Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: Oil price is higher.
Speaker 3: Stocks being dragged down as we look to what seems
Speaker 3: to be an escalating situation in the Middle East. After
Speaker 3: the US already conducted strikes against Iron yesterday in retaliation
Speaker 3: for the down to Apache helicopter over the straight Offoor News,
Speaker 3: President Trump saying that more attacks are on their way.
Speaker 3: This was the President in the Oval Office earlier today.
Speaker 1: We hit them hard yesterday, and we're going to hit
Speaker 1: them again hard today. In case you missification, you don't
Speaker 1: turn on your television set, and we'll see what happens
Speaker 1: with the deal. We're really close to a deal, but
Speaker 1: they keep tapping us along.
Speaker 2: They keep playing us for suckers.
Speaker 1: Because you know what they dealt with some very stupid presidents.
Speaker 4: Tapping us along. As the President made clear untruth social
Speaker 4: that the regime is simply taking too much time in negotiations.
Speaker 4: And this is where we start our conversation with an
Speaker 4: important voice in foreign policy and in domestic politics. That
Speaker 4: would be Nicki Haley, the former ambassadors to the United Nations,
Speaker 4: former governor of South Carolina, share at Hudson Institute, founder
Speaker 4: of Stand for America, The Advocacy Group is wonderful to
Speaker 4: have you with this ambassador.
Speaker 2: Thanks for interest today on Bloomberg.
Speaker 4: What are your thoughts then about this active conversation right now?
Speaker 4: Is this the only recourse at the moment to gain
Speaker 4: more leverage to hasten an agreement with more strikes.
Speaker 2: First of all, I think you have to look at
Speaker 2: you always have to look at what your adversary is thinking.
Speaker 2: For them, they're not looking to win, they're looking to survive.
Speaker 2: So there's a difference. What they think is if they
Speaker 2: can put enough political pressure on this administration, if they
Speaker 2: can put enough economic pressure on this administration, they think
Speaker 2: the US will cave to a weak deal. Iran has.
Speaker 2: This is the same playbook Iran has always done. They stall,
Speaker 2: they start talking, they make you think you're going to
Speaker 2: get a deal, they throw cold water on it, and
Speaker 2: all the while they're sizing, they're re arming, they're getting
Speaker 2: ready for the next conflict. Iran was never going to
Speaker 2: do a deal. They are never going to get rid
Speaker 2: of their nuclear ambitions. That's their number one priority. Now
Speaker 2: they've actually found more leverage with the Strait of Hormuz,
Speaker 2: and so they don't want to go back to what
Speaker 2: it was pre war. They now want to have sovereignty
Speaker 2: over the street. They want to make sure that they
Speaker 2: have the threat of nuclear ambition, and they're going to
Speaker 2: continue to do that. So I think Trump was right
Speaker 2: to strike yesterday, But the idea of a deal, that's
Speaker 2: just not in their cards. They one of the surprising
Speaker 2: things that's not talked about. They have excavated fifty of
Speaker 2: the sixty nine tunnels that hold missiles they're re arming. Now,
Speaker 2: that's not enough. We've weakened Iran tremendously, but it shows
Speaker 2: you how they think.
Speaker 3: Well, So, if Iran is never going to make a
Speaker 3: deal and the US is now obviously bogged down in
Speaker 3: the Middle East for some time in the absence of one,
Speaker 3: are we coming out on the losing side?
Speaker 2: This ambassador. No, the only option is to win. Trump
Speaker 2: has to finish what he started, and the key is
Speaker 2: stop waiting for a deal, finish it. They're very weak.
Speaker 2: But what you have to do is go after their finances.
Speaker 2: What has not and what the administration should do is
Speaker 2: go after Russia and China. Russia right now is providing
Speaker 2: them drones. China says they want this hostility to end,
Speaker 2: Yet they are providing them man pads for air defense systems.
Speaker 2: They provided satellite imagery so that you can hit our
Speaker 2: military bases. If you go after those two, they're providing money.
