Speaker 1: Yes, he's Australia overnight with the Pat Pernetta.
Speaker 2: Australia overnight. Now, what will be the fallout from the
Speaker 2: US strikes on Iran? Our next guest is Professor Aiden
Speaker 2: Warren from Romot University. Now, this is changing pretty quickly,
Speaker 2: this crisis in the Middle East. But the time of
Speaker 2: recording this discussion, shortly before going to air, we know
Speaker 2: that Trump called the US to strike three nuclear sites
Speaker 2: in Iran using the American B two bombers and the
Speaker 2: bunker Buster bomb. A few other details too to talk
Speaker 2: about with our next guest as far as what's happening now,
Speaker 2: including the ceasefire, how will Iran respond? We know there's
Speaker 2: been a hit on the US bas in Qatar. How
Speaker 2: successful were the strikes and will there be more bombing?
Speaker 2: To discuss it further, Professor Aiden Warren from the School
Speaker 2: of Global, Urban and Social Studies at Remt University. Hi there, Aiden,
Speaker 2: welcome back to the show.
Speaker 3: Hi, how are you.
Speaker 2: I'm good Now. I just wanted to mention that we're
Speaker 2: recording just before going to air because things are moving
Speaker 2: quite quickly. But yeah, well, you know, ceasefire is something
Speaker 2: we're looking at at this point in time. Those questions
Speaker 2: are interesting. How successful were the strikes, will there be
Speaker 2: more bombing, how will Iran respond? What's going to go
Speaker 2: with the ceasefire? Your thoughts and all this?
Speaker 3: Please aiden, Oh boy, there's lots of unpacked there. Look
Speaker 3: at the moment we are at.
Speaker 4: A ceasefire has declared, And initially it was declared this
Speaker 4: morning from Donald J. Trump that there was a ceasefire
Speaker 4: between he had broken a seaside between.
Speaker 3: Israel and Iran, and then there.
Speaker 4: Was more details that of course this was orchestrated or
Speaker 4: also broken by the guitar. President, I believe in the equation.
Speaker 4: And then from there on in the details a bit
Speaker 4: murky as to.
Speaker 3: Whether Israel and Iran had agreed on the terms.
Speaker 4: But since, you know, over the course of the day,
Speaker 4: Iran has come out and indicated that it has agreed
Speaker 4: with the terms of the agreement. In Israel has also
Speaker 4: said it agreed to US President Donald Trump cees fire
Speaker 4: proposal following its military successes in Iran. So obviously the
Speaker 4: this this cease fire has been announced obviously with a
Speaker 4: with a time time frame. But in the meantime, Israel
Speaker 4: and Iran have been also you know, continue on with
Speaker 4: their various assertive bombing campaigns and so forth, trying to
Speaker 4: get a few few away before of course the ceasefire
Speaker 4: you know, comes into play, which in itself is a
Speaker 4: you know it always maccab thing about war the other
Speaker 4: thing I will say. So obviously this follows a long
Speaker 4: procession of events, we know it. He really got to
Speaker 4: the point where, you know, obviously we have the the
Speaker 4: the Israel Iran flict or the Israel invasion of Iran.
Speaker 1: That's you know, probably in this eleventh to twelfth day.
Speaker 4: And then of course that went back and forward to
Speaker 4: the point where Trump of course came into the equation
Speaker 4: because obviously it was illustrated to Trump that Iran did
Speaker 4: not have the sorry, Israel did not have the capabilities
Speaker 4: to get into, you know, get those the requisite nuclear sites.
Speaker 3: We saw the lead up to that.
Speaker 4: Which of course was you know, you know, I mean
Speaker 4: like something out of a movie in a way, where
Speaker 4: you had a decoy couple of b B two bombers
Speaker 4: heading to Guam, and then you had another procession moving
Speaker 4: to the Middle East. Then you have of course bombers
Speaker 4: going in overnight and hitting those three sites. And then
Speaker 4: of course one the one submarine sending Tomahawk strikes into Isfahan,
Speaker 4: which is one of the third which is the third
Speaker 4: side the main sites.
Speaker 3: Of course, we were definitely Photo and of course.
Speaker 4: The Tans and so those who were with bunker busses.
