Speaker 1: From The Australian. Here's what's on the front. I'm Kristin Amiot.
Speaker 1: It's Monday, June twenty three, twenty twenty five. Australian business
Speaker 1: owners are being hit by more than one hundred federal
Speaker 1: and state taxes. They've called on Treasurer Jim Chalmers to
Speaker 1: use the upcoming Productivity Summit to give them some relief
Speaker 1: through tax reform. That exclusive story is live right now
Speaker 1: at the Australian dot com dot au. What now for
Speaker 1: the Middle East? Will Australia go to war? And did
Speaker 1: America's giant strike against Iran work? Those are some of
Speaker 1: the lingering questions after the United States bombed three Iranian
Speaker 1: nuclear facilities. Today, Foreign editor Greg Sheridan on this dangerous
Speaker 1: new phase in the Middle Eastern conflict.
Speaker 2: Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes
Speaker 2: were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear and Richmond
Speaker 2: facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.
Speaker 1: This is an address given by United States President Donald
Speaker 1: Trump after the nation's military unleashed almighty hell on Iran's
Speaker 1: nuclear facilities around.
Speaker 2: The bully of the Middle East must now make peace.
Speaker 2: If they do not, future attacks would be far greater
Speaker 2: and a lot easier.
Speaker 1: I spoke with the Australians Foreign editor Greg Sheridan on
Speaker 1: Sunday afternoon.
Speaker 3: It is hugely significant and we can't fully gauge it
Speaker 3: significance today. Indeed, anyone who tells you they know what's
Speaker 3: going to happen next is either taking drugs or lying
Speaker 3: to you. But this is the first direct attack by
Speaker 3: the United States on Iran. I think Trumps put to
Speaker 3: bed the Taco equation. Trump always chickens out the idea
Speaker 3: that he would threaten and bluster but not actually carry
Speaker 3: through with action. So I think there are several levels
Speaker 3: of significance. The first question is if the Americans in
Speaker 3: fact destroy the four DHO nuclear facility as they say
Speaker 3: they did. If they were successful in that, then that
Speaker 3: means Iran is gravely weakened. If they are unsuccessful in that,
Speaker 3: then Iran might be back with a nuclear weapon in
Speaker 3: no time. It certainly is a tremendous boost for Benjamin
Speaker 3: Nettan Yahoo Netan Yahoo. He has his pluses and his minuses,
Speaker 3: but he's a very formidable guy and is even more
Speaker 3: formidable when Trump is directing American power in his support.
Speaker 3: It's very unclear how Iran will respond. We don't know
Speaker 3: exactly what the regional consequences will be, so it's a huge, sprawling,
Speaker 3: unpredictable moment. If the Americans have ended the Iranian nuclear program,
Speaker 3: then they have done a great service to humanity. But
Speaker 3: that's a big if, and there will be a cost.
Speaker 4: We don't know what the cost will be.
Speaker 1: Here's how it happened. About three pm on Saturday, Sydney time,
Speaker 1: several US Air Force B two bombers took off from
Speaker 1: the Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. B twos can
Speaker 1: carry so called bunker buster bombs, which are capable of
Speaker 1: destroying underground infrastructure. Around the same time, President Donald Trump
Speaker 1: left his golf club in New Jersey to return to
Speaker 1: the White House, where he met with his national security
Speaker 1: team in the Situation Room. Under the cover of darkness,
Speaker 1: the B twos dropped multiple fifteen thousand kilogram bunker busters
Speaker 1: on Iran's nuclear infrastructure, including the Photo nuclear site, about
Speaker 1: one hundred kilometers from the capital Tehran. Photo was built
Speaker 1: inside a mountain to protect it from aerial attacks, but
Speaker 1: US military officials said the site where the International Atomic
Speaker 1: Energy Agency said the uranium required to make an atomic
Speaker 1: bomb had been enriched to over eighty percent in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three, was decimated. The Esfahan and Natan's facilities were
Speaker 1: also struck, potentially destroying what remained of Iran's nuclear capability
Speaker 1: after Israel launched Operation Rising Lion just over a week ago.
Speaker 1: Confirmation of the operation came via a series of posts
Speaker 1: on Donald Trump's Truth social platform. On Sunday morning, We've
Speaker 1: used AI to bring those posts to life.
