WEBVTT - Bloomberg Surveillance TV: June 17, 2025 0:00:02.400 --> 0:00:06.760 Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. 0:00:11.600 --> 0:00:15.440 This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along 0:00:15.440 --> 0:00:18.680 with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day 0:00:18.720 --> 0:00:22.239 for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics 0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:24.880 from our global headquarters in New York City. We are 0:00:24.920 --> 0:00:27.680 live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine 0:00:27.680 --> 0:00:31.280 am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or 0:00:31.280 --> 0:00:33.919 anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg 0:00:34.000 --> 0:00:35.840 Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app. 0:00:36.440 --> 0:00:40.440 The FMC widely expected to hold read steady, but it 0:00:40.479 --> 0:00:44.400 does plan on updating its economic forecast. Krishna guhov evercore 0:00:44.479 --> 0:00:47.839 Isi joins us. Now, Krishna, are we expecting to hear 0:00:47.880 --> 0:00:50.559 absolutely anything other than we are in a dark room 0:00:50.560 --> 0:00:52.840 with a blindfold, bumping into chairs, just like the rest 0:00:52.840 --> 0:00:53.040 of you. 0:00:54.840 --> 0:00:57.920 So I'm afraid you probably are going to get a 0:00:57.920 --> 0:01:01.000 lot more wait and see, lot more to learn. 0:01:01.960 --> 0:01:02.200 You know. 0:01:03.160 --> 0:01:07.640 That sort of guidance from fed chair how consistent with 0:01:07.720 --> 0:01:12.160 the idea that unless something radical changes, not only is 0:01:12.200 --> 0:01:15.319 nothing happening at this month's meeting, but nothing's going to 0:01:15.360 --> 0:01:19.679 happen in July either and then really in September we 0:01:19.800 --> 0:01:22.720 have that decision point for the FED as it's seen 0:01:22.880 --> 0:01:25.319 enough to want to cut right to that point or not. 0:01:25.840 --> 0:01:28.520 I think what the market will be focused on at 0:01:28.560 --> 0:01:31.840 this meeting it's really the extent of the updates in 0:01:31.880 --> 0:01:35.120 the Fed's forecast, and in particular whether policy makers are 0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:39.280 already shifting towards just a one cut baseline rather than 0:01:39.319 --> 0:01:40.560 two cuts for this year. 0:01:41.000 --> 0:01:43.320 Christina, how much does it really matter? Because right now 0:01:43.360 --> 0:01:45.800 the FED seems highly uncertain, very much on the fence. 0:01:46.040 --> 0:01:50.320 Their a sort of strategic analysis is shape shifting depending 0:01:50.440 --> 0:01:53.280 on the day, and we're seeing data that hints at 0:01:53.320 --> 0:01:55.960 something of a labor market softening that's caused a lot 0:01:55.960 --> 0:01:58.320 of people to be a little bit concerned. I'm talking 0:01:58.360 --> 0:02:02.120 about continuing claims to get retail sales in just about 0:02:02.160 --> 0:02:04.880 just under two hours time. How much is that almost 0:02:04.960 --> 0:02:06.640 more important than the rhetoric that we hear out of 0:02:06.640 --> 0:02:07.840 the FED right now? 0:02:08.760 --> 0:02:10.040 So I think you're certainly right. 