Speaker 2: If you go after those two, that's going to take
Speaker 2: away Aron's ability to help. The second thing is you
Speaker 2: do have to acknowledge car Island is where they get
Speaker 2: their revenues from, and at some point that's going to
Speaker 2: have to be addressed. But what they're doing is they're
Speaker 2: creating a distraction. You know what they've said is well,
Speaker 2: Israel is hitting Lebanon. No, Israel's hitting Hesbla, the terrorist
Speaker 2: regime in Lebanon. The Lebanese people don't like Hesbalah. And
Speaker 2: so the key is Iran's going to keep making excuses,
Speaker 2: They're going to keep creating distractions. At the end of
Speaker 2: the day, they just want to survive. They just want
Speaker 2: to make it another day.
Speaker 4: Well, you just said a lot, and we need to
Speaker 4: unpack that. So the United States seeses carg Island. That
Speaker 4: would involve troops, as we understand, in an operation that
Speaker 4: could bring some risk, but would have the point you're
Speaker 4: making a very direct impact on the economy in Iran.
Speaker 4: When you say go after China and Russia. Is that
Speaker 4: sanctions because we find repeatedly that sanctions don't change behavior
Speaker 4: with these two.
Speaker 2: You have to truly hold them accountable. You have to
Speaker 2: make sure that they feel the pain. And a lot
Speaker 2: of that is a lot of the oil that China
Speaker 2: would buy from Iran, they wouldn't pay Iran directly. They
Speaker 2: do it through shadow accounts, through the UAE. You have
Speaker 2: to go to UAE and say, look, we're working well together.
Speaker 2: You can't keep helping China help Iran. All of these
Speaker 2: add the cereal things, those are the ones you go after.
Speaker 2: The point is if you take your money away from Iran,
Speaker 2: they can't build nuclear production, they can't mine the straight
Speaker 2: they can't find Hesbala, Hamas and the Houthis. You know,
Speaker 2: right now Iran's talking about now starting to hit Israeli
Speaker 2: boats in the Red Sea. They're not stopping. Their intention
Speaker 2: is to keep being aggressive so that they can get
Speaker 2: what they want, which is sanction relief, to unfreeze the assets,
Speaker 2: and to try and get the country to see them
Speaker 2: as someone they need to be.
Speaker 3: Dealt with well as if they heard you, ambassador, the
Speaker 3: US just announced sanctions on quote unquote clandestine banking in
Speaker 3: China linked to Iran sanctioning some Chinese in Hong Kong
Speaker 3: based individuals. So perhaps that would be a start to
Speaker 3: what you're getting at here. But I want to go
Speaker 3: back to something else you mentioned, that's Lebanon and Israel's
Speaker 3: conduct there. Your point is well understood that it's Hezbela
Speaker 3: that they're targeting, but obviously there has been a lot
Speaker 3: of associated collateral damage, and I wonder if you view
Speaker 3: Israel now being actually a very complicating factor in the
Speaker 3: path forward, if Israel's desires and objectives are diverging from ours.
Speaker 2: The US partnering with Israel and what they did to
Speaker 2: really bring around to its knees was so important and
Speaker 2: so helpful for the national security of the US, of
Speaker 2: Israel and of the West, so very important that that happened.
Speaker 2: Israel has to defend itself. But think just since the
Speaker 2: April ceasefire, what you've had is the Hesbela has struck
Speaker 2: northern Israel over two thousand times with rocket syndromees. What
Speaker 2: country would put up with that? What country would allow that?
Speaker 2: So it's not that Israel was doing this, it's Hesbela.
Speaker 2: So Iran is trying to make this gray by saying, oh,
Speaker 2: they're hitting Lebanon. This is not the case. Lebanon is
Speaker 2: not the issue. It is Hesbela that's the issue. And
Speaker 2: you can't let this terrorist activity that is associated with
Speaker 2: a continue. And I think that the US and Israel
Speaker 2: are partners. I think that while Nettnahu and Trump may
Speaker 2: disagree at times, I think they agree on a lot
Speaker 2: more than they disagree. And I think at the end
Speaker 2: of the day, they both have the same men goal
Speaker 2: and so I think that partnership stays strong.
