Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: Norian Rapini, I've had some pain capital rise the following.
Speaker 2: If the president walks away from the war with around now,
Speaker 2: the threat to shipping in the strata for almost will remained.
Speaker 2: Despite the obvious risks, he has every reason to try
Speaker 2: to finish the job. Norielle, good morning, good morning, and
Speaker 2: good luck as well. You know, to explain the last
Speaker 2: few days, what is the status of things in your
Speaker 2: mind and where do you think this is headache?
Speaker 3: Well, there are two options.
Speaker 4: One need is to de escalate and walk away from
Speaker 4: this war and get to a ceasefire. But they're going
Speaker 4: to get a ceasfire without the deal with you run
Speaker 4: and he runs control the strait of Hormus is.
Speaker 3: Going to threaten the Gulf and the supply of oil.
Speaker 4: Your regime is actually much more radical today and it
Speaker 4: was before because Motaja Cameminison is more radical than his father.
Speaker 4: They're going to rebuild the ballistic missiles. They're going to
Speaker 4: build even more. They're going to even try to enrich
Speaker 4: the Ringum. They have to eapon grade and have a bomb.
Speaker 4: So it's a disaster.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 4: Trump is already behind in the polls this war has
Speaker 4: been a bit of a failure, but now going away
Speaker 4: from it implies that's going to for Shure lose the
Speaker 4: mid terms, not just a House, but probably the Senate.
Speaker 4: So I think that, in spite of all the rhetoric
Speaker 4: about negotiations and getting a ceasefire, my more likely scenario,
Speaker 4: I give you the two thirds probabilities one in which
Speaker 4: the US has to escalate and finish the job, and
Speaker 4: escalat means take over carg Island, try to take over
Speaker 4: even the state of Hormus, try to reopen it, try
Speaker 4: to a regym collapse, and win this war and finally
Speaker 4: have a more stable Middle East. It's a very risky
Speaker 4: one because if you take that chance, you might win,
Speaker 4: but there's also a chance that you lose, and then
Speaker 4: they beat the block even more hormous, they destroy even
Speaker 4: more energy supplies of the Gulfs and then end up
Speaker 4: in nineteen seventies circulation. But my view, escalating and winning
Speaker 4: is more likely than escalator and losing. And given the
Speaker 4: politics and electual dynamics, you left to escalate.
Speaker 1: So if you escalate and you end up losing, you said,
Speaker 1: it's nineteen seventies clflation all over again, if you win,
Speaker 1: what does that look like based on the risk premia
Speaker 1: that are likely to go on a lot of physical
Speaker 1: goods and a question about staff piling in different regions
Speaker 1: as a result of multiple different supply chain shocks.
Speaker 4: Well, if you escalate, a win means that you take
Speaker 4: over carg Island, you cut off by ninety percent the
Speaker 4: revenues of the government. You continue the bombing campaign, you
Speaker 4: destroy the military assets, you take over even the nuclear
Speaker 4: kind of weapon grade uranium. You try to destroy the leadership,
Speaker 4: You try to have regime collapse, and you try to
Speaker 4: keep open as much as you can see it overmus
Speaker 4: while defending the oil energy facility of the golfis If
Speaker 4: all these things happened and you win, then actually you
Speaker 4: got rid of the regime and for a short term,
Speaker 4: maybe two three months, you have all prices about one twenty.
Speaker 4: But then you're going to go to a stable world.
Speaker 4: And by the way you run, controlling the set of
Speaker 4: Hormus is a threat to the Golf, treat to Israel
Speaker 4: is a threat to Europe, is traight to Asias, that
Speaker 4: threat to the United States. So as the Emmiratis have
Speaker 4: been saying clearly this is not acceptable and this is
Speaker 4: the same view that people all over the golf have.
Speaker 3: Is not an acceptable solution.
Speaker 4: So given what has happened, you have to try to
Speaker 4: finish the job, and finishing job means having the facto
Speaker 4: regime collapse, either formal regim collapse or informally a situation
Speaker 4: which this regime is not any more a threat to
Speaker 4: the region and to the world.
Speaker 5: All the regime has been weakened, though you give that
Speaker 5: point to the president, but absolutely collapse. There's been no
Speaker 5: evidence that we've seen defections and they're still in control.
Speaker 4: Well, the facto collapse, in my view, means that you
Speaker 4: take over carg Island, You try to reopen the stet
Speaker 4: of ormos, You try to make sure that they cannot
Speaker 4: destroy more energy facilities in the Gulf. You keep on
Speaker 4: bombing the hell out of them for weeks. They've already
Speaker 4: been eroded a lot, and every day is thousands of
Speaker 4: new targets within Isral in the United States. You may
Speaker 4: even be able to kill some of the remaining leadership
Speaker 4: and the facto. That effectively a regime collapse, it's not
Speaker 4: a region collapse. A regime that doesn't have a nuclear
Speaker 4: weapon doesn't have weapon cannot threat in the state of
Speaker 4: homost and whether it's former regime collapse or not at
Speaker 4: that point doesn't matter. But that means finishing the job.
Speaker 2: Noriah, we got about sixty seconds left. You lived in Tehran. Yeah,
Speaker 2: as a child. How personal is this for you?
Speaker 4: You know, I'm a Persian Jew, so I was in
Speaker 4: Iran last one I was three years old, I lived
Speaker 4: in Israel, grew up in Italy in the US, so
Speaker 4: I don't take it personally. But I would say that
Speaker 4: while this is an appalling regime and the current one
Speaker 4: is worse than a previous one, the threat is not
Speaker 4: just to Israel. The threat is not just to the
Speaker 4: jess country. The threat right now is not just to Europe.
Speaker 4: Europe is threatn from an economic point of view. From
Speaker 4: a military point of view, the missiles along by the
Speaker 4: luge ballist the missiles of Iran can reach anywhere of
Speaker 4: the European Union. Is a threat to the world. Is
Speaker 4: not acceptable. You can discuss whether it was the writing
Speaker 4: or not to start this war, when once you start it,
Speaker 4: if you don't finish it, it's going to be much
Speaker 4: worse than the situation previously.
Speaker 3: So given the risk you have to try.
Speaker 4: To finish the job and having effective regime collapse or
Speaker 4: the regime boxed in anyway, it's not any more attract Norea.
Speaker 2: We appreciate your time and your experience. Thanks for sharing
Speaker 2: it with us.
Speaker 3: Thank you.