Speaker 4: Then there was a whole debate about, you know, whether
Speaker 4: or not Trump had the authority, and then there was
Speaker 4: a whole debate about, you know, did this is a
Speaker 4: big one that came to the four did those bunker
Speaker 4: busses actually really get inside and do the records of
Speaker 4: damage to really destroy the material or the sort of
Speaker 4: the infrastructure and the centrifuges and so forth, particularly in
Speaker 4: Photo in terms of the tons, of course, did that
Speaker 4: to what extent did they get did get inside the tons?
Speaker 1: And then of course in Isfahan, to what extent was it.
Speaker 4: Able to get the secured or a uranium that was
Speaker 4: already enrich And that led to another debate about did
Speaker 4: Iran actually have time to move that material.
Speaker 3: So there's been a whole lot going on.
Speaker 4: I mean, it's really been a and I won't say
Speaker 4: hours our proposition, but it's been really you know, every
Speaker 4: file four or five hours there's been something developing.
Speaker 3: I mean, and the world has been waiting with beta breath.
Speaker 4: Of course, so after those strikes from Trump in the
Speaker 4: United States, then everyone was waiting with beta.
Speaker 3: Breath of what was Iran's response going to be?
Speaker 4: And they responded, of course with their their sending twelve
Speaker 4: to thirteen missiles to Guitar.
Speaker 3: Really what easily interceptor?
Speaker 4: They also advised Guitar and I believe the United States station. No,
Speaker 4: they didn't advise the United States. They advised us how
Speaker 4: that these were coming. Nothing really was substantially damaged. I'm
Speaker 4: telling a why don't.
Speaker 3: You asked a lot?
Speaker 2: Did as very interesting?
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, but basically, look that went through to the keeper.
Speaker 4: Those those they were thwarted or they went they were
Speaker 4: inconsequential those missiles.
Speaker 3: And then just on that.
Speaker 2: To be warned and inconsequential to fire the missiles. Is
Speaker 2: that a bit of an active force from Iran to
Speaker 2: showcase what they're doing, But then they didn't really want
Speaker 2: to do as much damage as they could by warning
Speaker 2: people and easily intercepted. Is there something we can read
Speaker 2: into that situation?
Speaker 3: Yes, you're then on the head.
Speaker 1: Basically from my point of view, this is.
Speaker 4: What I think is is really you know, it's sometimes.
Speaker 1: Referred to as a Goldilocks strike.
Speaker 3: Where you're just wanting to get it right. You're wanting
Speaker 3: to say face, You're wanting to if.
Speaker 4: I was the supreme leader of Iran, really wanted to
Speaker 4: at least look.
Speaker 3: Like I'm doing something.
Speaker 4: I'm not just sitting there idol and not responding to
Speaker 4: those you know, significant significant attacks of course by the
Speaker 4: United States on those three you know, really significant pillars
Speaker 4: of the Iranian states in terms of those nuclear sites.
Speaker 4: And then of course, you know you want to at
Speaker 4: least be doing something.
Speaker 1: You know your your power is waning, you know your your.
Speaker 4: Missile your missile capacities has been diminished over the last
Speaker 4: week or so, and so you send this strike. It's
Speaker 4: almost like, Okay, I've responded, and then hopefully that will
Speaker 4: be where things are said or will example enough from
Speaker 4: the United States not to get think go hardcore back
Speaker 4: in their response. They let that go through to the keeper.
Speaker 4: Israel of course, has still kept up its campaign hitting
Speaker 4: Iran and Iran vice versa to Israel, but it's probably
Speaker 4: allowed an opportunity, of course, where something was able to
Speaker 4: be broken. I mean Trump's of course said that he
Speaker 4: he's organized the deal between Israel and Iran.
Speaker 3: But it's also come out that, as I've alluded to guitar,
Speaker 3: the leader.
Speaker 4: Has come out and also helped broke or helped discuss
Speaker 4: with Iran coming towards moving towards a ceasefire which hopefully,
Speaker 4: hopefully can work towards coming towards a conclusion to this war.
Speaker 4: But remember the sea spires, that's face. So, without going
Speaker 4: on too much, cea spires in the context of if
Speaker 4: we look at it in the context of Ukraine and Russia, well,
Speaker 4: you know they can be easily contravened.