0:02:10.120 --> 0:02:12.960 The first of all, you know, the real action here 0:02:13.000 --> 0:02:16.000 is on the Trump economic agenda above all trade, but 0:02:16.120 --> 0:02:20.640 also immigration, fiscal you mentioned, you know, regulatory other policies, 0:02:20.800 --> 0:02:22.919 and the FED to a large extent is responding to 0:02:22.960 --> 0:02:26.960 those shocks and learning from the economic data how they 0:02:27.000 --> 0:02:32.239 are impacting economic activity. So yes, you know the FED 0:02:32.560 --> 0:02:35.480 is going to take its queue from the first the 0:02:35.520 --> 0:02:39.120 path of policies like trade policy. Secondly, how this is 0:02:39.160 --> 0:02:43.280 builting through the macro data, the market data. But it 0:02:43.360 --> 0:02:47.840 does matter what reaction function the FED is sketching out 0:02:48.040 --> 0:02:52.680 that it will apply in these different economic circumstances. You know, 0:02:52.840 --> 0:02:55.520 there's a relatively easy case where the labor market doesn't 0:02:55.520 --> 0:02:57.960 weave it at all. Why are you cutting in a 0:02:58.120 --> 0:03:02.600 period when inflation is going to move up under these tariffs. Conversely, 0:03:03.000 --> 0:03:05.480 if the wheels come off the bus in the labor market, 0:03:05.760 --> 0:03:08.200 for sure, we know they're going to be cutting even 0:03:08.240 --> 0:03:12.919 though there's going to be elevated inflation, provided the expectations 0:03:12.960 --> 0:03:15.280 remain be well behaved. To say, all right, now, the 0:03:15.400 --> 0:03:18.440 question is in this middle zone, in this ray zone, 0:03:18.720 --> 0:03:22.040 how are they thinking about, you know, what would constitute 0:03:22.040 --> 0:03:25.920 a materially enough weakening of the labor market to want 0:03:26.000 --> 0:03:29.880 to cut to lean against that getting any worse. And 0:03:30.240 --> 0:03:32.920 also what do they think they're learning from the most 0:03:33.000 --> 0:03:37.240 recent data, which certainly is imperfect in the way you describe. 0:03:37.280 --> 0:03:40.920 But I'd say for May overall, top tier employment report 0:03:41.160 --> 0:03:44.560 and inflation both a little more benign than might have 0:03:44.600 --> 0:03:45.360 been expected. 0:03:45.600 --> 0:03:47.440 Hey, Chris nuts, Chris, can you talk of just for 0:03:47.480 --> 0:03:50.360 a moment about kind of this divergence between the market 0:03:50.440 --> 0:03:53.040 rate and the policy rate. We've always joked in our 0:03:53.080 --> 0:03:54.960 work that who needs feed speakers when you have the 0:03:54.960 --> 0:03:57.960 two year yields? Is there a level on the two 0:03:58.000 --> 0:04:00.840 year yield down where you'd say, Okay, the Fed is 0:04:00.880 --> 0:04:02.880 now behind the curve and kind of needs to get 0:04:02.920 --> 0:04:06.120 back in the easing cycle, maybe faster than you thought. 0:04:08.320 --> 0:04:11.400 Yeah, So that's a very good important distinction to draw, 0:04:11.840 --> 0:04:15.800 right the Fed obviously it sets the overnight funds rate, 0:04:15.880 --> 0:04:18.480 but it's the two year, five, ten, and so on 0:04:18.800 --> 0:04:20.960 rates that are much more important for the economy as 0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:24.240 a whole. And of course those will also embed information 0:04:24.520 --> 0:04:27.800 as to how market protestants are thinking about the outblook. 0:04:28.080 --> 0:04:30.599 What I would say is that the Fed doesn't try 0:04:30.640 --> 0:04:32.160 to micromanage, you. 0:04:32.120 --> 0:04:33.279 Know, the two year yield. 0:04:33.839 --> 0:04:36.359 It couldn't even if it wanted to. And so I 0:04:36.360 --> 0:04:38.360 don't think that it's so wildly out of whack right 0:04:38.360 --> 0:04:40.800 now with what Fed officials might be thinking on a 0:04:40.960 --> 0:04:46.400 probability weighted basis, because remember, the market isn't just pricing 0:04:46.440 --> 0:04:49.320 the baseline case, but they're pricing a range of risks, 0:04:49.320 --> 0:04:51.880 including the risk that we do after all, end up 0:04:51.880 --> 0:04:54.400 falling into a recession of bed has to come a lot. 0:04:54.600 --> 0:04:56.880 So right now I think the fairly comfortable. So to 0:04:56.960 --> 0:04:58.760 let the market operates a little bit of an automatic 0:04:58.839 --> 0:05:02.720 stabilizer