tv U.S. Policy Toward Iran Discussion at the Hudson Institute CSPAN August 23, 2019 4:34pm-6:10pm EDT
and dayton ohio, the house judiciary committee will return early from summer recess to markup re-gun violence prevention bill. which include banning the ammunition magazines. respecting firearms from those deemed by the court to be interest to themselves and preventing individuals convicted of misdemeanor crimes from purchasing a gun area live coverage begins wednesday, september 4 at 10 am eastern on cspan2 and c-span.org and if you're on the go, listen to ourcoverage using the free radio . >> next, foreign-policy dollars discuss the ministration policy towards iran and whether current effort by the us are working to change a man's behavior we hear about the country's influence in the middle east as president trumps domestic and international influences over iran. this is held by the hudson institute, about an hour and a half . >> is working.
>> welcome everyone. it's a very timely topic. the trump strategy with iran, maximum pressure is the theme of this stagnant situation. we will follow no one follows around as closely as we do and there isn't one where we wake up and see these incidents and the escalation happening in the region area this may well be a few more than a dozen incidents in the gulf targeting hackers and threatening the freedom of navigation. you asked the iranian abolition, this discontinued, 44 sanctions and around increase its enrichment of uranium. and eric, we have seen for
explosions in two months targeting the afghan militia, program militia. >> in yemen,, just this morning, the us confirmed that one of its drones were shut down. this is the second incident in yemen in, since june. so we need to discuss all of this as a very diverse group of experts and some i would, all of them actually i would call friends. i'm going to start from the far left. with bottom, it's, like right. he's a senior fellow at the foundation or defense of democracy, to his right is
brian julius, senior fellow at the center for american progress. to his right is fatima lsi, she follows yemen very closely as a nonresident fellow at the institute and to my left is my regis. a senior fellow here at hudson institute. thank you for hosting us. thank you for our c-span audience following this and those who are following us on twitter as well. how we're going to do this is where going to start off by very short opening statements . and the maximum pressure strategy. is it working what has changed in the region and then were going to have such a amongst us and will filter to you for questions afterwards so mike, why don't i start with you mark it's
been now over years in the us with from the nuclear agreement. a maximumpressure strategy , sanctions on almost everything that's connected to the iranian regime. has worked? >> i believe it's working ask for doing this on such short notice, thanks forbeing here, for coming. i believe the maximum pressure campaign is working . despite iran's publications , in an attempt to get your cave and to find a bypass mechanism to start us sanctions . is working, but i'll tell you what's not working. i believe this is what war with iran looks like everybody thought up in his narrative at war with iran is an invasion of iran with 100,000 american troops . that's not what war with iran looks like this is what war with iran looks like what we're seeing is there are very few accessible. there are some attacks on oil
tankers. there are some rocket and missile launchesby certain proxies . in the love on. but there's this air campaign and what the iraqi militias and other militias tied to so money are realizing is that so money cannot protect them. we have for explosions in iraq in the last 30 days. against ammunition depots. one happened yesterday. ammunition depots that are controlled by iran back militias . and they're being attacked without consequence. we'veseen the israeli air force attack , salami proxies and defensive capabilities in static missile storage sites, iraqi storage sites in syria without consequence. these air campaigns where russia sits on its hands, they don't use that as the hundreds, to protect his operations and we are seeing
provocations by iran that really are working and if you look at the increased capability that the us and other allies in the strata foremost, we now have an intelligence reconnaissance ability and show the international community went iran tries to impede something now the british center is probably the last successful operation iran to be able to conduct in the street if we do this right. so what i'm thinking here is iran is now resorting to billing after factors that are involved in illegal smuggling operations iraqi tanker that was seized 10 days ago, is there. and they seek it, to be able to show that it was cheating because they knew it was cheating was there . that'swhere they're at . it's fun to watch. i think as an international body, we can really absorb these facts, continued
sanctions on because this is what war withiran looks like . they cannot do a lot and the end of the day, with regards to the jcp, russia and china are not interested in the islamic republic violating the mvp, the nuclear proliferation city, the jcp was a necessary and in a lot of ways. and he was already there, it's a ceo a was designed to iran, more of a share in the middle east aligned with us interests , announced that sally iran competition in these fancy layout at all. i'll stop there. this is what war with iran looks like and it's fun to watch. >> i do have a lot of questions, maybe onthe difference . the deployment in the gulf, the british have not deterred iran so we will get to that also in the discussion on the
jcpoa but when we moved to fatima. what you give usinsight on , when you look yemen, the drone incident today, the second, how has this maximum pressure been seen inside yemen? what is iran doing differently? >> thank you to the hudson institute for having me here. in terms of yemen, i think the huthi rebels have become iran's favorite proxy. so course in iraq or in lebanon, the iran back militias cannot take action because they would just direct confrontation with us forces in the region but in yemen, because of the ongoing conflict, it has become very easy for iran to use the huthi is to send a message to the united states who are hiding behind plausible
deniability, saying that it has really no relations with the huthi communities and it's basically a complete line because the huthi is all of their capabilities in the drones, on the ballistic missiles to the rgc. so within yemen, it is, the yemeni people from the us out thrown all of its effort into mediation efforts in yemen so backing that you and political process. if backing the un envoy. but we are consistently coming into just, it's not going anywhere. because around he's on telling the huthi to escalate. a time when it's against its
best interest to escalate. so even for example if you look at the port of data in yemen where the arab coalition was going to move in and try to reclaim the port which was, basically would help in terms of elevating the humanitarian crisis there was was back there as in any type of military confrontation and the military could have escalated the crisis. the huthi had allegedly stated that they would beable to withdraw , but the day after they withdraw, they launched an attack, a joint on saudi arabia so. >> you would say the huthi is feeling more empowered. >> in yemen. >> the who these are constantly empowered by the iranian regime and there's, their standing and they don't have any allies so the only
ally that they're looking for is the islamic republic. and their relationship with the islamic republic is slowly coming to the service area just last week, the huthi is appointed ambassador . it's a legitimate government but iran is seeking to provoke that way so you know, this is just an iranian that we are used to. randall is all of these things we're often busy trying to interpret and it's basically advances its own expansion of interest. and unfortunately, these militias, despite any costs that i have home so the huthi have been very brutal in the way thatthey govern inside of yemen .there have been over 8000 political prisoners in
yemen and they are detained by huthi and we hear nothing about that in the news. and of course, the huthi are using this to their advantage and iran is using this advantage. in the same way the huthi, units such as the killing or the acceptance or 30 journalists. in among the geese who have not evengenerated any attention . they clamped down and they started follow an iranian life strategy in terms of cracking down on domestic opposition , but then they pursue the destabilizing effects on the region, on the neighbors. whom yemenis always hadstrong ties with . >> brian, what you give us your, unfiltered thought.
