough, uh, professor, we saw, uh, four US servicemen killed this past week, and Donald Trump had to take to air. And I'm not sure if you guys caught what he said. He said, you know, these four soldiers, you know, they told me that Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb, you know, and and that's the message that he, you know, delivered to the American people. And of course, that was just a complete fabrication because obviously Donald Trump is for US servicemen. But that's the propaganda that he has to spew to the American people to try to justify, uh, this war. In my opinion, that's the only thing that Donald Trump has right now is this lie. And, you know, we, and that's that's why I think on Let's Talk to You Politics, we really try to get to the facts and really want to make sure that we bring the best guests in here to kind of cut through the noise and give you that alternative media that is certainly rising so much and becoming more popular because we know that the United States government lies to us. We know that the United States government cannot be trusted. Uh, certainly not on international affairs. We don't even trust them on domestic affairs. You know, there's very little belief in the US government right now. We know that our politicians are certainly not serving our interests. We look at Donald Trump, you know, by far the most corrupt president that has ever served, enriching his family. Um, you know, we look at the deals that his son-in-law and, you know, Kushner and all of his cabinet members are making, you know, making billions, literally billions of dollars with a B on the back end through crypto schemes and, um, you know, stock market manipulation. I mean, there's just, um, it's, it's a very difficult situation. I think right now in the United States where, you know, I, I just don't see any type of power from the United States and and and their position. Now, they're they're they're trapped in this escalation trap. Um, you know, do you, do you, what, what is the the sentiment right now if the United States were to launch a some type of ground invasion or to use some type of proxies to, you know, potentially cause an uprising here? Professor, um, what are, what are your thoughts on that?
The Iranians are planning for everything. They're planning for major escalation, which would mean striking Iranian bridges and critical infrastructure because Trump has said many times that he'll obliterate Iran. He'll send it back to the Stone Age. He'll wipe out the civilization. And of course, no one in the West and among the elites, no one protests. You don't see any MPs in in the European Union or the European Parliament putting out statements of condemnation. You don't see the Washington Post or the New York Times say anything or do anything. Just a couple of days ago, for the first time, a a New York Times, uh, journalist, after all these months, finally asked, you know, in the civilized world, which probably means the West, because we're not civilized, most people think that destroying bridges and critical infrastructure is a war crime. Do you, do you, if he, as this is this is the first time that after all these months, someone is asking Trump that question, and of course, he didn't answer. But, um, so Iran is preparing for that, and the Iranians have said if they start targeting the country's critical infrastructure, they, they, they have deterrence and they will be forced to retaliate. Those countries that are facilitating the war, Saudis, the Emiratis, the Kuwaitis, the Bahrainis, the Qataris, all all their critical infrastructure will be destroyed. And you and I know what that means. That means that the global economy will immediately collapse, and the the panic will just bring down, uh, the stock market, and that's the last thing left for for the likes of Trump. If there's a land invasion, we would probably be seeing, first of all, the same response from Iran because that land invasion can only take place with the help of Kuwait and Bahrain in these countries because that's where they'll have to, the the logistical support will have to come from. But the Iranians, uh, have prepared themselves for a land invasion as well. And they, just as they built all these underground missile bases and drone bases over the last few decades, they've been preparing for a land invasion too. Uh, the, you know, ever since 9/11, especially the Iran and the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, when the the United States surrounded Iran, the Iranians began developing these, uh, these defense capabilities more rigorously. So if the United States lands, I mean, if they take some islands, it's not going to do the United States any good. I mean, both of you, uh, understand business much better than I. Hark Island, it does, it's if there's a siege on Iranian, on the on the Strait of Hormuz now, so Iran is not exporting oil. So since no oil is leaving Kark Island, what's the purpose of invading the island? All it does is that it brings American troops closer to the Iranian shores. It's a flat piece of land. And so now the Iranians can start hitting them much harder and much more easily with short-range rockets and with, uh, short-range drones that ground troops in Iran have. So they'll, it'll be, you know, large casualties. And if the United States tries to take islands near the Strait of Hormuz, it's not going to open the Strait. I mean, this is not the 18th century where you have to have people on the shore to keep it closed or open. Iran is firing missiles at US bases in Jordan a thousand kilometers away and hitting with precision. They can easily keep the Strait of Hormuz closed without, you know, with or without a few thousand Americans planting a flag here or there. But even when they take those islands or they come to the shore, then the ground troops will go after them, and there will be, uh, you know, all the same sort of technology that the United States, that the Iranians have been developing to defend the country over the past few decades, the same has been is being developed with ground troops. So in all those mountains in the south of Iran, alongside the Persian Gulf, because it's a mountainous area, which is also very bad news for the United States, they're full of underground bases for those ground troops, full of equipment, full of, they have their drones, they have their rockets. It'll be a catastrophe. But, and I don't know if Trump is going to do this because if if he's saying he wouldn't, but this is Donald Trump. You cannot predict. I mean, as you and I speak, it's early, uh, it's morning in the United States. Maybe right now Trump is putting out this crazy tweet, you know, that changes everything again. And then three hours later, he'll change it again. So, who knows? You know, we, we cannot predict this. What we can predict is that the global economy is going to go downhill very fast.
>> I'm going to leave you with a new tweet that was just sent out a couple minutes ago, and this is really important. This is one of our US Congressmen, Ted Lieu. He just said, "We need a massive change in defense strategy. In less than 5 months, against a second-rate military, the United States has used about half of all Patriot and THAAD missiles. The United States can only make 50 Patriot and 8 THAAD missiles a month. Russia and China will outlast the US in future wars unless we change." Now, we've had some people, uh, you know, kind of some some, uh, people chatting in there that the United States is winning, you know, that this is looking good. But the reality is is that our munitions are running dangerously low. The United States is spread across too many wars, and it is just running very thin. And again, I, I think what we also have to really recognize here is that Iran is facing an existential threat. You know, this is not something that they are going to just roll over and just say, you know what, we've had enough, because at the end of the day, their country was attacked. We have to remember that the United States launched an unprovoked war on behalf of Israel. The United States and Israel launched this war together. We're more than five months in. There is no end in sight. And the only thing, the only question that remains is how bad does the United States want to lose this war? If they continue to escalate, and that, you know, again, if they continue to potentially launch a ground invasion, which many analysts are now expecting in the next couple of weeks, I think that this will really backfire on the United States. By far, the best solution that the United States government can do will be to pull out of the region, cut their losses, and simply go back home. Will that happen, or will Donald Trump continue to escalate? Well, I want you guys to make sure that you tune in to next week's episode of Let's Talk Geopolitics. Next Sunday, August 2nd, we're bringing back the one and only Scott Ritter to discuss more of this, to discuss Russia, Ukraine, the Iran war. And as always, every Sunday, Alex and I and our team are working very hard to bring you guys the latest in geopolitics. So, everyone, thank you so much for tuning in to this week's episode of Let's Talk Geopolitics. Let's run that outro. We'll still be in the comments section, and we look forward to seeing you all in our next episode.