going down in the market when the news is 0:05:02.760 --> 0:05:05.960 weak at rates moving up when the news is stronger 0:05:06.080 --> 0:05:09.000 or there's a signs of some more inflation pressure. Are 0:05:09.040 --> 0:05:11.719 they're not yet at a point where they would feel 0:05:11.760 --> 0:05:15.279 the need to make a call on rates themselves in 0:05:15.360 --> 0:05:16.520 terms of the FED fund set. 0:05:17.000 --> 0:05:18.800 Christin, do you think kind of in the spirit of 0:05:18.839 --> 0:05:21.120 the Fed might not make the same mistake, they might 0:05:21.160 --> 0:05:25.720 make new mistakes. That two is coloring they're thinking too 0:05:25.760 --> 0:05:29.960 much on this idea of kind of the inflation risk. 0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:33.599 Maybe in a lot of respects, the appropriate word to 0:05:33.680 --> 0:05:36.640 use today, and we talked about this earlier, is actually transitory, 0:05:36.960 --> 0:05:40.360 given that Tarifa a one time price hike or oil. 0:05:40.520 --> 0:05:42.800 Yet they're so reluctant to do that because of the 0:05:42.839 --> 0:05:44.039 recent experience. 0:05:45.480 --> 0:05:48.520 So look, at some level, I think you're right right, 0:05:49.040 --> 0:05:52.480 everyone fights the last war, and the FED can be 0:05:52.520 --> 0:05:55.120 guilty of that too. There's no question that the fact 0:05:55.120 --> 0:05:58.480 that the FED, you know, went out with a transitory 0:05:58.480 --> 0:06:00.840 story and lived a regret at last time is I 0:06:00.880 --> 0:06:03.839 think coloring, and they're thinking some this time too. But 0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:08.320 there are two important objective considerations there that do weigh 0:06:08.400 --> 0:06:11.680 a bit in this direction. The first is that these 0:06:11.720 --> 0:06:14.080 tariffs are not simply on end products. They're also on 0:06:14.200 --> 0:06:18.960 intermediate goods inputs into US production. And it's those tariffs 0:06:19.000 --> 0:06:22.280 on intermediate goods that the economic research tells US can 0:06:22.360 --> 0:06:25.160 have more persistent effects on inflation, not just that a 0:06:25.240 --> 0:06:29.240 one and done, certainly if you like tax increase effects. 0:06:29.400 --> 0:06:31.760 The other thing is that the FED does have reason 0:06:31.800 --> 0:06:36.560 to wonder where the inflation expectations, wage bargaining, price setting 0:06:36.560 --> 0:06:40.760 behaviors are quite as well locked down now after several 0:06:40.839 --> 0:06:45.400 years of elevated inflation as they work previously, And these 0:06:45.440 --> 0:06:48.919 starting conditions economists will use the term initial conditions do 0:06:49.120 --> 0:06:52.279 matter in terms of your risk management judgment. 0:06:52.640 --> 0:06:55.080 Christian, just real quickly here. If I were cynical, I 0:06:55.120 --> 0:06:57.360 would think the FED would just err on the side 0:06:57.400 --> 0:06:59.479 of being more hawkish in order to keep some of 0:06:59.520 --> 0:07:02.680 the INFLA and expectations restrained. Why isn't that the case 0:07:02.720 --> 0:07:05.120 that we can basically expect them to say something that 0:07:05.240 --> 0:07:07.159 is going to be hawkish, whether they think it or not. 0:07:09.560 --> 0:07:14.120 So I think they are mildly hawkish. I mean, after all, 0:07:14.200 --> 0:07:17.480 they're telling us that they judge that the current setting 0:07:17.600 --> 0:07:22.880 of policy is moderately restrictive, modestly restrictive. The individual officials 0:07:22.960 --> 0:07:26.680 use different terms, but restrictive And why is it restrictive? Well, 0:07:26.680 --> 0:07:30.040 it's restrictive precisely because, as you say, they want to 0:07:30.080 --> 0:07:35.440 try to lock down inflation expectations