your approach, your assessment of the maximum pressure strategy the administration has employed, is working? where you see things going from your perspective -mark. >> first, thanks to all ofyou . you should be beach. what we are honored and that an important discussion, thanks to mike for having me here, i have adifferent view from my. we thought about this a lot . and in discussions like this, different views and their regular in town. so hopefully if you disagree with me and i hope you do, we will do it respectfully, the way mike and i do in the philadelphia eagles and dallas cowboys. this item is wearing a redskins high. it's amazing. >> there will be two victories for each of us every year. >> light issues, our
differences are important, a lot more of these . but we're also human beings want to share our expertise back to for doing because it's quiteoften you don't have people from different persuasions . the second thing to answer your question is when i talk about iran, i've never been to iran. i talked to a lot of iranians , but i think one thing that often missing in washington dc think tank is the iranian perspective. a multitude of iranian perspectives and my friends here will give us a littlebit , these american . but there is a range of perspectives. the point i want to make is a simple one but an important one. when we talk about iran we think of it as some sort of chessboard and were going to exercise policy tools against it. the country people and just a few blocks from your , there than anything exhibit at the sackler gallery, i a couple of colleagues at once.i,
six women photographers. not that this will give you sort of people appreciation of what complex deciding what iran is, but look at these photos. there's a court date from one of the photographers, and then i'm going to, it's important because these complex diverse views from within iran are often represented. she writes about these photos, these images will not change anything, nor will they help anybody.what i will is that they visualize a generation marginalized by those seeking in their name. by those seeking in their name. so i offer that with a sense of humility as an analyst, who just looked at us foreign policy, who talks to, who goes to the middle east all the time. as a limitation in what i have to say and what those limitations is that i haven't explored the full depth of what iran is and it's a
country with people. my name response to your question is no, the strategy is not working. this is where mike and i disagree. i think it's adisaster . my friendly amendment to the title of this panel which is trumpsmaximum pressure campaign : rally, allied and rattle iran. this is what i wouldchange , trumps aggressive appeasement , confuse allies, attack each other. trumps aggressive appeasement of iran confuse our allies and let them attack each other because increasingly our debate on foreign policy are about dividing ourselves . aggressive appeasement. aggressive, what do i mean by that? we have a president who as we see every day uses rhetoric with fx, on the way here to the panel i got a call from a danish journalist. what to guess what he was asking me about? greenland.
people take the words of the president of the united states to this day very seriously. that's all i'm going to say about that topic. this is a president on iran, if it's monday, wednesday or friday he says one thing, tuesday orthursday, will hear him saying something else . but it's so often quite aggressive. reminiscent of that phase earlier on in north korea policy if you want to call it a policy of fire and fury. but policy isn't just statement. it's action. after years of trying to all us troops back from the region and rebalance to where we were in the 80s and 90s, we are sending more troops to the region. and just a few months ago, to the middle east in saudi arabia to other places, us air bases and things like that. let's be clear, we're not talking about syria where the
fight against some of these forces in iran are. and there but for the graceof parker carlson i think two months ago , we may have had some sort of military action and mike says we're already at war and i think you said it's fun to watch. again, respectfully i disagree. war is never fun to watch and i would say also in fact it's a good point today, we are at war, we should tell our congress and the american people about it. they need to have a voice in that and the authorization for use of force when we send our most precious national security assets into harm's way. they need the support of the democratic society. we are living right now and thank you again for coming this summer in a haze where most of the american public just needs to track and this and that the dangerous precipice thatwere on because it's a collocated situation .
aggressive appeasement, why appeasement after mark if you look at secretary of state mike pompeo's speech where he had 12 requirements which he called basic, what you would like to see in iran. to me as an analyst who's been in this thing for a while it reminded me of those benchmarks that members of congress wrote about iraq and of the 1012 years ago, sort of a wish list of play: ideal of where we would like to be from secretary pompeo's perspective. yesterday hespoke at the un as well . he asserted the policy like my has asserted is working. protest year, when a us official asked repeatedly said policy working, he's actually arguing against the basic set offacts and realities that people don't believe . that may be a function of our
policy environment or political environment but again, aggressive appeasement , abuse in the sense that he was in the middle east as i see it, i don't see any closer to equilibrium. see around hurt by the sanctions, the clear. maximum pressure is having an impact on the people of iran, not sure i'm having it having an impact in a strategic way yet on the calculus of the leaders, but having an impact and this is where i'll close area i think in this environment, the way i look at the trump team itself. because this is where the center of gravity is, there's a whole other discussion about our policy of iran and national security that is worth having inside the trump team i see a lot ofdivision from the top down . it was everybody on board to impose costs on iran, to impose maximum pressure. i don't see a glimmer of a strategy of what's next. as a policy analyst, that's what concerns me. wherever you stand on the position i was the guy in
favor of the jcpoa. and what could be improved in a better way than the trumpet ministration has done. i think that ran does things that behave like the region, guess what. some of our closest partners as well.we would be better advised to use our tools of statecraft and a better approach than what we've seen under trump. i think we're in a weaker position where more isolated in the world . we have some of our closest allies not backing them and we have this thin veneer of rhetoric masking movements that couldget us into sticky situations with the absence of an actual coherent strategy . >> i'dlike to follow up . the only iranian american on the panel. >> you follow what's happening inside iran, you
follow every drone that has happened in the region, every missile that lies off from yemen to the salaries. work where do you see things, or where do you, what your take on what you've heard so far and is there a strategy when you look at it? and is working? >> a strategy. >> like a wwe reference. >> hopefully it will begreat . >> question. also thanks to hudson and mike for hosting and go panelist for sharing the stage and to you guys for turning out. you make it sound like other than life choice tracking flying tubes all the time. but it can get a little bit redundant. i'm intentionally using the word redundant because the weekly follow-up of what brian was saying, what the strategy is is more of the
