Transcription
General Kim, I mean, we mentioned that the president posted on social media that Sentcom um executed bombing raids on the the Car Island. He said that he chose not to wipe out the oil infrastructure. To you, what does it signify that that the US is now hitting Car Island?
Well, it it means that we have raised the stakes in this war considerably. It's gone simply from a uh take out the military, take out the regime, but now we're trying to take out the economic lifeblood of this country potentially. I mean, it really is um he is holding Cara Island in my mind hostage to ensure that uh Iran allows the uh ships through the straight of Hormuz. But as Jeremy properly said, uh this could blow out of proportion because that oil infrastructure is attacked. Uh it is clear that Iran is going to attack the rest of the infrastructure in the Middle East and uh at that point this this the prices of oil will just go out of control.
These are images of that tanker off of Iraq ablaze, simply on fire. Iraq shut down its oil terminals as a result and it's just one of several hits in the region. That was off the coast of Iraq right there in Bahrain, an oil depot on fire all night there. And on the southern coast of Oman, there was a strike on the docks there during d on a fuel facility. So general, my my question to you, obviously this has to do with control of the Gulf, control of the straight of Hormuz there. The United States, President Trump has said the Navy could escort tankers in and out, could provide security. But why haven't they why haven't they helped ships get in and out of the Gulf? Is it safe to do that?
Well, thank you, John, for having me. And the answer is no. It's not safe right now. I mean, buckle up cuz this is going to get worse before it gets better. I mean, they have the the Iranians have enormous asymmetric threats that as Orin was reporting earlier, they've got all these mines they could put out there, perhaps 5,000. They've got ballistic missiles they could fire. Still have 120 launchers now with cluster munitions that they've demonstrated. They have air, sea, and underwater drones. Remember what happened to the Russian fleet in the Black Sea by the Ukrainians? That was all drones. Uh they've have homebuilt cruise missiles now. Again, back to the Ukrainians. They sunk the battleship, the Mosva, the mighty Russian battleship. Um they've got suicide speedboats. Think about the USS Cole 26 years ago in Yemen. I mean, just they ran a suicide speedboat loaded with explo explosives into the USS Cole and damn near sunk it. There's so there's lots of things and that's why the insurance underwriters are are very scared and that's why it's a very dangerous mission to conduct escorts right now in the oil in the straight of Hormuz and the United States needs to think about very very hard about what they can do to degrade the the asymmetric threats that that are exist right now on the coastline.
Well, it gets to the question again if President Trump wants to wind down this war soon. We're not 100% sure he does. Are his objectives in line with Israel's objectives? Is Israel as intent on ending this soon as the United States might be?
Well, John, that's probably a very good question. I mean, there's going to be three components to ending this war. I mean, the United States, uh, I have no doubt that one day, no matter be an hour from now or a week from now or a month from now, President Trump will declare total and complete victory, no matter what the outcome. But the war is not going to end until the Israelis stop. And of course, the enemy has a vote, Iran. And as we've seen right now, they're doing everything they can to expand the war. Now it looks like there threats that are existing now from some of their proxies. Hezbollah has fired over a thousand missiles now at the uh at Israel. The Hoodis could very well get involved. They could shut down the straight uh Bob al- Madab that where 12% of the world commerce exists. The Iraqis, there's a large contingent of uh Iranian supporters in Iraq that could wreak havoc. They already have. They've attacked an oil refinery. And of course, there's a wild card. The Russians. The Russians are now providing intel. They're helping out with the drone warfare. They could continue to provide assistance to to Iran. So, this war is not getting smaller, it's getting bigger. And any talk about ending soon, I think, are premature.
What do you see as the potential for this fight over CarG to be an accelerator or a tipping point in this war?