into the initial sticker 0:07:35.520 --> 0:07:38.960 shock from the tariff price increases when that comes, and 0:07:38.960 --> 0:07:40.440 as I said, it hasn't really shown up in May, 0:07:40.600 --> 0:07:42.960 we do expect it to shop more over the next 0:07:43.240 --> 0:07:47.080 few months near term. That's certainly hawkish, But I think 0:07:47.080 --> 0:07:50.760 it's also important to understand that the FED recognizes that 0:07:50.880 --> 0:07:55.000 a precondition for being able to cut rates in response 0:07:55.040 --> 0:07:57.720 to labor market weakness at a time when spot inflation 0:07:57.840 --> 0:07:59.880 will be high because of the task is that you 0:07:59.920 --> 0:08:02.280 have to make sure that you've locked down the inflation 0:08:02.400 --> 0:08:03.600 expectations first. 0:08:03.840 --> 0:08:05.760 So yes, it's moving in order of priorities. 0:08:05.800 --> 0:08:09.880 Lock down the expectations first, then look at business cycle management. 0:08:10.040 --> 0:08:12.240 If they get the first right, they will have the 0:08:12.320 --> 0:08:14.800 flexibility to do the second if it's needed. 0:08:14.920 --> 0:08:27.440 Christy, who have ever CORESI thank you so much. Another 0:08:27.520 --> 0:08:30.440 leg that could potentially offset some of the deficit concerns 0:08:30.440 --> 0:08:32.439 are the tariffs and the revenue that could be possibly 0:08:32.480 --> 0:08:35.480 brought into the United States. Former senior Trump trade advisor 0:08:35.559 --> 0:08:38.559 Kelly and Shaw joining us now, Kelly an, I'm curious 0:08:38.600 --> 0:08:41.760 what we've learned, in particular from the trade discussions over 0:08:42.000 --> 0:08:45.520 as part of the G seven meetings in Canada, particularly 0:08:45.520 --> 0:08:47.160 when it comes to the UK and the US. How 0:08:47.240 --> 0:08:48.160 much of a template is that? 0:08:49.520 --> 0:08:52.079 Yeah, good morning, and thanks so much for having me so. 0:08:52.320 --> 0:08:55.360 The big announcement regarding trade at this year's G seven 0:08:55.520 --> 0:09:00.920 was of course that UK deal on autoparts, on imports 0:09:00.960 --> 0:09:03.720 and then aerospace, and then the executive order that the 0:09:03.720 --> 0:09:06.880 White House issued last night to accompany the deal also 0:09:07.000 --> 0:09:09.439 teased out that there would be relief on steal and 0:09:09.520 --> 0:09:11.640 aluminum for the UK at some point in the future, 0:09:11.920 --> 0:09:13.800 but the details still forthcoming. 0:09:14.120 --> 0:09:15.120 So what this shows is. 0:09:15.120 --> 0:09:17.200 The UK is still very much front of the queue, 0:09:17.280 --> 0:09:20.200 ahead of any other government. The next closest we got 0:09:20.400 --> 0:09:24.360 was an announcement by a prime minister of Canada that 0:09:24.440 --> 0:09:27.520 the US and Canada would be negotiating a deal within 0:09:27.600 --> 0:09:29.960 the next thirty days, which is a bit longer than 0:09:30.000 --> 0:09:32.840 we were originally expecting, but at least it's an agreement. 0:09:32.480 --> 0:09:33.920 To agree, Kelly. 0:09:33.960 --> 0:09:37.240 And we also saw no deals from the likes of Japan, 0:09:37.360 --> 0:09:39.360 for example, and I'm sure the prime minister there would 0:09:39.400 --> 0:09:42.000 have liked to have seen something. And also the ability 0:09:42.040 --> 0:09:44.120 to reach a deal was cut short with the President 0:09:44.200 --> 0:09:47.720 leaving back to Washington, DC with a new hot war 0:09:47.840 --> 0:09:50.200 for President Trump to deal with and to think about. 0:09:50.280 --> 0:09:53.280 Does it show the limitations of deals being led by 0:09:53.280 --> 0:09:57.080 the president? Will this ultimately slowed down the timeline? 