Speaker 1: Is the world about to see the US intervene in
Speaker 1: another country, this time Iran. US President Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: threatening to take action against the regime, declaring help is
Speaker 1: on the way and by.
Speaker 2: The way, to all Iranian patriots, keep protesting, take over
Speaker 2: your institutions if possible, and save the name of the
Speaker 2: killers and the abusers that are abusing. You're being very
Speaker 2: badly abused.
Speaker 1: Since the end of December, Iran's been rocked by the
Speaker 1: largest protests in decades. The government has responded with brutal force,
Speaker 1: shutting down the internet, killing hundreds of people and detaining
Speaker 1: thousands more. I'm Nicole Johnston and you're listening to seven
Speaker 1: AM today Treta Parsi, an Iranian expert from the Quincy
Speaker 1: Institute in the US, on a regime fighting for survival
Speaker 1: while the world watches to see will this lead to war.
Speaker 1: It's Thursday, January fifteenth. Trader Aaron's been in a communications blackout,
Speaker 1: but enough's leaking out to show what's happening is huge.
Speaker 1: Can you take us through the situation on the ground.
Speaker 3: Yes. So, for about three days, the government completely blacked
Speaker 3: out all Internet communications, even very difficult to even get
Speaker 3: in touch with folks by phone. They even jammed the
Speaker 3: starlink and did so, I think, far more successfully than
Speaker 3: anyone had expected. So for the first twenty four to
Speaker 3: thirty six hours, whatever came out actually came out by
Speaker 3: people who left the country and took the video with
Speaker 3: them on their phones. The image that has emerged, of
Speaker 3: course now is that the government used extreme brutal force
Speaker 3: against protesters. According to the estimate of the US government,
Speaker 3: it was about one thousand, six hundred deaths. I think
Speaker 3: there are human rights organizations that have put it closer
Speaker 3: to two thousands. These are huge numbers. It shows that
Speaker 3: the regime has really probably used the most amount of
Speaker 3: violence than we've seen since nineteen eighty eight towards the
Speaker 3: end of the Iraq War. There's also another element of
Speaker 3: this that is also quite unprecedented, which is that there
Speaker 3: is at least an element of the protesters that also
Speaker 3: have been using a degree of violence that we have
Speaker 3: not seen in previous protests. When you take a look
Speaker 3: at this over the course of the last twenty five years,
Speaker 3: you see a steady radicalization of the protest movement, which
Speaker 3: frankly is mainly driven by the repression of the government itself.
Speaker 1: What is it that's triggered this latest round of protest
Speaker 1: and how did we really end up here?
Speaker 3: Well, the in media trigger was the collapse of the currency,
Speaker 3: which caused shopkeepers and were immediately affected by that to
Speaker 3: start protesting, But it very quickly morphed into much broader protests.
Speaker 3: It is not just about the economy, but about the
Speaker 3: lack of freedom, the lack of political freedoms and the
Speaker 3: Islamic Republic as a whole, with clear calls for the
Speaker 3: downfall of the current regime. It went very fast from
Speaker 3: economic protests to that.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: Iran's been run by theocratic clerics since the country had
Speaker 1: an Islamic revolution and overthrew the shower back in nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy nine. We have seen these types of big protests before,
Speaker 1: maybe not on this scale, though. Could you tell us
Speaker 1: about the previous ones and why this one feels so different.
Speaker 3: Well, the biggest process we've seen in the country was
Speaker 3: in two thousand and nine, where the government cheated in
Speaker 3: the elections and ensured that then President Admadinejad essentially one
Speaker 3: a second term, even though everything indicates that he actually
Speaker 3: had not won. You had at one point two million
Speaker 3: people out on the streets in Tehran calling for the
Speaker 3: votes to be counted. You had major protests in twenty
Speaker 3: seventeen over economic issues, and then, of course the twenty
Speaker 3: twenty two protests over the death of Massa Amini, a
Speaker 3: young woman who died in police custody or was killed
Speaker 3: in police custody over what they accused of or failure
Speaker 3: or wearing proper hirdjob.