Well, obviously Carg Island's huge. It's the as you've already mentioned 90% of their oil flows through there. You shut that down there is no capability for them to develop any more revenue and the country starts having some real challenges uh internally. Um and again I think that's part of the overall plan uh that you know that the US is looking at is how how do you set those conditions within Iran to where the people have the ability to decide their own fate in the future whatever that fate may be that they want to pursue and follow. Uh that colonel they can't but they're already targeting ships in the straight of Hormuz. They're already indiscriminately shooting into the 13 Gulf countries around that area with rockets and mort, you know, drones. Uh so it's not like their threat is something new. They're already doing what they say they might do. So uh for us, the United States and others who are looking at Car Island, we I think we want to keep that island uh functional. We want to have the ability to when the Iranian people decide their own future fate, they have a revenue source, they've got that uh facility still available to them uh to generate, you know, which we know is 90% of their oil. I mean, ultimately in the end, we want a an Iran that's fully integrated back into the world, that's, you know, not anti-American, doesn't have to be pro-American, but not anti-American either, you know, that doesn't have uh proxies operating all over the Middle East and and other locations. Um, not nuclear. Yeah. Uh, it it's it's it's not like America wants to take over that country. We don't want to put boots on the ground, I don't believe. We don't want to try to steer the direction of where that country and those the Iranian people want to go. They're incredibly smart, bright people. They have a great future, but they have a suppressive regime over the top of them uh that right now they they are unable to personally just take care of.
So, let's look at the near-term uh before we get to the future of leadership of Iran. The president was asked yesterday about when he will know this war is over. Now, the president said the war is won or the US is winning or the US will win. The question is, when will the kinetic energy when will the fighting be over? Here's his answer. When are you going to know when it's over? It when I feel it. Okay. I feel it in my bones. President says he'll feel it in his bones. Now, that seems to alleviate the administration of metrics or um objectives. What do you make of that answer from the president?
Well, I can tell you that's the the Department of Defense is not operating that way. Uh the military planners who are involved in this operation have very clear, concise objectives and outcomes that they're working towards. Uh they're not going to feel it. They're going to know it and they're actually measuring and and and making assessments continually. They're looking at things like are there defections occurring in the leadership of the Iran of the Iranian um leadership over there? Are we seeing defectors? Are we seeing military units starting to fall apart in the country? Uh, allegedly we just hit their major banking system uh in the last 24 hours and took out the the ability to pay any of their uh soldiers within the Iranian army, which is going to start having a second and third huge order effects. By having done that, we're now targeting and going after the IRGC militias, the checkpoints that are all over the country that are used to control the people with very targeted strikes. the more that we have that air dominance that we've been able to establish right now, the more ability to get in and go after these very selective targeted locations. And the more the troops flee and don't enforce this regime's rule, the more that people are going to take back control of their own country.
Yeah. Um the president announced on social media um that car island strike, but also the Pentagon is now deploying these marine expeditionary uh units, one of them to the region. 200 Marines and sailors. Our team out of Washington reports that these been used for large-scale evacuations, amphibious operation that require ship toshore um uh movements including raids and assaults. Also have ground and aviation combat uh components. It won't make it there overnight, right? So, it'll take some time to get there. But what do you make of of this deployment, these additional resources, if the rhetoric from the administration and from the Pentagon is we've won, um it's nearly over, they're decimated, obliterated.
Well again, 2,300 uh Marines on the ground, uh division ready brigade from the 82nd Airborne Division of 3,500 paratroopers, whatever they decide they were going to bring in, if they needed some boots on the ground, so to speak. Uh are easy to get there. They they could have forces there in uh 36 hours if they wanted. The US military could. Um but at this point, there's not a need to put boots on the ground. And and and I I'll be honest, I everybody I have been talking to will tell you there is no intent to put boots on the ground. The military does not want to do that. We don't want to become embroiled in some kind of conflict like that. What we're doing right now is in fact achieving the objectives of making sure they don't have a nuclear capability of starting to take down eliminate their proxies to reducing their own military causing it to start get disfragmented and to fall apart to reducing their leadership. So those things are are taking place without the need to put boots on the ground.