Speaker 2: We have completed our very successful attack on the three
Speaker 2: nuclear sites in Iran. All planes are safely on their
Speaker 2: way home. Congratulations to our great American warriors. There is
Speaker 2: not another military in the world that could.
Speaker 4: Have done this.
Speaker 1: And then a warning.
Speaker 2: Any retaliation by Iran against the United States will be
Speaker 2: met with force far greater than what was witnessed tonight.
Speaker 1: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later released a pre recorded
Speaker 1: message praising the decision by Donald Trump to inject the
Speaker 1: United States into the war.
Speaker 5: History will record that President Trump acted to deny the
Speaker 5: world's most dangerous regime the world's most dangerous weapons. His
Speaker 5: leadership today has created a pivot of history that can
Speaker 5: help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future
Speaker 5: of prosperity and peace.
Speaker 1: In the aftermath of the bombings, a news anchor on
Speaker 1: Iranian state television said, mister President, you started it and
Speaker 1: we will end it.
Speaker 5: Nad al yea is juan huda ambrikar shomar shudul charity
Speaker 5: va matamomshkah.
Speaker 1: At the same time, a map of US military bases
Speaker 1: in the Middle East was broadcast. Then, on Sunday afternoon,
Speaker 1: around launched a fresh shabablistic missile attack on Israel, and
Speaker 1: the nation's foreign minister are bas Arakshi accused the US
Speaker 1: of engaging in extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior. In
Speaker 1: a post on x formerly known as Twitter, Greg, how
Speaker 1: do you expect Iran will respond to this display of
Speaker 1: force by the United States?
Speaker 4: So?
Speaker 3: Iran has three things it can do in response. It
Speaker 3: can fire missiles, it can engage proxies to attack Israel,
Speaker 3: America and Arabs who are seen to be their friends.
Speaker 3: And it can sponsor acts of murderous barbaric terrorism around
Speaker 3: the world. I think it will do all three, but
Speaker 3: it's a bit unclear what its capabilities are. So the
Speaker 3: Israelis think they've taken out nearly half of Iran's missile capability,
Speaker 3: but that still means Iran has a lot of missiles left.
Speaker 4: Israel has very good missile.
Speaker 3: Defense, but it's not foolproof, so some Iranian missiles are
Speaker 3: getting through. Think there's any effort on the Iranians part
Speaker 3: really to target Israeli military facilities. I think they're perfectly
Speaker 3: happy if they hit residential apartment box. They just wanted
Speaker 3: to stress Israel and hurt its morale and show that
Speaker 3: they are fighting back. This could go on for a
Speaker 3: long time, or the Iranians might decide to stop. If
Speaker 3: they don't stop Israel, and perhaps America will take out
Speaker 3: a lot more of their missiles and maybe some of
Speaker 3: their other targets as well. So there is a danger
Speaker 3: in escalation here. As to the proxies, Iran had a
Speaker 3: full suite of proxies, a ring of fire around Israel.
Speaker 3: It had the Hoodies in Yemen, the Shia militia in Iraq,
Speaker 3: Allied government in Syria, massive military force in Hesbela and
Speaker 3: Southern Lebanon and Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic g had,
Speaker 3: amongst the Palestinians, all forces which it financed and it armed,
Speaker 3: and it directed to some extent. Now Hezbolah has been
Speaker 3: dentially neutralized by the israelis Hamas is not in a
Speaker 3: position to mount a serious attack on Israel, and the
Speaker 3: Syrian government has fallen to its own enemies, and Israel
Speaker 3: has wiped out the conventional weapons of the Syrian military,
Speaker 3: so Israel is much less threatened by proxies than previously.
Speaker 3: The Hoodies can keep firing missiles if they like, but
Speaker 3: they get very very few.
Speaker 4: Of their missiles through to Israel.
Speaker 3: If they resume attacks on American shipping in the Red Sea,
Speaker 3: the Americans will strike them again, and the Americans hurt
Speaker 3: them very badly when they strike them previously. So the
Speaker 3: most intact of the Iranian proxies would be the Shia
Speaker 3: militia in Iraq. They hate America and they are generally
Speaker 3: pretty obedient to Iran. But it'll be fascinating to see
Speaker 3: what the relationship between Iran and its proxies is now.