Speaker 2: Well that's right, yes, yes, Australia have a night professor
Speaker 2: Aden Warren from Ramot Universities with US the US political
Speaker 2: exp Was there another way? Did it have to be
Speaker 2: this way? You know, diplomacy and Israel were concerned or
Speaker 2: the world was concerned about Iran and making nuclear weapons
Speaker 2: for a long time, and it's come to this. Was
Speaker 2: this the only way to sort of bring it to
Speaker 2: ahead and get in there and eliminate the production capabilities
Speaker 2: of these bombs? And here we are, Well.
Speaker 3: From my point of view, yes, there was another option.
Speaker 3: I thought there was a good thing in tackle.
Speaker 4: It was called the Iran nuclear deal that went from
Speaker 4: twenty fifteen to eighteen as one of Obama's signature agreements.
Speaker 4: It went a long way to mitigating Iran as the
Speaker 4: threats in terms of nuclear weapons.
Speaker 3: And also so I thought that that was already in place.
Speaker 4: Trump, of course in twenty eighteen got rid of that
Speaker 4: because you know, he wanted widen it to include other
Speaker 4: activities of the Iran States, and also he wanted it
Speaker 4: was an Obama signature agreement, so that there was probably
Speaker 4: pert all things from my point of view, that got
Speaker 4: you know, want him to get rid of it.
Speaker 3: But if we.
Speaker 4: Fast forward to now, from my point of view, I
Speaker 4: think that I think that going in, you know, the
Speaker 4: threat wasn't imminent as what is being made out.
Speaker 3: They had a nuclear enrichment program.
Speaker 4: They were enriching up to levels that were probably beyond
Speaker 4: that you know I have for nuclear energy purposes, but
Speaker 4: they were they were enriching. They did not have the
Speaker 4: delivery capability is a long way of having a delivery
Speaker 4: capability for a nuclear weapon, and that's.
Speaker 3: The other thing that comes from the equation.
Speaker 4: And excuse me, they had the and so that was
Speaker 4: that's the other thing that comes in the equation.
Speaker 3: For me is they didn't have.
Speaker 5: The delivery and and I really I think I had
Speaker 5: problems also with the notion that you know, invading another
Speaker 5: state to really and then and really going hard with
Speaker 5: with interventions and use a military.
Speaker 3: Force is I don't think it's a way to go.
Speaker 4: I think this is high stakes, high risk, and I
Speaker 4: wouldn't get carried away that he's Trump's pulled it off,
Speaker 4: you know, in terms of getting a ceasefly CPI.
Speaker 3: Is one thing.
Speaker 1: But now we have to nut out an agreements.
Speaker 3: We have to nut out, you know, as Iran and Israel.
Speaker 4: Accepting terms, and we have to hope that there is
Speaker 4: not any other skirmishes in between. And we also have
Speaker 4: to hope that there's not other any retaliation with other
Speaker 4: proxies of Iran than and other friends and allies of
Speaker 4: Iran in the region.
Speaker 3: So there's a lot to play itself out. It's a
Speaker 3: good result now, but from my point of view, I think.
Speaker 4: That I would have preferred, you know, there was we're
Speaker 4: off to the there was a Trump A fairness to
Speaker 4: Trump was his administration was in their fifth round of
Speaker 4: talks with Iran and they're about to have the sixth
Speaker 4: round of talks with Iran when Israel took it upon
Speaker 4: itself to attack Iran, and I thought that, you know
Speaker 4: those talks, you.
Speaker 3: Know, people say they weren't going to yield.
Speaker 4: Me think I think that there could have been a
Speaker 4: deal nutted out of that. But depends on where you
Speaker 4: are on the spectrum. I think that there could have
Speaker 4: been another option. I think it was high risk intervening.
Speaker 1: In another state and potentially opening.
Speaker 3: Up a regional war, even World War three.
Speaker 2: Well one, double three six nine three, Professor Adam Warren's
Speaker 2: on the line, and if you want to comment, agree
Speaker 2: or disagree, that's our number here at Australia of n
Speaker 2: won double three six nine three. You said they didn't
Speaker 2: have the delivery capability, but wasn't it only a matter
Speaker 2: of time that would work it out though?
Speaker 3: Professor Well, well that's the whole that's a very good question.