Speaker 4: It's amazing that we're having this conversation in June of
Speaker 4: twenty twenty six, remembering the no New Wars mantra that
Speaker 4: followed the Trump campaign throughout his reelection. There's amazing analysis
Speaker 4: from our colleagues at Bloomberg Economics have found since taking
Speaker 4: office last January, President Trump has greenlit at least fourteen
Speaker 4: four hundred and eighteen military strikes around the globe. I'm
Speaker 4: just curious, if you were sitting behind the Resolute desk,
Speaker 4: would you have started this war.
Speaker 2: I think that Trump did the right thing. Iran was
Speaker 2: the weakest they had ever been. If Trump wouldn't have
Speaker 2: gotten involved, they just would have gone back to doing
Speaker 2: what they're doing. Keep in mind, you have to know
Speaker 2: that the ideology of that regime. In nineteen seventy nine,
Speaker 2: they called the US the Great Satan, and they said
Speaker 2: death to America. Believe adversaries when they say they want
Speaker 2: to kill you. I personally was targeted. There was a
Speaker 2: hitman that was actually paid money on US soil to
Speaker 2: kill me. They are coming to America to kill Americans.
Speaker 2: This is a regime that finds that their Messiah is coming,
Speaker 2: and in the meantime, their struggles are supposed to be real,
Speaker 2: and they're supposed to cause chaos and brutality and murder
Speaker 2: in the process. You can't change an ideology like that.
Speaker 2: So they were going to rebuild, They were going to
Speaker 2: continue to cause harm. They were going to continue to
Speaker 2: put national security threats on Americans. Over one thousand Americans
Speaker 2: have been injured and killed from Iran. We shouldn't even
Speaker 2: be allowing one. This had to happen. Now he just
Speaker 2: has to finish what he started.
Speaker 3: So you see the national security justification for this particular excursion,
Speaker 3: as the President has called it. He also has suggested
Speaker 3: that once this Iron situation is over, whatever that is
Speaker 3: he may turn his sites to Cuba, and I wonder
Speaker 3: if you see that as as urgent what you would
Speaker 3: expect the US to do when it comes to Cuba
Speaker 3: and a regime that clearly is teetering on the brink.
Speaker 2: In the US put in their national security strategy to
Speaker 2: make the Western hemisphere a priority. I think that you
Speaker 2: saw that with you know, extracting Maduro in Venezuela. The
Speaker 2: Venezuelans are going to see so much progress with that.
Speaker 2: That was something that needed to happen. They deserve freedom
Speaker 2: and they're going to get it. What you're seeing in
Speaker 2: Cuba is a little bit different because Cuba doesn't have
Speaker 2: a Delsi Rodriguez, a number two that can go and
Speaker 2: run things. Cuba doesn't have a machado ahead of an
Speaker 2: opposition that can go forward. So I don't think that
Speaker 2: this administration is going to go militarily into Cuba. I
Speaker 2: think they're just going to put pressure through sanctions and
Speaker 2: weigh them down. You know, they already stopped the oil
Speaker 2: that was going from Venezuela to Cuba. They had Mexico
Speaker 2: pulled back on the oil that was going to Cuba,
Speaker 2: and now Cuba's feel the pain. They can only take
Speaker 2: so much pain. What they're going to want is sanctuarily.
Speaker 2: They're going to want to get the Cuban economy going again,
Speaker 2: But unfortunately they're going to have to continue to deal
Speaker 2: with the people that are leading Cuba right now. That's
Speaker 2: not going to be anitial that's not going to be
Speaker 2: something that they can change.
Speaker 4: Yeah, there have been questions about whether we could sustain
Speaker 4: action in two parts of the world militarily like this,
Speaker 4: because we have a massive build up in the Middle
Speaker 4: East that's standing by to do what you're suggesting, which
Speaker 4: is to finish the job. If in fact we went
Speaker 4: pedal to the metal and took the advice of Dickie Haley,
Speaker 4: how long.
Speaker 2: Would it take stop negotiating with them? That's never going
Speaker 2: to happen. We've lost time. Go finish what you started.
Speaker 2: I think within a week to two weeks, is that right?
Speaker 2: They can long before the well a week to two
Speaker 2: weeks they could. It would take them the amount of
Speaker 2: time to extract the nuclear enrichment that they have. As
Speaker 2: far as island, you'll have to have special forces there
Speaker 2: to go and hold car Island is going to obviously
Speaker 2: take a little bit longer. But this is one where
Speaker 2: they need to be focused and mission driven on go
Speaker 2: after the revenues that are going to Iran, and that's
Speaker 2: the only way to get rid of the regime. And
Speaker 2: then the Iranian people have no way to defend themselves.