Speaker 3: It's one thing for the proxies to do Iran's bidding
Speaker 3: when it looks like Iran is winning. Iran has all
Speaker 3: this influence all over the region, and Iran has lots
Speaker 3: of money and lots of capabilities, but Iran is much
Speaker 3: diminished now, it's not winning, and being a friend of
Speaker 3: Iran in the region is now very dangerous.
Speaker 4: If they do.
Speaker 3: Attack Americans after what Trump has said, I think they'll
Speaker 3: be a very harsh response against Iran. And then finally,
Speaker 3: Iran is the chief state sponsor of international terrorism. It
Speaker 3: kills its own dissidence all over the world. It's responsible
Speaker 3: for a great deal of anti Jewish terrorism, so you
Speaker 3: probably will see an uptick of that. So I think
Speaker 3: they will respond in all three of those fronts, but
Speaker 3: whether they are able to respond in a decisive way
Speaker 3: on any of those fronts is unclear.
Speaker 1: Has this situation increased the possibility of a terror threat
Speaker 1: in the United States? Do you think?
Speaker 4: Oh?
Speaker 3: Yes, absolutely, And all over the world it's increased the
Speaker 3: possibility of a terror threat in Australia. The Iranian government
Speaker 3: has a very particular, very extreme Islamist ideology at its heart,
Speaker 3: and it financed terrorism all over the world. Terrorism is
Speaker 3: relatively cheap to finance. You just need one bad guy
Speaker 3: and some explosives really in most contexts, or one bad
Speaker 3: guy and a motorcar in a lot of contexts. And
Speaker 3: although the majority of Islamist terrorism has been Sunni. Iran
Speaker 3: tries to exert an ideological leadership even over Sunni extremists,
Speaker 3: and it also pays people to conduct terrorism. There was
Speaker 3: a trial of an attempted assassination on Donald Trump, which
Speaker 3: didn't get to the physical stage of an assault, but
Speaker 3: the guy who was put on trial was led by
Speaker 3: American prosecutors to be looking for a hitman to hire
Speaker 3: on Iran's behalf to kill Donald Trump. So I think
Speaker 3: you could see Iran has conducted shocking murderous terrorism in
Speaker 3: Argentina and across Europe and so forth. I think the
Speaker 3: terrorist threat is probably increased everywhere. On the other hand,
Speaker 3: if Iran gets caught red handed behind acts of terrorism
Speaker 3: in Trump and Netanyahu, they enemies who are now willing
Speaker 3: to respond them mean, Iran has been brilliant at taking
Speaker 3: murderous actions, which somehow or other they do through a proxy,
Speaker 3: and therefore the retaliation is against the proxy and not
Speaker 3: against them.
Speaker 4: So that situation has changed now.
Speaker 3: One result of October seven, the terrorist attacks on Israel
Speaker 3: is that Israel's strategic calculus has changed and the acceptance
Speaker 3: of threat has changed, And so both Israel and Donald
Speaker 3: Trump confront Iran with a situation it hasn't had before,
Speaker 3: which is it will now be held responsible itself for
Speaker 3: the actions of its proxies. And if Iran thinks it's
Speaker 3: at a rough ten days, much rough things could happen.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, of course, has been seeking a deal with
Speaker 1: Iran to end its enrichment of uranium for months now,
Speaker 1: and those diplomatic efforts have ultimately failed. On Sunday, he
Speaker 1: posted on his truth social platform that Iran should have
Speaker 1: accepted the deal presented to them when they had the chance.
Speaker 2: What a shame and waste of human life, simply stated,
Speaker 2: Iran cannot have a new clear weapon. I said it
Speaker 2: over and over again.
Speaker 1: Why act now and with such force?
Speaker 3: Well, Iran has been in negotiations forever now. Iran has
Speaker 3: never agreed to give up uranium enrichment, and these negotiations
Speaker 3: have been spluttering along for years and years and years.
Speaker 3: And Iran thought it was just playing rapid oupe again,
Speaker 3: that it could just go on forever with these negotiations.