Speaker 4: Tens of thousands flocked to Massa Ameni's grave just outside
Speaker 4: her hometown of Sekis. This is the year of blood,
Speaker 4: chanted the mourners, the supreme leader will be overthrown.
Speaker 3: Even though they failed to overthrow the government, they absolutely
Speaker 3: succeeded in achieving a cultural revolution in which today the
Speaker 3: government no longer is enforcing the hedejob laws in the
Speaker 3: manner that it was doing before. But this feels different
Speaker 3: for several different reasons. One is, of course, massive speed
Speaker 3: in which it grew. They're also very different for another reasons.
Speaker 3: If you take a look at footage from all of
Speaker 3: the previous protests, they were protests during daytime. These protests,
Speaker 3: except for the first couple of days, were all taking
Speaker 3: place at ninth It makes it much more difficult to
Speaker 3: assess exactly what's going on, and then of course you
Speaker 3: have now slogods that are being heard that were never
Speaker 3: heard before. Maybe not representative of all protesters at all
Speaker 3: in any way, Shop performed, but nevertheless in a noticeable
Speaker 3: way in favor of the sun of the former Shaw.
Speaker 3: That is also something we haven't seen before. Whether that
Speaker 3: is a deeper change or whether that is one of
Speaker 3: the most aggressive ways of insulting the theocracy, It's unclear
Speaker 3: at this point, because the son of the Shaw has
Speaker 3: tried to play a leadership role. He did call for
Speaker 3: people to go out. As I said, this is a war,
Speaker 3: and war has casualties. In fact, in order to preserve
Speaker 3: and protect.
Speaker 5: And minimize the death roll, minimize innocent victims yet again
Speaker 5: be killed by this regime, action is needed.
Speaker 1: How is the regime justifying its brutal response.
Speaker 3: It is justifying it by saying that there are foreign
Speaker 3: elements that are fueling this, that these are not the
Speaker 3: legitimate concerns of people. There's is vandalism, there is violence.
Speaker 6: We have recorded voices of individuals giving orders from abroad
Speaker 6: two terrorist agents instructing them to fight at police forces
Speaker 6: and to fire at demonstrators if police forces were not present.
Speaker 6: Their intention was to spread killing.
Speaker 3: And you know, it is pretty standard for the Rarnan
Speaker 3: government to say that the protests are driven by elements
Speaker 3: on the outside. But for the first time, you actually
Speaker 3: now have Israeli officials and Israeli TV saying that Israel
Speaker 3: is involved in these protests. You have the former head
Speaker 3: of the CIA saying that Israel is involved in these protests.
Speaker 1: The real wild card in all of this now is
Speaker 1: what will Trump do? What's he been saying, and how
Speaker 1: prepared is the US to attack Iran.
Speaker 3: Well, Trump has been saying quite a lot, but one
Speaker 3: of the more important things that he said is that suddenly,
Speaker 3: even though he had earlier on said that he might
Speaker 3: attack Iran again over its nuclear program and over its
Speaker 3: missile program, now suddenly he said that he's going to
Speaker 3: attack Iran. If Therny has killed protesters, then of course
Speaker 3: the Varani has killed the tremendous amount of protesters.
Speaker 2: I think it's already it looks like it.
Speaker 5: There seemed to be some people killed that aren't supposed
Speaker 5: to be killed. These are violent, if you call them leaders,
Speaker 5: I don't know if their leaders are just they rule
Speaker 5: through violence. But we're looking at it very seriously. The
Speaker 5: military is looking at it.
Speaker 3: There's been no military action, but there's been preparation, and
Speaker 3: the United States is probably in a position, if not now,
Speaker 3: within twenty four or forty eight hours, to take on strikes.