Yeah. and threearters of Americans who have been pled recently by Quinnipic say that they do not want or do not support uh ground troops in Iran. It would be highly unpopular. Lieutenant General William Caldwell, thank you so much for the analysis. Today, in a written statement attributed to Iran's new Supreme Leader and read on air by Iranian state TV, Moshabah Ham called on neighboring countries to shut down US military bases while threatening to continue targeting US interests in the Middle East. Iran has dramatically stepped up attacks on shipping traffic and energy assets in the region. But despite those strikes and despite mounting pressure from the Trump administration, many Gulf nations have been reluctant to join the war. Let's get some perspective now with retired US Army Major General James Spider Marks. General, thanks so much for being with us. What is your reaction first to this statement attributed to the Supreme Leader?
He's trying to separate the United States with what have been legitimate partners over the course of many many years, as you know, multiple decades. We've routinely maintained very positive relationships in the region and those have have grown over time. So what what the new leader in Iran is doing in spite of the pressure that the United States and Israel continues to provide, he can still lash out. He can provide a little bit of punishment, but for the most part, albeit the images right now of tankers that have burned and those that are burning is significant, there's limited capability that he has to reach out continually, as he did over the course of a couple of days. So, we're moving into a period, I think, Boris, of transition in terms of the pressure that the United States and Israel will provide. And it really is marching through a more mechanist mechanistic approach to targeting. But again, what we're seeing is Iran trying to really create some fissures in that alliance. And that's all about significant economic pressure. I mean, it's certainly contingent upon straightforward moves, but it really is going after economic nodes in addition to just oil tankers.
I I wonder how you think the calculus has shifted for some of these Gulf allies uh and whether those relationships with the United States are at risk of fraying. In part because the foreign minister of Oman uh put out a statement suggesting that uh regional actors are betting that aligning with the United States may have the US adjust its calculus. But he suggests that there's growing debate about the effectiveness of those security arrangements. Oman has said that this war is illegal and immoral. I wonder if you think these relationships are actually at risk.
Well, certainly when you hear things like that, first of all, let's keep that in perspective. That's that's their perspective on the legalities, etc. Long-term relationships with the GCC, I think, are going to remain very very strong. Certainly in the near term, what we what I would expect to see is kind of a cohesive nature of the alliance. Although I do I do find it very interesting that the GCC has stepped up and said we are not going to at least they've said it for now. We are not going to participate in the potential for escort missions through the straits. Look, if you go back to 2019, the United States and the GCC collective navies did just that. So the scar tissue is there. the positive results of that are there. I'm curious why that hasn't stepped back up and have been something front and center of trying to further solidify the relationships.
There's also a question of whether these Gulf nations go in the other direction and fully back the war alongside the United States. I think perhaps the most likely candidate to do that is Saudi Arabia. What would it take for Riad to join to fully join the fight and and what would it mean for the war?
Well, I think all of the GCC nations and and certainly um the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, they stand to they they stand in a better position certainly if if they're together and their long-term um engagement does not include Iran. For the longest time that those regional partners have been isolating Thran and now Tran is giving them every reason to continue along that path. So I think those nations again strategically stand in a much better position if they are together with the United States. Albeit there is some near per near-term challenges that exist. There is some pain that exists. But the objective is to further identify those fissure points in the regime and continue to weaken that. Look, the regime is not going anywhere. This is not a friend of the United States or the West. This is again this is not a nearterm solution. This is I think continual pressure is what's required and then you end up with some decisions that have to be made in terms of the Iranian people whether they're going to stand for this type of illegal autocratic brutal uh hypocritical type of um relationship that they have with tan and will they bet on Israel the United States and their re uh their regional neighbors to be there for them.
General, I'm very grateful to have you here today, especially as we are just learning um that a Marine expeditionary unit uh is on its way uh to the Middle East. Uh, of course, 200 Marines, sailors. Can you help us understand what that says about the mission in Iran right now?