Speaker 4: Look, when the around Nuclear Deal was signed and ratified
Speaker 4: and so forth, it expands it around nuclear breakout capacity
Speaker 4: from twelve to fort en months, and basically there was
Speaker 4: you know, there were sanctions that could have easily been
Speaker 4: snapped back into place, and there was International Atomic Energy
Speaker 4: Agency inspectors always inspecting sites at all at all times,
Speaker 4: whenever they wanted to at will. When that was of
Speaker 4: course scotched by the trump of minister stration Iran, you know,
Speaker 4: regime started enriching up to other levels and higher levels
Speaker 4: into dangerous that it was also because you know, why
Speaker 4: would you be wanting to comply with the West when
Speaker 4: they're you know, they are the ones who walked away
Speaker 4: with that particular agreement.
Speaker 3: That's that's the way you can look at it. But look, my.
Speaker 4: View is that they were enriching up to a sixty
Speaker 4: percent level.
Speaker 1: You need about ninety percent to even have the.
Speaker 4: Requisite material, so probably about two to three weeks away
Speaker 4: from that if they wanted to.
Speaker 3: But then they have to have the missile.
Speaker 4: Then they have to have the harness that that particular
Speaker 4: technology into a light enough warhead to again be able
Speaker 4: to wage this sort of attack. So to me, according
Speaker 4: to and again according to other people in the nuclear domains,
Speaker 4: there was still ample you know, there was still ample
Speaker 4: time to go and look from my point of view,
Speaker 4: also again Iran is part of the Nuclear non Proliferation Treaty.
Speaker 4: It does not have nuclear weapons, It did not have
Speaker 4: a nuclear bomb. North Korea has nuclear weapons, is not
Speaker 4: part of the MPT. Israel has nuclear weapons, is not
Speaker 4: part of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or the MPT.
Speaker 1: Pakistan does, India does, and they are.
Speaker 4: Both also not part of the Nuclear Ompiliferation Treaty, and
Speaker 4: they yet afforded all sorts of concessions. So I'm not
Speaker 4: saying I'm a proponent of around having a nuclear weapon,
Speaker 4: but from an Iraan perspective, I think that needs to.
Speaker 3: Be played itself out into the equation. You know, they're
Speaker 3: part of the Nuclear Opliferation Treaty.
Speaker 4: Those four nation states that I mentioned, Pakistan, India, Israel,
Speaker 4: and North Korea are not part of the Nuclear Nonpliferation
Speaker 4: Treaty and they have nuclear weapons and they do not
Speaker 4: allow inspections into their respective sites.
Speaker 2: Yes, is the only difference, as made a good point there.
Speaker 2: But the difference might be the fact that, well, Israel
Speaker 2: are there, and it's easy for us to say because
Speaker 2: we're long way away and let's try to negotiate this way,
Speaker 2: and you're all over it. But if you're in Israel,
Speaker 2: maybe this is a political motive. It's a greater threat,
Speaker 2: and it's just next door and the Gaza thing and
Speaker 2: it's all happening that's the difference in my mind. You
Speaker 2: mentioned these other places, but it's quite unique what we've
Speaker 2: been watching there in the Middle East in that threat
Speaker 2: just across the road there from Iran has meant that
Speaker 2: Israel has decided to try to stop them with whatever
Speaker 2: they were doing with nuclear weapons, and that's what's led
Speaker 2: to this. But your point is, what about those other countries.
Speaker 3: I don't disagree with that. I mean, I think that, yeah,
Speaker 3: you're right.
Speaker 4: I don't understand why from Israel's perspective, why they enjoy
Speaker 4: having the nuclear monopoly in the Middle East. So the
Speaker 4: only country in Middle East that has a nuclear monopoly
Speaker 4: right and has nuclear weapons and has you know, in
Speaker 4: between three to four hundred nuclear weapons. That's a lot
Speaker 4: and so therefore they probably don't want to be sharing
Speaker 4: that power with another nation state in the Middle East.
Speaker 4: But from I think, from from a rain perspective, how
Speaker 4: how I can understand.
Speaker 3: I'm not condoning.