Speaker 2: They've killed thousands of people in the streets and made
Speaker 2: examples of them. What's happened in the past is the
Speaker 2: US has actually helped countries so that the people can
Speaker 2: rise up. That's the way that this is going to end,
Speaker 2: is when the people feel safe enough to rise up
Speaker 2: that they can go and take their country back. If
Speaker 2: the US were to.
Speaker 3: Pursue the course of action you're describing, do you believe
Speaker 3: it would it would be prudent for the president to
Speaker 3: go to Congress first? Do you see that constitutional necessity
Speaker 3: that he is consistently denied as necessary.
Speaker 2: I always think you need to go to Congress. One.
Speaker 2: You need the buy in of Congress, you need the
Speaker 2: buy in of the American people. You need to explain
Speaker 2: what you're doing, why you're doing it, and what you know.
Speaker 2: And yes, it's just good practice to go to Congress.
Speaker 2: With more. Administration has done a lot by executive order.
Speaker 2: The danger in that is the next administration. If it's
Speaker 2: not a Republican, all of that gets reversed, and then
Speaker 2: we're swinging the pendulum. That's not good for the American people.
Speaker 2: Congress needs to step up. There are a lot of
Speaker 2: things Congress could be doing, but right now we're hearing
Speaker 2: a lot of talking and not a lot of action.
Speaker 4: The political pendulum also swings as we watch the primary
Speaker 4: season unfold. And there was a state you know a
Speaker 4: lot about that was, of course voting yesterday in South Carolina.
Speaker 4: The President's endorsements have been on the line quite a
Speaker 4: bit here more recently, and they paid off last evening,
Speaker 4: particularly in the race for governor and the primary for
Speaker 4: governor Pamela That curious your thoughts on this and what
Speaker 4: it looks to be the end of a couple of
Speaker 4: political careers, including Nancy Mace and someone who you endorsed
Speaker 4: and endorsed you back in Ralph Norman. What transpired last
Speaker 4: night and is it good for your party?
Speaker 2: Well, I think, first of all, primaries are always good
Speaker 2: for our party. I think that it's very important that
Speaker 2: you have debate, that you have, you know, them touching
Speaker 2: as many hands as they can. I'm really getting their
Speaker 2: message out. So I think having a full primary was
Speaker 2: a great thing. You know, the press has been covering
Speaker 2: that Nancy Mace was a factor, and because of the
Speaker 2: Trump endorsement, she lost. She was never a factor in
Speaker 2: this race. She was always in fifth place. She was
Speaker 2: never going anywhere. She knew that in South Carolina. Knew that.
Speaker 2: So you know she later bed she's now laying in it.
Speaker 2: That's what she's doing. Ralph Norman, who I respect and love,
Speaker 2: we go way back. He does what he says he's
Speaker 2: going to do. He's got real clarity. You know, certainly
Speaker 2: I wish she would have made it into the runoff,
Speaker 2: but you know he was always pushing, and then you
Speaker 2: had Evatt and Wilson in there, and so look, it's
Speaker 2: the power of the Trump endorsement. Evatt wouldn't have made
Speaker 2: it in the runoff without the Trump endorsement. So his
Speaker 2: endorsement is strong. It does move the ball. And you know,
Speaker 2: we just have to make sure that who we elect
Speaker 2: in a primary is who we want to vote for
Speaker 2: in a general.
Speaker 3: Well, and to that point, I wonder if you think
Speaker 3: the President is making the correct endorsement choices, even if
Speaker 3: we look beyond South Carolina to say somewhere like Texas, Texas,
Speaker 3: where Ken Paxton is now the one who is going
Speaker 3: to have to try to hold a Senate seat in
Speaker 3: Republican hands.