Well, I think it says that we want to have forces in position in case we need them for some kind of mission that we haven't already conducted. And I can envision a number of different contingencies here having to do with achieving freedom of navigation through the Gulf and the Strait. uh perhaps something involving their oil export capabilities uh and some others without getting into specifics where a marine expeditionary unit would be very very helpful. We had them deployed in Iraq on a number of occasions when I was the commander and so forth and used them extensively when I was the commander of central command as well. It's a very capable organization. It's got a lot of flexibility and so forth. And of course, we're also moving the aircraft carrier task force that was in the Eastern Mediterranean, the USS Gerald Ford, is that part of that, the largest aircraft carrier in the world, that's also being repositioned. So, they're obviously putting a lot of different assets in position uh if we decide to pursue one of the conting contingencies that has to do with this particularly challenging mission. I thought Zach was exactly right about it. And as the central command commander, we rehearsed again freedom of navigation. We ensured it all the rest of that. But it's a really tough mission. And if you revisit the uh tanker wars as they were called in the mid1 1980s when we did reflag tankers and we escorted them with our ships. Uh it was a very challenging endeavor. There were a lot of backs and forth uh as Iran responded to it. We actually took out some of their oil platforms. It ultimately ended when one of our naval ships took down a civilian airliner which it thought was an Iranian fighter. Uh and that so stunned tan that I think they said if they're willing to do this let's end it. But it was a tough tough issue and the very first ship that was escorted um the USS Brid or Bridgetgerton it was a civilian vessel actually hit a mine and had to turn around and go back. It's just that any any success that they can have at all really shakes the confidence of the major oil companies that own these huge super tankers. And it's not insurance. It's actually lives of their uh their skippers, their their crews on these vessels that they don't want to put at risk. So this is a tough one. Tough indeed. And what is your sense of the reporting Zach had there that basically the national security community underestimated Iran's willingness to do this? That essentially the thinking was they wouldn't go this far.
Yeah, I really don't have insights into what the intelligence community offered or the national security community in this case. What I will say is that I don't believe central command has ever been commanded by an admiral before and it's a very good time to have uh an expert on this. I'm sure he went through that straight innumerable times over the years. He was actually the three star uh in the theater as the naval component commander for central command as well the fifth fleet. So you couldn't have a better commander for this particular challenge. The challenge is that it's a really pernitious one. It's tough and there are missions like this where uh again you have to bring everything to bear and what you're trying to do is reestablish confidence uh in the minds of the CEOs of commercial companies. They're not stateowned enterprises as they are some other places in the world. And they're not going to move and risk this, I don't think, unless they really are certain that these ships aren't going to get struck and that they won't lose members of the crews.
General, uh, what is your sense of how much time is really needed to have this continue to allow the outcome on the other side to be one that is better than where we started?
Well, we're already much better in a number of different ways. Obviously, a number of very senior regime leaders have been killed. Uh, we've taken down very substantially their Arab missile defenses. is we have air superiority now. We can fly anywhere with non-stalthy aircraft and and take on targets. Uh we've done a very good job at reducing the number of missile launchers and missile stockpiles and even now taking out the actual industries that produce the components that are assembled uh for those taking down drones. The the infrastructure of the regime forces has been very very heavily damaged. The challenge is that uh this kind of basically religious fanaticism that animates the new supreme leader noting that his father was killed in a strike early on. He was there was wounded his mother and wife were both killed. that kind of fanaticism uh can manifest itself in taking actions that bring even further damage and destruction uh on Iran and its its people and above all its regime forces. And I you know the answer that people when they ask me how how did this end, I've also said it ends when President Trump believes that it should end that there have been the objectives met and all the rest of that. Maybe there's some missile math issues in there as well. How many interceptors do we have and how many launchers and missiles do they have if that's uncomfortable? Um the challenge here is that the Iranians get a vote and I'm not certain at this moment. You know, we hope for a Dulce Rodriguez and what we got was Kim Janong, you know, to use the analogy of Venezuela. And again, this is the son of an extremist, uh, the supreme leader, a cleric, uh, and I fear that he will prove to be as non-pragmatic. Whatever we hope might emerge, uh, as was his father. And that's the dynamic here, as always in war, the enemy does get a vote.