same. were going to see more of the same and you see it in the news cycleand an mediterranean method of escalation, you see it in the american response and , we're reaching a new normal and this has been the summer of escalation for a more political highlight, 57, the un ga, around on self-imposed deadlines to interview to exceed the limits goes on nuclear program by the nuclear deal, where locking in positions and i think what you're seeing is a very public negotiation and i have fought on what the americans are saying publicly about their position and i have thoughtabout what the iranians are saying publicly . >> rephrase that and see how we got here. max pressure campaign you can say interest when washington left the arambula last may, left on may 8 a few days short of the deadline to extend the waiver form our sanctions relief and then washington began temperamentally into basis
reimpose the sanctions that were way by the jcpoa nuclear deal, i foundthat the irresponsible strategy for escalation . however then washington has ramped up the pressure and around response to that, it wasn't really said publicly but you saw it in the behavior, the classic academic showing about communications by the words aware of iran is a game with eddie. the nation for was framed as patients area i had history for this supranational area counsel, this injunction is best defined around response to the first year of max pressure may 28 20 with obvious a second and the product injunction is in the law which means very god is with the patient. you have max pressure, the uranium strategy was to wait out the trumpet ministration. you choose not to think would drive the europeans for americans, to choose to do things the entrance to the
apartment, that with the un security council divided, make america look more isolated and not iran informal violation of the area and would live in the gray zone and cultivate ambiguity but not do things the warrants or invite a response . like most of washington thought that american unilateral sanctions not accomplished sufficient damage to the macro economy of iran when multilateral sanctions almost a decade. that's fast forward one year and the conventional wisdom in most of washington and conventional wisdom of most of the regime in iran is wrong. american sanctions by the same standards of the macro economy, oil exports, gdp, inflation. you have standing inflation in iran, value of the real, the black market relative to us dollars. by all those indicators, max pressure is a success and i think it's by all those indicators that rain
decision-makers came together and decided to amend their strategy of 50 patients and engage ingraduate escalation . i think talking about yemen and how the rain feel safe, and that they can engage in yemen escalation, i would largely agree with that because in the first year of 50 patients, what you saudi arabians do was when you have their partners or their proxies or their allies across the region engage in escalation meeting a new territory, using a weapon, choose a new target, they did so because the battlefield conditions. likely not what sulemani was calling them but the battlefield necessitated a you this. what you seen since the spring of 2019 is the opposite, a political directive to escalate. there is sulemani or around saying please do this ..
just to be specific it is when the u.s. sanctions designated the irgc. >> revocation of the oil would bring approaching the one-year anniversary of the fall of jcpoa exactly so in response to these forces that i think iran is trying to communicate with washington is that we are going to take this lying down and ultimately because they know the strategy is it is driven primarily by sanctions being coursed with economic measures and iran is going to need sanctions relief at some point in all of these in my view are a measure of success. if you take with respect to the polaroid approach that brian is taking or as the snapshot it looks pretty bad it looks like the iranians are testing more missiles than before. that's because there was no policy rhetorically and
economically to counter those. i think there's a bipartisan weren policy failure to push back on iran since the jcpoa. the shortcoming still our diplomatic meaning we still have this convergence with our allies today and there's news australia will be joining that maritime policing coalition in the persian gulf the strait of hormuz and gulf of amman but it still has diplomatic setbacks like the issue with the tanker in jabrill to and can be corrected with greece refusing entry to some of the ports with the tanker a few days ago. it needs a diplomatic and a regional win. >> at the same time my question to the panel and specifically to you mike is is there a point of sending warships to the gulf to deter iran?
that could only increase that when you talk about deterrence, when you talk about close gulf allies who now have to watch over their back how can you say that the strategy is working since iran is not deterred and has not come to the table in talks to the administration? >> so speaking as a veteran of three wars i know it diplomacy in afghanistan looks like and i know what diplomacy in iraq looks like we put an air defense systems in iraq saudi arabia to protect their allies to protect the american effort. that's what i mean by this is what war with iran looks like and i will be fun to watch because of the end of the day its conventional military that can project. it is a special forces and intelligence hybrid that is capable in the quds force but
it's iraqi militias are afraid they are getting hit and they are not attacking americans like they said they would. they may be stretched to attack americans at the balad airbase and intelligence showed increased capability nova sudden the arms was destroyed so what i'm saying is we put in the defensive capability to absorb and an offensive capability to respond and we have a responded yet. i don't think tucker carlson influence on the president has anything to do with this non-attack with the president didn't inducted against iran after shooting down the drone. what happened was they demonstrated the capability the irgc radar saw an imminent american attack and then it stopped. it was followed with a cyber attack. they shut down the radar screens leaving operators vulnerable for 30 minutes believing they were going to die. that left the president saying i could have killed 150 irgc and i
chose not to. that is the equivalent of somebody killing you while you were sleeping in her bedroom and sending you the dhs tape the next day and said i could kill the last night but i chose not to. that is something that was the right way to intimidate a paper tiger in a lot of ways. so that's what i'm talking about. the technology is caught up with the islamic republic. we can show in real-time the irgc oil tanker in international waters. we can show that to the international community however iran maintains i was the only one that went with the two minutes. >> we did at the middle eastern way. >> i will just wrap up. and cybercapabilities on par with where technology is that we have methods of capability as well. we have done a couple of times.
we have dropped drones from the sky with a cyber attack reading shutdown radar sites with a cyber attack or that's something the obama administration wasn't some thing they were comfortable with than the jail pe -- aopa and we told the islamic republic we wouldn't do something like this. this is what iran looks like in war however it's the most powerful tools that they have right now. they are sitting on their hands and not doing anything. [inaudible] >> there would be a rocket strike and we were just delayed. we can't go in eat now. we have to stay in his bunker for two minutes. >> there've been more targeted attacks today. >> is not successful attacks. you have to kill americans for us to respond and they know not to do that.