Speaker 2: It's going to cost a lot more money for Republicans
Speaker 2: to hold that seat. I do think we'll hold the
Speaker 2: Texas seat, but it's just not Republicans. Look at Graham
Speaker 2: Platner in Maine. You know, it's amazing to me. You know,
Speaker 2: I always say it's important to understand that in a primary,
Speaker 2: you make your choice. In a general election, you're given
Speaker 2: the choice. You have to choose between the two. But
Speaker 2: in America, typically only fifteen percent of Americans vote in
Speaker 2: a primary. So what you're getting is the extreme of
Speaker 2: both sides. So by the time most Americans go to vote,
Speaker 2: they're having to choose between two extremes. It's because we
Speaker 2: don't talk about primaries in high schools. Our kids don't
Speaker 2: know that they know to vote in November. They know
Speaker 2: to do that, and they do. But until we start
Speaker 2: talking about the importance of primaries, and until Americans see
Speaker 2: that that's actually the race that matters, you're going to
Speaker 2: have the Packston race. You're going to have the platiners.
Speaker 2: You're going to have those that make us kind of uncomfortable.
Speaker 2: But you know, all in the name of getting a majority,
Speaker 2: let's get the right, good people in there so that
Speaker 2: we can start getting things done. But more than that,
Speaker 2: let's look at what's not getting done. You know, you
Speaker 2: look at the debt that America has right now. What
Speaker 2: is Congress done about that? So you want to talk
Speaker 2: about a war, but why aren't they talking about balancing
Speaker 2: a budget. You know, we're thirty nine trillion dollars in debt.
Speaker 2: We're going to be forty trillion in the fall. That's unacceptable.
Speaker 2: That's like the US taking in five trillion a year
Speaker 2: and spending seven trillion a year. You know, now we're
Speaker 2: one hundred percent over GDP. The last two recessions, we
Speaker 2: had a buffer. If we have another recession, there will
Speaker 2: be no stimulus, there will be no tax breaks. You
Speaker 2: aren't to have a cushion to do anything with. That
Speaker 2: is something Congress can address now, and they've yet to
Speaker 2: do it. Social Security is going to run out in
Speaker 2: six years. Every US candidate needs to be asked, what
Speaker 2: are you going to do about it? Because seventy five
Speaker 2: million Americans will be affected by that. You don't wait
Speaker 2: until that falls on us and do a quick band
Speaker 2: aid of a deal. It's something I talked about in
Speaker 2: the campaign, was reforming entitlements. You have to do that.
Speaker 2: In a few years, fifteen percent of our federal outlays
Speaker 2: are going to be interest. That's not okay.
Speaker 4: Well, I'm just listening to you speak, ambassador, and I'm
Speaker 4: wondering if you plan to travel to campaign for candidates
Speaker 4: that you decide to support, whether it's in the South
Speaker 4: Carolina runoff or nationally, and what your plans are beyond
Speaker 4: this midterm cycle. We all remember when you said your
Speaker 4: time would come? Is it coming? And this next round?
Speaker 2: First of all, I'm going to help any candidates that
Speaker 2: I can. You know, we have been helping Susan Collins
Speaker 2: raise money, plan on going to Maine and campaigning for
Speaker 2: her to doing that when we see a good candidate.
Speaker 2: I mean that race matters to us so much. And
Speaker 2: she's been such a remarkable senator, you know, it's it
Speaker 2: shouldn't go over seeing that she's never missed a vote,
Speaker 2: never missed a vote, and regardless of where her views are,
Speaker 2: she's respected. She's a hard worker, she's come out of
Speaker 2: tough races, but we need to make sure she wins again.
Speaker 2: We can't take this for granted. So yes, I will
Speaker 2: be out there in elections helping Republicans. That's something I'm
Speaker 2: always going to do. In terms of my future, you know,
Speaker 2: I'm going to keep talking about the things that matter.
Speaker 2: I'm going to talk about foreign policy. I'm going to
Speaker 2: talk about the debt. I'm going to talk about the
Speaker 2: need for us to self correct. I think that's what
Speaker 2: I can do. You know, I talk to a lot
Speaker 2: of business leaders now about how you manage business in
Speaker 2: you know, this world that we're in, and that's kind
Speaker 2: of where I am right now. You know, I'm not
Speaker 2: going to look forward. I'm not running in twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 2: That's not something that I'm interested in. But my voice
Speaker 2: is going to always be there. I think it's too
Speaker 2: important for us to stay silent in times like this.