Speaker 4: I would not want them to get a nuclear weapon,
Speaker 4: but I think they liked the fact that they had
Speaker 4: a little bit of nuclear ambiguity because it was their
Speaker 4: way of having a bit of a terrence.
Speaker 3: It was their way of hope, hopefully making you.
Speaker 4: Know, you know their threats, because we can't just assume
Speaker 4: that you know, Israel has threats, and therefore we always
Speaker 4: we're always got to look after Israel's perceived threats. There's
Speaker 4: other nation states in that region they feel under thread also.
Speaker 3: Right, So it's the which is their tactic. And I'm
Speaker 3: not condoning those either.
Speaker 4: I'm just saying, when you have dynamics, they don't just come,
Speaker 4: they don't just come born out of nowhere sort of
Speaker 4: so to speak.
Speaker 2: Yes, everyone's playing their card and this in this you know,
Speaker 2: this thing that we're watching, this conflict that we're all
Speaker 2: holding our breath on. So I guess as we go
Speaker 2: one double three six nine three, I'm going to ask
Speaker 2: you where to from now? But we don't know, do it.
Speaker 2: It feels like a bit of a de escalation to me.
Speaker 2: Now we've had a flaring up and let's hope that
Speaker 2: it can just sort of settled down to be.
Speaker 4: Well, I'm going to be optimistic about it, you know
Speaker 4: what I mean. I know I'm trying to I'm being
Speaker 4: quite frank and trying to.
Speaker 3: Wave everything up. But you know, I think now that.
Speaker 4: We're here, now that we've you know, we've we've we've
Speaker 4: gone right, We've gone right up to you know, how
Speaker 4: do I say this is high risks?
Speaker 3: Maybe the mistaken about it. This is a high risk.
Speaker 4: If Trump pulls a rabbit out of the heart, which
Speaker 4: you just might do, well, then you know we on
Speaker 4: the I'll be the first is hopefully you know, if this.
Speaker 3: Means that Iran and we'll get maybe even some regime
Speaker 3: change with a decent regime in there. If this means
Speaker 3: that there'll be.
Speaker 4: No more you know, there'll be Israel will settle down
Speaker 4: and I won't be just contravening other states as borders
Speaker 4: and doing what they will will If this means that
Speaker 4: other states in the region behave a little better and
Speaker 4: we can get some sort of you know, less tension
Speaker 4: in the region, I'll be the first to sort of say, hey,
Speaker 4: well done, but the rabbit's pulled. You know, he's pulled
Speaker 4: a bit of a rabbit out of having now. But
Speaker 4: let's face it again, anything can change.
Speaker 3: By the time this goes to air.
Speaker 4: This is a cease fire. Now we need to work
Speaker 4: out the terms of an agreement. Now we need to
Speaker 4: get both parties to agree to the agreement. And I
Speaker 4: know that Iran will be still wanting certain things going
Speaker 4: their way, and so will Israel and.
Speaker 3: That's you know as well as I do. That's going
Speaker 3: to be really hard to broker.
Speaker 4: And if they do not, and they do not come
Speaker 4: to terms, well then there'll be a return to escal
Speaker 4: there will be a return to missiles from both sides,
Speaker 4: and then you got again have us into the equation.
Speaker 4: So from my end, I know I'm talking a lot,
Speaker 4: but really there's a lot time play itself out. I'm
Speaker 4: very I'm stoked that there is a cease fire. I
Speaker 4: hope continues into an agreement that both parties agree on.
Speaker 4: I'd love to see regime change with a decent regime
Speaker 4: comes to the fore in Iran and.
Speaker 1: Then hopefully go to everlasting peace in the Middle East.
Speaker 3: That would be my ultimate goal.
Speaker 2: You're being modest and kind saying you're talking a lot,
Speaker 2: and it's very sharp analysis. This is your world. You
Speaker 2: get it, and you can you know, you're watching it,
Speaker 2: and you're giving us your true insight, and it's very
Speaker 2: helpful for our listeners and for me to sort of
Speaker 2: hear what you've got to say, and of course we
Speaker 2: process it and think, well, you know, we see it
Speaker 2: on the news and what is Professor Adam warren't saying.
Speaker 2: So thank you for your time on Australia every night.
Speaker 2: We'll talk to you soon again on the program.
Speaker 3: Thank you anytime, Thank you very much.