Speaker 5: You ask him to say, what will they do, Where
Speaker 5: will we attack where? And at what angle will we
Speaker 5: attack from.
Speaker 3: If Trump thinks that he can do another Venezuela and
Speaker 3: try to do some sort of decapitation of the regime,
Speaker 3: I think the system here on is very different from
Speaker 3: that of Venezuela, much more difficult for the United States
Speaker 3: to do, nor will it necessarily lead to the type
Speaker 3: of transition towards the government that the people want. So
Speaker 3: it's much riskier, and Trump in the past has been
Speaker 3: attracted to bold action that at the end of the day,
Speaker 3: carries very low risk. So it remains unclear whether he
Speaker 3: is bluffing or whether there's a sincerity behind it. From
Speaker 3: his own basis, is not a popular move. They aren't
Speaker 3: understandaby he's involved in more foreign military entanglements since he
Speaker 3: made it clear that he's running into end wars.
Speaker 5: During the four years of the Trump administration, we had
Speaker 5: no terror, We had no wars against other countries, expensive,
Speaker 5: never ending, stupid wars like we had under other presidents.
Speaker 5: I won't say which one.
Speaker 3: That he's going to try to win the Nobel Peace Prize,
Speaker 3: and that he's going to not be the type of
Speaker 3: a president that gets the US dragged into new wars,
Speaker 3: particularly not in the Middle East.
Speaker 2: Coming up?
Speaker 1: Could US intervention lead to civil war and an even
Speaker 1: greater catastrophe for the Middle East? Traitor if the United
Speaker 1: States did intervene, What sort of options would Trump have?
Speaker 1: How could that happen?
Speaker 3: Well? I think some of the things they probably are
Speaker 3: looking at is to see if they can do what
Speaker 3: the Israelis failed to do in June, which was to
Speaker 3: decapitate the regime by taking out as many of its
Speaker 3: key leaders as possible. These Raelis were successful in killing
Speaker 3: about thirty top Ivanian generals and commanders, but that neverthe
Speaker 3: only paralyzed the army and the state apparatus for about
Speaker 3: a couple of hours. The United States obviously has far
Speaker 3: greater capabilities than Israel does, but the United States does
Speaker 3: not have the element of surprise which the Israelis had
Speaker 3: back in the summer. There could also be exactly what
Speaker 3: Trump probably was planning or being advised to do earlier
Speaker 3: on but is go after some nuclear sites and go
Speaker 3: after missile sites and then say that this is being
Speaker 3: done to protect the protesters, even though it doesn't have
Speaker 3: any direct bearing on that. And the degree to which
Speaker 3: the unasitates would have to take them all out quickly
Speaker 3: before the Yvanias started using them to strike at the
Speaker 3: US or at US basis is another element and again
Speaker 3: a much riskier proposition than what he has been pursuing elsewhere.
Speaker 1: More broadly traded, since the war in Gaza, we know
Speaker 1: Iran's been losing its regional influence. Could you take us
Speaker 1: through some of those big moments that have really shaken
Speaker 1: the region to its core over the last couple of years,
Speaker 1: and it hasn't left it fund mentally weakened to try
Speaker 1: and send off any attack by the US.
Speaker 3: So it has suffered some tremendous blows to its regional position.
Speaker 3: A key one, of course, is the Pager attacks against
Speaker 3: the Hesbola leadership that really weaken Hesbola, which was in
Speaker 3: many ways Iran's first line of defense against Israel.
Speaker 7: The leader of Lebanon's Hesbola group, Hassan Nostrada has just
Speaker 7: delivered his first televised speech since the device attacks that
Speaker 7: killed at least thirty two people across the country. Nostrada
Speaker 7: also admitted this week's attacks were an unprecedented blow to
Speaker 7: the resistance movement, but said Hezbolah will not fall.
Speaker 3: The fall of the Asset regime also a very very
Speaker 3: significant blow to Iran's forward defense that they had put together.