>> that to my question is iran deterred, yes or no? >> absolutely. >> then why are they doing more tax? >> they are doing more attacks. >> in the gulf war today is there's an iranian ship carrying oil. >> that is not intact. >> that is not an attack that they are open late and they currently violating sanctions. when we sit here and argue the maximum pressure is working, how was it working when we are seeing you know it's intensified in the region and still iran is operational. >> i would love to be an iranian general saying we are winning. this is easy. we have half the american public on our side maybe 70% of the europeans are going to cave. let's continue to do this and
tout this as a success but it's not a success. i mean they are not successfully doing it. >> how do we gain if iran is winning or the u.s. is winning? is iran deterred and is the strategy working? >> you go first. 30 seconds to do a quick thing. >> successful attacks are destroying militia arms are being able to thwart and shoot down drones or those are successful attacks. iran has done things that they are not successful. that's the difference. >> brian. >> again i don't see the reward for this policy with the rest that are quite high. i don't see a payoff just yet and you may be right. a polaroid snapshot of where we are right now may produce something different where iran does come to the table but to
answer your question i don't see them deterred. i see them provoked and i think your comments actually indicate that as well, that they are tesy can go. it's a broader field than a tactical military yunel because when i look at places not just human and you talk about yemen where the foodies in the sense of split this coalition and the uae is repositioning itself. i think it's fair to say vis-à-vis saudi arabia. it does not look so cohesive and strong. all of the weapons that don't seem to -- >> but i would draw a line in what's happening in yemen. you have the dynamics of one thing but if you look across the gcc there's high anxiety about iran. there is legitimate security
here that even when he visited and he was at odds with others, there are two fronts in yemen. >> when you talk about uae it's different about iran or is about yemen? >> it's about yemen but it's a different tone and approach been meeting with representatives from iran. they have different interests and it's a quite fractious bunch syria is the biggest place where you see an aggressive appeasement strategy by the trump administration fully in place. where iran, one of the requirements from secretary pompeo is no iranian dachshunds. i submit to you as somebody who thinks it's important for the u.s. to stand by her allies like israel when they are faced with threats is shameful that israel feels the need to conduct regular strikes on syria
including inside of iraq where we have a presence. i'm not saying we shouldn't go full out conventional offensive war with iran. no, absolutely would be a disaster. what i'm saying is they are playing a multilevel game where they have spread their implants and deepened it in lebanon and syria, and iraq in places like yemen and they are using multiple tools, media, cyber and other things to punch far above their weight when the u.s. as allies have always conventional tools and we are not shaping the dynamic in our favor. >> isn't a bipartisan almost approach with a continuation from the obama administration so now we just look the other way. it's not exactly, it was an the priority for the last administration. >> the priority in the sense that isis was the number one goal in syria and we live now
again in this hate trades where we are right now. people can just say we are going to end the endless wars is a slogan and ignore the fact of terrorism and still having deep roots. there was never any of this is to solve the conflict in syria is a policy priority. people may have set up at the number one goal is the anti-terror check this and that i would raise if isis does reemerge as a factor that was one of the things that led to the tactical cooperation with iraq in places like "karate kid" some sort of way. that places another conundrum for people in the trump administration who are trying to pose maximum pressure against iranian forces against the theater. >> you want to bring in brian on yemen. if you take a step back and look at the iranian in yemen how
widespread is it today? are the houthis a an iranian proxy in your opinion and what are the options for the gulf countries, for the u.s.? >> i just want to, there are some interesting things i've read on the panel and i would say iran has been extremely patient. that is its main struggle and then yes it's asymmetrical warfare not a conventional one so it deploys its malicious overseas and creating that tax that it is so difficult for us to respond to given the fact that there will be so many devastating consequences if you respond to it conventionally. you are using that patients in that ability to reassess it at every juncture. you know and it sort of like not
so different with the iranian crisis where president carter had offered, president carter offered including lifting sanctions in iran decided to wait out the not to negotiate with what they perceived was the losing side. when reagan took over it was within weeks that crisis resolved and i think we are doing the same thing again. they are doing the same thing again. they are waiting and i would say it's a maximum pressure campaign is not working is partly because of our response and our attitude so how do we really, i mean i see a very divided europe in terms of agreeing with us and i think perhaps with the way that iran has behaved in terms of the
ships and trying to assert its dominance over the strait of homeless vet the europeans are finally waking up to see that this is really a danger and it's not behaving rationally. and it's an increasingly tactical powers. in terms of yemen i've written a paper about this. the yemenis in the houthis have been increasingly belligerent about their support. they haven't been a shy as before saying we have nothing to do with iran. in fact it's interesting if we say the maximum pressure campaign is working or not but the houthis have funds from yemen to actually support hezbollah and that was interesting. if anything it tells me the campaign is working and i will
tell you one more thing. iran has historically caved in when it's either military threat or an economic threat and that's what happened during the iraq war. >> this is the only way that you can get iran? >> absolutely. >> it's a national security alternative to they have changed the national security prerogative. example is they iran iraq war. it looks like iran is up sometimes and down sometimes. sometimes the most backward country in the world and sometimes depending on the strategy place in affection iran has ascended at the time but all these different variables drive iranian foreign-policy. let's let conflict be archived
here. 7.5 years the region. funny those who advocate restraint love for an american foreign-policy and national security who advocate for the policy of restraint. i would use that example to say no when you step back and you try to play both sides but going back to the point the 7.5 years of the water the idea of regime change is not a bush administration phenomenon. really it was an article of a leaf for khamenei that you could export the islamic revolution to baghdad and because of that conflict that iran is constantly intervening. they don't want a strong stable neighbor to their west ever again but because the way the war went on a because of the strength of the military
successes in increasing western and international military pressure economic pressure khamenei said if he had any dignity before god he argued it that way and he accepted the cease-fire resolution to drinking from a poisoned chalice. the entire art fur and for policies have you make khamenei's successor drink from the same poisoned chalice and accept something that the other likes? is going to be very tricky and take a very long time. it should be a partisan opposition should be driven by the conclusion that iran only feel safe with this type of unrelenting pressure and then let let iran make mistakes. saddam hussein joined the eyewear -- i ran the report he began to target international shipping but forever the historic content iran was the one using the fast attack craft and using other boats.