Uh, you took you took my my question right out of my mouth, honestly, because of course you famously posed it. uh you and Rick Atkinson, tell me how this ends uh in in Iraq. And when you say the enemy gets a vote, I mean, how realistic is the possibility of a quagmire here if the Iranians continue to use essentially asymmetric warfare tactics, drones in this straight and keep it closed uh or at least extremely dangerous for an extended period of time?
Well, I actually don't think we'll see a quagmire. That really for me, it gives rise to thoughts of 100,000 troops on the ground and very challenging circumstances and the enemy and so forth. And I think at some point there will be a recognition even if they don't start saying long live Iran instead of death to America and death to Israel that there will be a recognition they've got to stop this because at certain point they're just going to strangle their own country and they may actually give rise to the kind of splintering of the regime forces to take over this supreme leader position and and that would be very threatening to him. uh but it could go on longer than certainly it should. And I guess the bigger issue here is if he continues down the path that his father did and tries to resurrect the nuclear program or the missile program which Iran Israel was going to take out anyway by the way if we hadn't done this they were worried about its reconstitution. Um, if that's what we end up with, we may have to revisit this from time to time because Israel is not going to allow uh a threat to manifest itself in the way that it did actually prior to 107. It learned something. It changed its national security orientation fundamentally since then. Uh, and that means we're going to have to really plus the defenses in a host of different ways, harden infrastructure in the region, uh, go underground with a lot of this and so forth. So there could be a fundamental change. And of course the countries in in the region have the resources to do that as well. But that will not be obviously the result that we wisfully had hoped would be which would be that a pragmatist would take over and there could be some kind of more constructive relationship with a leadership that realized that what they had brought on their own people is just nothing but destruction and damage and death.
From your lens as a general, where do you think this war stands tonight?
Well, I would say that the military campaign has been nothing short of brilliant. The amount of uh ordinance that's been dropped, the amount of targets that have been taken out, uh it's it's really unprecedented in modern warfare in terms of what they've been able to do. Now, taking that and translating that into strategic victory, I think we've got some way to go. And in terms of where that can go, I think the question the president raised on the tarmac tonight just there was important because he said it's a question of when do we stop. He said we don't want to let it regrow and ideally we'd like to see somebody in there that knows what they're doing. I think those are pretty big questions that haven't been answered yet in terms of whether or not the United States is happy with the new supreme leader or or you know what a US exit here could look like.
What do you think?
Well, look, my feeling, Caitlin, is that we went to war because we are unable to achieve three key issues at the negotiating table. A continuation of the nuclear program of Iran, a continuation of the ballistic missile and drone program of Iran, and a continuation of the proxy program that Iran has run since 1979. Uh, we couldn't get anything out of the Iranians. They did their typical delay, deny, dissemble, deceive. So, we took those goals into the battlefield. Uh, I think we ought to do everything we can to compel the Iranians back to the negotiating table. uh having given up those pro programs as an entry ticket because we got a lot to talk to the Iranians about in terms of their economy, sanctions, their inflation, uh their access to the international Swiss system. The country is a mess and we can help them with that, but they've got to give up their nukes to get that help.
Yeah. they don't seem willing to talk just based on how they're still retaliating tonight. something even the president has said he was surprised by just how much and and how forcefully Iran has been retaliating. The straight of hormuz though I I think you know we just showed the standstill in traffic there that is directly impacting people here in the United States. I can tell you what I'm hearing from people in the administration. It's a huge concern in terms of of energy and oil prices. When you see Iran's control over the straight of war moves and the danger that potentially poses, what do you see from a military and economic perspective?
Well, first of all, I see the tanker war of 1981 to 1989 when the Iranians and the Iraqis would not try to close the Persian Gulf started off by Iraq in order to try to choke the Iranian uh economy. 450 plus ships were attacked. U we had 37 Americans killed in an attack on one of our ships. Hundreds of sailors. So there is precedent and I think that precedent uh is actually prologue to where we're going to go, which is we've got to get the convoy escorts running again. We've got to refl those tankers again as we did with Kuwait tankers. So we've got some work to do, but there's a way through this.