Speaker 3: It doesn't necessarily change the picture tremendously for its potential
Speaker 3: to be able to fight back or defend itself against
Speaker 3: the US. And those are two very very significant losses
Speaker 3: that I think account for more of the loss that
Speaker 3: Ivan has suffered. But then there's a new picture in
Speaker 3: the region right now. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq,
Speaker 3: Pakistan are now very concerned that the United States will
Speaker 3: attack Iran. They do not believe that it will lead
Speaker 3: to some sort of a smooth transition to a new
Speaker 3: stable government, but rather that it will lead to a
Speaker 3: regional war, perhaps the civil war in Iran, major refugee flows,
Speaker 3: major instability.
Speaker 1: How could Iran decide to fight back if there was
Speaker 1: a war, where would it want to target?
Speaker 3: Well, I think the Iranians probably understand they're not going
Speaker 3: to win a war against the United States. The United
Speaker 3: States is overwhelm mainly powerful. But there's a different way
Speaker 3: that the Ivanians may think that they can win, which
Speaker 3: is that they don't have to defeat the United States militarily,
Speaker 3: and they can't. They just need to make sure that
Speaker 3: they destroy Trump's presidency before they lose the war. If
Speaker 3: this war between the United States and Iran would go
Speaker 3: on for several weeks, perhaps two three months, there would
Speaker 3: be large number of casualties on the US side as well,
Speaker 3: because the Iranians will be targeting American bases in the
Speaker 3: region or other types of assets that the US has.
Speaker 3: This would be devastating for the Trump presidency, who has
Speaker 3: promised that he would get the US out of all
Speaker 3: of these wars, would no longer go back into war
Speaker 3: in the Middle East in particular. And now suddenly, three
Speaker 3: weeks after talking about the Western Hemisphere, the US is
Speaker 3: back bogged down in the war in the Middle East.
Speaker 1: And finally, Trader, does Irun look anything like a regime
Speaker 1: on the brink of collapse or do you think it
Speaker 1: can continue to hold on?
Speaker 3: So in many ways, the regime is actually on the
Speaker 3: brink of collapse. I think they definitely did see themselves
Speaker 3: being in an existential situation. I think they right now
Speaker 3: probably think of themselves that are in a safer situation,
Speaker 3: that they have turned some sort of a corner because
Speaker 3: they clamp down on the protest. But at the same time,
Speaker 3: every time they use this amount of force, and this
Speaker 3: time more than m before, they continue to erod their
Speaker 3: ownly vicimancy. So yes, I think in many ways it
Speaker 3: is on the brink, but it's also been on the
Speaker 3: brink for some time without necessarily collapsing.
Speaker 1: Treeta, thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 3: Appreciate it, thank you for having me.
Speaker 1: Also in the news, the federal government says it will
Speaker 1: look at stronger legal protections for religious groups, people with
Speaker 1: disability and too LGBTQ plus Australians after new hate speech
Speaker 1: laws pass Parliament. The laws were written in the wake
Speaker 1: of the Bondai beat shootings and will be debated next week.
Speaker 1: The bill is expected to provide protections against anti Semitism
Speaker 1: and speech threatening other racial groups, but its scope has
Speaker 1: prompted calls for broader protections. Prime Minister Anthony Alberesi has
Speaker 1: indicated he expects further legislation will be introduced and Palestinian
Speaker 1: Australian writer run to Abdulphutter is threatening defamation action against
Speaker 1: South Australian Premier Peter Malinowskis in a statement posted to Instagram.
Speaker 1: She claims Malinowskis commented publicly about her character, implying she's
Speaker 1: a terrorist sympathizer, and says her lawyers have now written
Speaker 1: to the Premier. The Premier's comment came amid a mass
Speaker 1: boycott of the Adelaide Writer's Week after Abdulphutter was removed
Speaker 1: from the program. This led to the entire event being canceled.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening, PATCHA Tomorrow