just like a ran doing these tanker attacks now the more they escalate the more they risk driving towards is the more they grossly violate the deal the harder will be for europe to save these are not only violations of the deal they are violations of the safeguard agreement in other international treaties that iran is a party to iran is in a bind. you have the escalation. their strategy was predicated on escalation in our strategy to. the question is if the u.s. policy going to be fundamentally based on sanctions alone or is it going to have something else? that's why i mention for her it to be truly successful to get iran to the table we need a regional component. iran felt isolated at the tail end of the iran-iraq war. >> are there any signs that their regime internally is going to give in? >> each time he floated a
prisoner swap once in florida the idea with legal talks even so yes iran is negotiating publicly. that's a measure of success. iran's red line from april and may until now in negotiations have changed. they say multiple different things. we will only negotiate with the america we returned to the jcpoa and only negotiate with oil way for. which one is the? each country is publicly negotiating now. we should see it as a public measure of negotiation like in a country like ours korea they are doing military things to build leverage for when they come to the table. >> mike fatima explained the waiting it out and the hostage crisis. do you see it as an option for iran and how you see the calculus inside of the iranian
regime? payment j.c. poa caught us telling the regime to wait it out and wait until 2020. when you hear nuanced language coming out of some the democratic candidates for presidency they are concerned about ballistic missiles and they are concerned about iran supporting terrorism. they are not in the jp cos but they think they should be renegotiated. that's a good sign. can the regime survive another 40 months a maximum pressure? yes but will it hurt them? he yes or can they survive trump being reelected in continuing this for another four years? i don't think so. >> the reigning people have the loudest voice. i've asked them for the record and they said no. i would probably end up in prison if i came back.
the whole thing is if you listen to the diaspora and if you listen to iranians and if you look at this movement the regime is in trouble. the regime is in trouble and the only thing the united states can do is mess it up but we shouldn't get involved and the supreme leader i'm told when i visit the region i visited some of our regional allies and directors and they said the supreme leader gets a brief every morning and that reef is the price of eggs in the price of chickens right there with the status of militias in the region. that is telling equivalent. imagine making $6000 year in paying $6 for an egg trick that's iran has. that's a big deal. accents and a kierney night dates. my point is it's working and my faith inconsistency in foreign-policy my faith and like brian said it's right. one day you are like that's right in the next day what are
you doing? one quick point and then i will and i won't talk anymore. we are bound to mess this up so we shouldn't and that's why have ryan here. i think in them next to administration brian is going to be key voice in the national security. we need to get back a bipartisan approach to our adversaries. it would be nice to have a conversation about the islamic republic instead of always think what about saudi arabia? >> let it be known that i have the ever important mike pregent for democratic support. on maximum pressure again i'm against it. i think it is put us in a weaker position and a much more precarious position but if you are going to use pressure and
there are cost on iran i want to know what's next. the reason i set this policy is confusing allies and dividing ourselves is that i really don't see what the next step is and we are doing it at the time when there is likely at some point in the next few years to be in a leadership position. i am an analyst and i can look at actuarial tables and predict the supreme leader probably won't be with us at some point in the next five to 10 years. our current approach i don't see a glide path to how do we use our diplomacy with allies in the world in the region are the policies at home. to build the consensus here in america that might in an general way easier said than done when i foreign-policy debate has become so protectable that i think artificial intelligence and algorithms could actually replace a lot of buzz because
you know there's this notion that most national security and foreign policy debates these days which i hope we are not doing here. i don't think we are. >> you know you are watching, i assume you're watching the democratic debates and at least you have 20 or 24 candidates who agree to go back to the deal, to the nuclear deal. isn't that a signal for iran? >> well yeah. >> is that a realistic goal when you look at the arms embargo and other stuff that's on its way to expire in? >> it's a signal of a certain respect is where there's a nuance there. depends on the candidate what's going on i fully appreciate politics. i was the guy who wrote proposals for ending the war in iraq.
and believed in some of those politically but as mike said there is more nuance there. what i see in the political point here is it's much more nuance among democratic voters about iran. people can get a copy of -- about public attitude on a range of foreign-policy measures and iran people like maximum pressure. the rest are in favor of some sort of diplomatic approach with the strong backing for her. u.s. people would he think of iran among a number of different countries is a friend, ally? is an enemy or competitor? 71% of americans say it's an enemy. that is the product of a lot of propaganda and iran's own actions and things like this. it creates what might talks about a bipartisan consensus you
deal with iran and the full spectrum. trump didn't happen to use that approach. trump with other countries like denmark is not dividing conquer. we will succeed and i don't think we have a formula in terms of reaction from a lot of people. go back to it for maximum pressure. there's a lot of room between the two to build consensus with allies here at home. >> i want to go to fatima to weigh in on and when you look at the gulf countries, when you look at the current sanctions what options do they have given the trump administration and putting measures in place. there was no military response
that some had anticipated so how does that change the dynamics and where do you see the gulf countries sitting in? >> the gulf countries today are in a week position and part of it is because there is this international election in terms of what to do with iran and how to respond and there isn't any unified object if or if vision. people don't even know that iran is an enemy and people don't even know saudi arabia or uae is a friend or a foe. so there are significant problems there. insofar that the policy analysts in yemen usually under play the iranian role in supporting the houthis which i feel has been a reason for so many policy errors
the only way that i feel we can abandon a military solution in yemen and pursue a more reasonable diplomatic solution is if we really pressure the iranian regime somehow. he would have a victory in yemen if he decides to focus on bringing an end to that conflict but as we are talking about about this and i think thinking about iran overseas we rarely talk about the human costs of these militias in their respective country so in yemen a big part of the humanitarian catastrophe is driven because of the houthis behavior and houthis have no incentive to negotiate and in fact iran has caught hold
any negotiations and in the peace talks in kuwait in 2017 and continues to do so to today. until there is real pressure on iran and a strategy i'm quite disappointed to see that this democratic upset over the iranian deal is taking place without really addressing what are the challenges in the iranian deal. the use of the militias and the ballistic missiles that are there these are components that like to see the democratic candidates address. we don't want to see a continuation of iran's behavior. i was an academic conference where many, i was really struck because there were so many others who were saying iran has really no choice but to use