Speaker 3: Well, and as you talk about talking about foreign policy,
Speaker 3: something that you were vocal about in twenty twenty four,
Speaker 3: President Trump, is Joe alluded to earlier, was very much
Speaker 3: not running that kind of campaign, and yet he does
Speaker 3: seem to be running that kind of presidency, much more
Speaker 3: foreign policy oriented and I wonder if you expect that
Speaker 3: that trajectory is going to continue where that once again
Speaker 3: is back at the forefront of conversation.
Speaker 2: Well, I think you can say no new wars, but
Speaker 2: the reality of Ukraine and Russia is there. Russia invaded
Speaker 2: a free country. That's something that we can't step away from.
Speaker 2: The reality of the threat from Iran on our national security.
Speaker 2: You can't walk away from that. So yes, in a campaign,
Speaker 2: you can say no new wars, but reality hits you
Speaker 2: in the face when you get to that leadership position
Speaker 2: and you have to make those decisions. And I think
Speaker 2: he's having to make those decisions now.
Speaker 4: It's a pretty dangerous time that we're living in and
Speaker 4: talking through with you, ambassador, And there's a big question
Speaker 4: about who should be running the nation's intelligence apparatus. This
Speaker 4: is a big problem on Capitol Hill. FISA expires, it
Speaker 4: looks like on Friday, because lawmakers need more than Bill Pulty.
Speaker 4: They want a permanent name that the president might announce.
Speaker 4: He says he's working on one, but Poulty will be
Speaker 4: on the job later this month.
Speaker 2: Are you comfortable with that? Well, I think Trump has
Speaker 2: made it clear that he's going to put a permanent
Speaker 2: person in there. That person needs to have experience we need.
Speaker 2: I mean, our intelligence is everything I can tell you
Speaker 2: from when I was at the United Nations. The profiles
Speaker 2: of our adversaries, Knowing what they're saying, knowing what they're doing,
Speaker 2: knowing the threats that face us are hugely important. It
Speaker 2: would be irresponsible for Congress not to renew FISA. I
Speaker 2: can't stress enough how that keeps American safe. And regardless
Speaker 2: of what you think about Poulty, FISA needs to continue
Speaker 2: and Trump needs to put someone qualified in there that
Speaker 2: can make Congress feel like they can move forward. So
Speaker 2: of those things need to happen just quickly.
Speaker 3: Is it also irresponsible to have someone, even an acting capacity,
Speaker 3: who's used non public mortgage data to go after perceived
Speaker 3: enemies of the president.
Speaker 2: I think that what we want is transparency. Let us
Speaker 2: know who's serving us, what are they doing for us,
Speaker 2: Be transparent about it, and what's your end goal. I
Speaker 2: think that they're, you know, cabinet members who are doing
Speaker 2: a great job. I think there are other cabinet members
Speaker 2: who we may not know as much of what they're doing.
Speaker 2: Open it all up, let the American people see at
Speaker 2: the end of the day. Americans want to know that
Speaker 2: government's working for them. They still don't trust government. They
Speaker 2: don't trust our agencies, they don't trust Congress, they don't
Speaker 2: trust selected officials. Americans deserve better. You know, they're paying
Speaker 2: higher and groceries hire and energy, hire and insurance. You know,
Speaker 2: all of these things. Kids can't afford their rent. If
Speaker 2: all of that's going to happen, it makes an American
Speaker 2: public more resentful, and it makes them more angry at
Speaker 2: why people aren't working for them. And my advice is, look,
Speaker 2: we're gonna be okay, but do your part. Step up.
Speaker 2: Don't vote for somebody because they look good in a
Speaker 2: picture of a hold of baby. Well, you know, are
Speaker 2: they fighting for you? And if they're fighting for you,
Speaker 2: fight for them. But if they're not, it's time to
Speaker 2: turn the leaf and get someone else.
Speaker 3: All Right, we'll leave it on that note. Ambassador, thank
Speaker 3: you so much for joining us. She's now chair at
Speaker 3: Hudson Institute and also a former Ambassador to the United
Speaker 3: Nations and former governor of South Carolina. Nikki Haley here
Speaker 3: with us on Bloomberg TV and radio. Thank you so much.