Speaker 3: But the negotiations are not really complex. They're actually really
Speaker 3: very simple. Iran has to give up all uranium enrichment
Speaker 3: facilities and it has to agree to an inspections regime
Speaker 3: which is intrusive and credible because they have a very
Speaker 3: long record over many years of lying routinely about their
Speaker 3: nuclear activities. They have lied at every point, They've cheated
Speaker 3: at every point. The International Atomic Energy Agency says they're
Speaker 3: in breach of their treaty obligations. The fact is that
Speaker 3: all of the talks and all of the negotiations have
Speaker 3: failed up till now, and Trump offered them a deal,
Speaker 3: but the deal was a deal they could never accept.
Speaker 3: If they gave up all enrichment activities and agreed to
Speaker 3: an inspections regime, which was really credible, they would be
Speaker 3: giving up their nuclear weapons program, and they don't want
Speaker 3: to do that. And now, of course it would be
Speaker 3: even harder for them to do that because they would
Speaker 3: have to accept humiliating defeat by the Americans. The other
Speaker 3: big consequence is what are Iran's bad guy friends going
Speaker 3: to do about this? Iran got the converter which makes
Speaker 3: uranium into nuclear fuel from China, and they got the
Speaker 3: converter which makes nuclear fuel into metal which you need
Speaker 3: to create a bomb, also from China. There are hard
Speaker 3: questions to be asked about how is China going to
Speaker 3: relate to Iran in the light of all this, because
Speaker 3: it's much easier for Iran to reconstruct their program if
Speaker 3: they get assistance from China, much harder if they don't.
Speaker 3: Or maybe they'll get assistance from North Korea, which would
Speaker 3: be Chines's assistants, delivered as it were, by a Chinese proxy.
Speaker 3: These are enormous questions to ponder. No one would say
Speaker 3: Trump has solved everything by taking out their facilities, But
Speaker 3: the best sources I can find think that if they
Speaker 3: have destroyed these facilities, they've set back in Rand's program
Speaker 3: probably by seven to ten years. That's a very big achievement.
Speaker 3: That's a very big achievement. And it's not as if
Speaker 3: in that seven to ten years, Israelis and Americans won't
Speaker 3: be watching what Iran gets up to.
Speaker 1: Coming up, did Donald Trump backflip on the Middle East?
Speaker 1: Donald Trump campaigned on an America First platform, saying he'd
Speaker 1: keep America out of these kinds of foreign entanglements, But
Speaker 1: he said in Sunday's address that I decided a.
Speaker 2: Long time ago that I would not let this happen.
Speaker 2: It will not continue.
Speaker 1: Do Donald Trump's politics actually matter in the current circumstances?
Speaker 3: Now, Trump did say he was going to keep out
Speaker 3: of foreign entanglements and forever wars, but this is not
Speaker 3: a forever war. The idea that America keeps out of
Speaker 3: military entanglements doesn't mean that there are no circumstances ever
Speaker 3: on the face of the planet where America will intervene,
Speaker 3: especially with air power which involves no ground forces. So
Speaker 3: I don't think Trump has done anything inconsistent here, not
Speaker 3: that Trump is ever worried by consistency or anything like that.
Speaker 3: If the Iranians are successful in killing large numbers of
Speaker 3: Americans in the Middle East and have massive terrorist outrages
Speaker 3: in the United States and so the politics of this
Speaker 3: may come back to hurt Trump.
Speaker 4: Or if the Iranians.
Speaker 3: Blow up Saudi oil facilities and there's an economic crisis
Speaker 3: as a consequence, it's possible that politics could come back
Speaker 3: to hurt Trump. But a one day intervention from the
Speaker 3: air to destroy nuclear facilities which were producing weapons grade
Speaker 3: highly enriched uranium for a regime which is killed and
Speaker 3: murdered Americans for forty years, I think that falls well
Speaker 3: within the purview of any American present. The other thing
Speaker 3: is Trump is not actually really an isolationist. He doesn't
Speaker 3: really want to police the world. But if you hit America,
Speaker 3: he'll hit you back one hundred times harder. But of course,
Speaker 3: in the end, the proof is in the pudding. If
Speaker 3: it works out disastrously badly, it will be seen to
Speaker 3: have been a terrible decision. If it results in a
Speaker 3: weaker Iran, which can cause less damage to America and
Speaker 3: its allies, it'll be seen as an active genius.
Speaker 1: Greg Sheridan is The Australian's Foreign editor. This story is
Speaker 1: developing quickly. For all the latest on the conflict in
Speaker 1: the Middle East, visit the Australian dot com dot au