militias. that's a defensive strategy and frankly it's quite ridiculous. iran has a choice to de-escalate it's feeling threatened for a reason. it's feeling threatened because of its behavior and is feeling threatened because it's direct we challenging our interests overseas. there is a way to include iran. there is a way to include iran. >> given the leverage in yemen. >> of course. i would not like to see him and become as complicated as syria for example where there are so many players in the mix and it spoils area but i think in yemen the situation, we cannot just talk about the houthis independently of iran which is what all the analysts have been
saying. in considering the human cost of the conflict you really have to understand what iran has been doing in the country. so again one of the examples that i give to people are the -- in yemen. there is an inscription of kids eight years and older. i will use an analogy. i think turkey and iran would have to bring yemen down. so that is the issue. iran is so content on winning. it's what it wants that it's ready to basically overlook the humanitarian suffering in the irony is you read every paper out there and it's the americans
responsibility and i think we are unfairly taking the unfair share of the burden. >> we are getting to the point where we have to turn to the audience but i do want to ask a final question. between now and the next election do you see a pompeo meeting or at trump meeting perhaps with the u.n. general assembly coming up and just quickly yes or no? >> i think it would he a mistake to do legitimize the regime but possibly it will happen. >> yes. >> i think iran will wait it out until the next elections. >> i think yes because contrary
to the view of iran waiting it out i think if iran did a complete assessment of the trapped administration and president trump himself on how is active in north korea he would want to get a republican president to get a deal that is like the nafta deal that is not all that different treaty would have trump's name on it and are public and party in nap political comment will go along with whatever trump does. that's a better more obtainable framework from iran's dif. as an official once told me they thought trump was easily flattered so we will travel him. i believe iran will fire him and that will happen before november of 2020. >> he will not engage with trump unlike north korea in turkey. hominy has to give the green light but unlike north korea and turkey which went wrong came into office iran until april and
may of this year thought to bring trump in as a manifestation of american hubris. now maybe they are peeling away little bit but i think they are trying to rope-a-dope some of the gcc states. they were talking about bin salman. the reason he was playing up the present steelmaking instincts, my concern is what happens if the u.s. goes for premature diplomacy as opposed to productive diplomacy. you want a bigger and broader deal. you can use to measure for that. all this escalation is designed to have limited military utility. the political strategy and getting america to slow the pace of the sanctions which are then give and to rollback the
sanctions again is effective and in incentivize american and mind of helsinki and to get something that isn't a current rotter and isn't better but just a new deal. they are trying to incentivize diplomacy. no meetings. >> now meetings. but that we are going to go to q&a. make sure you have a question. my colleague at sky news and you can mention who you want to address your question too. >> the pressure campaign is not working. [inaudible] >> was the nuclear deal working? it was working in terms of --
>> was the nuclear deal working or not? >> the question is whether the nuclear deal was working or not. i am saying it was working according to the terms that were negotiated and agreed upon by iran. it had weaknesses as with all pointed out and one of the biggest weaknesses was iran's actions in the region to stabilize neighboring countries. they were efforts. obama invited -- to camp david in 2015 with a bunch of working groups. there wasn't anything in terms of real strategy. under trump become to the region. tell me how that's working out these days. there were white as the senate. my point is that there was a better pathway both here at home
and in the world. it strengthened the agreement and addressed iran's stabilizing actions. we have not chosen the strongest process to do that but we have confused our allies in the world and for reasons you understand we have divided ourselves in this war because everything is up partisan issue. democrat in -- democrats republicans go after each other on issues like iran which is stronger than trying to find a policy that would be stronger or america. the answer to your question yes the deal was working according to the terms that were agreed upon in it has been improved upon over last two or three years. it puts us on a riskier escalation and i are partners in the region. >> the united states didn't
withdraw. in 2020 the united states will be able to contain iran or in 2023? >> it's a hypothetical but again my diagnosis is unity at home. unity of purpose and this is not a new thing. this division within our own country on issues. i'm not optimistic because the reference to iraq the war is apples and oranges to compare what's going on with iran right now he on iraq there was this consensus. >> you are talking about the air ran iraq war. >> yes i am. they are two different states strategically. they were in an environment where trump is fragmented himself even with his own party and we don't actually have that
unity that requires democracy. my biggest fear is that we will become less of a factor beauty of think tank analysts saying let's leave it alone but step back from the region. that i think is going to make things even more complicated. >> with that we go to the back. the gentleman in the classes. >> thank you. i'm looking at an article that appeared in the jordan times. the american hegemony in the middle east has come to an end. with present a trump's failure to check iran. your question. >> i look at the question. the realization has become commonplace. far from being omnipotent the united states is imposing if the
maximum pressure campaign is working why doesn't an analysis like this appear in the jordan times? >> i think we have addressed this with others' views on the panel on whether maximum pressure is working or not. >> i may not have a job after this. anyway what i would say is the maximum pressure campaign is focused on iran and is working. as a stabilize iraq? is a stabilize syria, no but iran's victories earned fracture countries. iraq is fractured serious fractured yemeni is fractured to the pressure is to further fracture these countries. are we successful? we are not successful because there were two years we change out the strategy. it's kind of a risk analogy
actually. we were in wars like daniel snyder runs the redskins. we need a belichick strategy in the country will have less about why partisan approach to our adversaries. >> whether not in the jordan times i mean why not? it's a newspaper. the gentleman with the mustache. [laughter] >> once a time -- once upon a time in washington d.c.. >> i'm so glad i decided to grow this yesterday. really quick the kudos. my name is ty taylor and the national security editor at the "washington times" newspaper. big kudos to the hudson institute for supporting a panel with such diversity of views. this is. rare and it's so important and a lot of people here know that. with regard to the report this
morning of another downed u.s. drone in yemen for behnam or fatima is this something the iranians likely ordered or is it something the houthis would have likely done on their own? the second thing really quick and brian you just mentioned the air of nato and i'm hoping you are more for me to tears this -- this is the administration has the end and 79 nation obama era counter is his coalition trying to essentially was good into a counter iran coalition. is that really what's happening and what are the potential pitfalls or perhaps benefits for such an approach? thanks for calling on me. >> it could have been done by iran them selves or in yemen.
all that the houthis capabilities have come from hezbollah or iran. they are shooting at whatever they perceive as a threat that is logical. they control the territory in the north and they will continue to do so. i would go back the eye round co attack that occurred last week in which may be the houthis claimed 10 drones landed in saudi arabia where it was actually able to destroy a small part of the plant in aramco and have they hit the explosives? that could have been really devastating. there are not only workers in the plant but also american workers. again i was in the company of yemeni people who were telling
me we wish americans died in that way america could take seriously and understand the houthis are real threat to deal with. why do we have to wait to find american blood on the houthis for us to respond? we need to find a way to pressure iran into pressuring the houthis and to those that want to mention quickly that the u.n. envoy could take a stronger sense of holding the houthis responsible for their intransigence in the region. it's not just merely a yemeni conflict or civil war but using this to really help iran gain more leverage is devastating. >> very quickly. >> it was reported that it was
downed with it -- so go back to your iis. if they did have it clearly it's not iran provided. trust me there plenty of things that iran has provided but let's not forget yemen was divided during the cold war. many of the missiles are iranian but the houthis themselves have air-to-air and surface to air things that iranians help them get from surface to air and surface over it's true that they have a six and we just have to look to the houthis have a solid arsenal? b and it was an emergency proxy that launched it. >> you label me a big hawk on iran and i am but this is where history matters. the houthis are not a proxy yet. they are full-blown partner. the more you say that you are
full-blown proxy already then you risk any way to the houthis in an attempt to follow yemen that doesn't involve iran. they are going to have grievances. there were houthis in the arabian plan to a. >> is not a monolith. i agree with you it's not a monolith but at the same time their ideological means that go far back with the founder of the movement. >> absolutely but let's be very careful as to why the attempt matter so much because as the houthis veaux person went iran think he recognizes the guardianship. >> if they were full-blown proxy years ago the statement would not be new. the longer the conflict continues the more we drive them into iran's hands.
>> i would add to this the same language that everybody is using the emblem is the same. the way that they go on tv. a houthis who started this movement wouldn't have taken a turn for the movement of the youth. if you did not visit iran and if iran were not invested. i would just recommend reading the paper that i wrote. >> i read it and i would recommend reading it. when you are looking at our rounds proxies it's easy because everything a proxy. >> another panel maybe next week
>> we still have many questions. her questions are about the air of nato and i hate to see being ignored. it's not entirely a new idea. it started in 1953 and the obama administration also attempted. egypt has recently withdrawn itself and that being the biggest troop force definitely throws a wrench into the whole concept. they haven't agreed on a concept yet. to go to this site to the audience.
>> thank you. i've question about your talking about whether it's working or not but what is the end goal? he wasn't administration in the thing it sounds like they are different and goals. you hear pompeo and he talks about the intervention in different places and the 13 list. you hear reporting about how he doesn't like the whole regime because you can't change the regime's pattern of behavior change the regime as a whole. what is the end goal and how were real estate gets it and it would be great if i had somebody like brian tell me what with the aid democratic administrations and gold the come either michael or behnam on the other side. >> if we let behnam we will go to 12:30 on that. >> honestly i'm not being snarky here.
i don't know the end goal of this administration because there are so many across the map that's based on my research of the countries who want to see a more assertive approach. what the ideal would be as an approach that introduces more stability in the region and takes ideas like joyce reported on the nato feeling multiple times. i wrote a paper on it for the century foundation for not a bad idea it's just against the realities of her region. it's an excellent idea that but america wants to write sizes approach the middle east it's easier said than done. but an approach that makes sure that all the pathways that iran has two nuclear weapons are cut off that actually deals with destabilizing actions of iran as
well as other countries in the region, some of our closest partners that have undermined the stability of the state system. in yemen, iraq and syria. it's one that i think is a more sensible approach that needs more than a military approach and aggressive rhetoric or the same agreement from 2015. >> just a quick 20 seconds on that. it's a regime change without saying regime change. if you look at this iran doesn't have to adhere to all 12. if they adhere to free up in the regime collapses and if they adhere to two of them the regime collapses. the 12 steps that pompeo has laid out are designed to be something the regime can't accept it if you look at any of those, taken a combination of the regime would collapse in accepting any of them. i think it's a regime change without saying it. as a main it's going to happen.
we do not do this right in the best thing we can do is to have hands off. the other thing is they are iranian people are limning the regime. i'm not tagging about the people complaining about eggs and chickens. i'm blaming the regime for squandering the regime change. they know it's a strategy of a regime change without a regime change. that's the strategy that iranians are hoping we have. we are saying it without saying it and we are bound to mess it up. >> we will go to the lady in the front. >> sara stern. i would like to hear from other people besides brian about whether or not they believed the
jcpoa was working. seems like everybody -- president trump are leaving the jcpoa but there were certain provisions at that the iranians were great at achieving such as military sites that are supposed to be open to the iaea and the iaea for some reason did not go when and we found out that they were and of course if i were an iranian regime i would use those sites. whether other thing about the jcpoa working? >> is the jcpoa working or not? very quickly. >> it is working for iran very well and they mess it up and president obama was right. he said iran will never get a bomb on my watch and then he left office 12 months later so was working. >> in short j.c. p.o. a use
peeling away the pathways for iran to get a nuclear of them. there are times when the jcpoa which is in iran's favor iran pushed the limit. it also did things that are in violations of u.n. security council resolution 2231. busy only thing that caught eyes it at the international level and the injunction that calls up on iran. the arms transfer which iran is grossly violating in yemen across the region and the black list travel ban. you see him taking selfies in iraq and syria all the time in there and did on this list like the subsidiary of iran defense attaché. appears the arms expos is supposed to have -- >> is iran today closer to a nuclear weapon than it was? >> iran is beginning to violate
the tents in the jcpoa. it's beginning to put a knife to one of the key achievements to the throat of the jcpoa which is a one-year break out. it's beginning to grow its capacity and quality and quantity of the centrifuge. he can shorten the timeline gets incrementally doing this trying to keep those sides of the atlantic apart for now. >> the gentleman with the redskins -- >> take the mic away from him. >> good afternoon to michael and brian. and to fatima joyce and behnam i will say a morgue diplomatic hello. my name is chris and i'm an air force officer former dhs and former contractor at balad air force base where it had my own personal encounters. i will direct my question toward brian. we know about iranians -- sorry
mike. >> anytime you can tie me to brian. >> i did meet cut you off like that. and if all rivalries aside we know about iran's abilities to attack commercial shipping vessels. that said the proverbial band we ended up in a conventional shooting war with iran. how are their capabilities as far as our carriers and submarines? >> they will be able to inflict some damage. hopefully there's enough of the deterrence in place to prevent that from happening but anytime we could decimate the irgc but what happens then? that's the calculus. the conventional four won't be a land force, a ground force. there'll be no 100,000 american troops on the ground. we are just not good at those things. will be a naval confrontation
which if they have the first strike we will encourage some losses and then we will decimate them in everybody will make a calculated measure to response. >> is this president doing anything? barrack team of rivals within national security discussions within the administration. they are a team of rivals and as brian said they'll disagree and i think that's a good thing for the washington post made the mistake of making president trump -- president trump look like the adult in the room trying to calm down bolton. i think it's good. the cyber attack said the u.s. has put to use against iran are huge and no one is talking about them. those are offensive capabilities. those are militarized strategic pinpoint surgical combining those things, those are very successful. >> the gentleman with a white shirt.
>> thank you. i am with -- nuclear arms control and i've a question for michael. you mentioned that you have faith in consistent form policy in the context of continuing. >> i know have no faith in consistent foreign policy is what i meant to say. >> as i understood in any case containing a maximum pressure campaign from this point forward , what do you think the u.s. decision to withdraw from the jcpoa ssto iran about american foreign policy and how does that change their cat elation in their willingness to negotiate with us in the future? >> i think withdrawing from the jcpoa did not isolate the u.s.. strength and our relationship with north korea. any nuclear deal with north korea must address ballistic
missiles, must not have sunset clauses and must allow military sites to be inspected by americans but the jcpoa did not allow americans or canadians in to inspect because as americans travel to the middle east we go through canada or texas. i think it was the right thing to do to walk away from the jcpoa. everyone knows that a future negotiation with iran passed the senate with 60 votes. there needs to be a treaty so the next president can't just walk in and tear it up. ..
everybody says is not true. tell me why. because iran is going to really know skate in 202028. why would they come back to us and conceived when they got everything they wanted. economic power, military power and now a nuclear power. that's exactly where they want to be. sumac they might acquire a nuclear weapon anyway. >> but the russian and chinese are not going to allow them to have a nuclear weapon. >> it is strong enough to deter iran without a nuclear weapon. we need to talk about regional behavior. i would love just think about this, we will never weapon eyes and make a nuclear weapon. does anybody here believe that? no one believes it. that's enough but it's not. it is a strategy.
>> thank you very much michael he worked on iran in the bond medical culture. one subject dear to her heart is israel. as the pressure on the rhine increase the danger to israel. i see that in the context of the proxy work of hamas. is that really increase the danger. we hear this all of the time, wipe us off the map. that's not going to happen. >> after i answer in 20 seconds. they want no part of this and we've seen it in the rhetoric and their actions, they want no part of this rain us conflict. they are happy to do it later on at a different time when deals directly with israel.
israel has a lot of attention. they are not willing to do it. that's why we see lebanese people actually tell is really in we are not the ones who launched the rocket, it was those guys in syria. that's huge. they lost a lot of faith amongst his followers based on the sacrifices in syria. he cares about with the lebanese people think about him. he is not ready to go into a war with the united states and israel when orion's just a goal land bridge, they can't support it they can't defend it they can't keep it from getting hit. >> first thanks for your service. we appreciate it. [inaudible conversation] on his roi think it's really unfortunate that this sort of statement from president trump yesterday, i believe sound of trying to make the us israel relationship a bipartisan issue.
people have been doing this for year. i signed statement is sort of as an investment of those people are doing a very bad thing. that paid off and it's bad for israel and is bad for the us. i did an article late 2017, the colleague of mine at the time and is only counterterror acts. we went to israel and talk to security. they were deeply concerned about the change landscape. in syria 11 and now i think in recent briefings inside of iraq. this is again where i go back to and we use phrases, use the aggressive one, sorry aim to get the tension. there is a deeper analysis there. as one of which comp originally official one sent to me, we used to hear our neighbor strength and we invaded. now we fear their weakness. the chaos and instability in places like syria, which we don't even talk about these days. as much as we should. the fragmentation in a place
like it on. it has been more exploited by countries like iran. what i said briefly, which is a longer deeper's discussion. their use of the multiple tools of their craft. we've got games that go every two or four year electro cycle. they are doing what they can and it's shifting landscape. again sort of the threat that they see that around backs. i don't think it's in a much better situation. this sort of mutual deterrence in place. on the northern border in since 2006. i think it's eroding. at this., the erratic nature of the us national security debate and under this president, i think israel like many countries in the region are trying to do what they can on its own with some support whatever they can get it. >> on that note, we conclude our very exciting panel. thank you, audience thank you,
cspan thank you, we hope to continue that conversation at a later time. [applause] [inaudible conversation] here's a look at our prime time schedule and the cspan networks. starting at eight p.m. federal court cares argue for subpoena on president trump's financial records. his book tv then with books and authors who recently appeared on her afterwards series. and on c-span three, american history tv. with programs looking at how slavery is interpreted that colonial williamsburg. earlier today the supreme court announced justice ruth bader ginsburg recently completed three weeks of radiation treatment. for malignant tumor on her
pancreas. this is the fourth time justice in burke has been treated for cancer. the most recent taking place late last year, for lung cancer. she has served in the high court since 1993, and was appointed by president clinton. she is 86 years old. ♪ c pans washington journal with policy issues that impact you. coming up saturday morning, professor and author of the millionaire was a soviet mole. the twisted life of david carr. so be on the talk of history of russians influence in american politics. and more from state university professor, discusses the history of the first african arriving in virginia 400 years ago. in 1619. be sure to watch cspan's washington journal, live at seven eastern saturday morning. join the discussion. ♪
sunday night on q&a theoretical physicists author of the future of humanity. talked about our destiny beyond earth. in achieving digital immortality. >> the digital immortality takes everything known about you on the internet, your digital footprint, your credit card records, what movies you see, what winds you like to buy and countries you visit. your videos, your pictures your audiotapes, and creates a profile that digitizes which will last forever. so when you go to the library the future, you will not take out a book about winston churchill, you will talk to winston churchill. back sunday night at eight p.m. eastern. on cspan's q&a. >> in the wake of the recent shootings in el paso texas and dayton ohio, the house judiciary committee will return early from a summer recess. markup three gun violence
prevention bills. banning magazines, restricting firearms from those deemed being a risk to themselves, and preventing individuals convicted of misdemeanor hate crimes from purchasing a gun. live coverage begins wednesday september 4th at 10:00 a.m. eastern on cspan. and if you're on the go, listen to our live coverage using the free cspan radio app. >> next day hearing on the use of e-cigarettes by young people. medical professionals on addiction and how marketing has targeted youth and minorities. the hearing was held by a house oversight and reform subcommittee. it's about two hours. >> good morning. the subcommittee will come to order without objection that shares authorized toec