0:09:57.480 --> 0:09:57.760 Yeah? 0:09:57.960 --> 0:10:00.680 And I thought what was interesting about the early departure, 0:10:00.720 --> 0:10:03.000 and obviously there are things flaring up in the Middle 0:10:03.000 --> 0:10:07.320 East that required his attention, was that the two deals 0:10:07.320 --> 0:10:09.480 that I thought could come together this weekend that were 0:10:09.559 --> 0:10:11.920 left on the cutting room floor, in addition to Japan, 0:10:12.080 --> 0:10:15.040 would have been India and Mexico a deal on steel 0:10:15.080 --> 0:10:17.400 and perhaps fentanyl. He was set to meet with both 0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:20.480 Mody and shine Bomb today. Those meetings, of course won't happen, 0:10:21.320 --> 0:10:24.840 but I do think what it shows is some competing priorities. 0:10:25.040 --> 0:10:27.520 But look, he's got an entire team who is dedicated 0:10:27.559 --> 0:10:33.679 to these trade negotiations USTR, Ambassador Greer, Secretary Bessett, Howard Lutnik. 0:10:33.880 --> 0:10:36.080 They're not going to be as involved as some of 0:10:36.120 --> 0:10:39.040 the defense and National security advisors will be on this 0:10:39.120 --> 0:10:42.280 Iran is real conflict, So they are going to be 0:10:42.320 --> 0:10:43.959 focused exclusively. 0:10:43.360 --> 0:10:44.319 On these trade talks. 0:10:44.360 --> 0:10:46.840 Now, of course, that doesn't mean that one doesn't influence 0:10:46.920 --> 0:10:49.840 the other, but there are separate lanes in his administration 0:10:49.880 --> 0:10:50.880 who can handle both. 0:10:51.400 --> 0:10:53.360 Is it your assumption then that we do get those 0:10:53.400 --> 0:10:57.360 deals that you mentioned that we're close to by July eighth. 0:10:57.480 --> 0:11:00.280 Yeah, that is my expectation, and we really don't know 0:11:00.320 --> 0:11:03.240 what's going to happen in July. We had Secretary Bessett 0:11:03.280 --> 0:11:06.640 during a hearing last week teas that for countries negotiating 0:11:06.679 --> 0:11:09.880 and good faith, they could see an extension of that period, 0:11:10.160 --> 0:11:12.560 But the President hasn't said one way or the other. 0:11:12.920 --> 0:11:15.280 And I think negotiators are going to seek to put 0:11:15.320 --> 0:11:17.800 pressure on a number of governments where things are close 0:11:18.160 --> 0:11:19.960 in order to try to get the deal. And we've 0:11:19.960 --> 0:11:23.680 heard directly from the administration that India is close, and 0:11:23.760 --> 0:11:26.719 my expectation is that Canada and Mexico are also very 0:11:26.760 --> 0:11:29.280 much top of the queue. If for no other reason, 0:11:29.360 --> 0:11:32.360 then there are two of the US's most important trading partners, 0:11:32.360 --> 0:11:35.240 and we still do have sizable tariffs on both for 0:11:35.320 --> 0:11:38.480 goods that don't currently qualify for those USMCA deals. So 0:11:38.600 --> 0:11:40.240 that's going to be a big ticket item, not just 0:11:40.240 --> 0:11:42.480 for the US, but also for Canada and Mexico. 0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:45.400 Kelly and Shaw, a former senior Trump trade advisor, thank 0:11:45.440 --> 0:11:47.240 you so much for being with us and the insights 0:11:47.600 --> 0:11:49.679 on what's going on with trade. 0:11:59.760 --> 0:12:00.280 US now. 0:12:00.480 --> 0:12:04.160 Is Reza Palavi, the son of the last Shaw of Iran, Raza, 0:12:04.240 --> 0:12:06.160 thank you so much for being with us. I want 0:12:06.160 --> 0:12:09.600 to start with a question, are you in active discussions 0:12:09.640 --> 0:12:12.680 in any way to return to Iran in a leadership 0:12:12.800 --> 0:12:16.720 role if there is some sort of regime change in Iran? 0:12:18.720 --> 0:12:22.680 Good morning to you and to my fellow competters following 0:12:22.679 --> 0:12:26.360 this program and all of your audience. There is a 0:12:26.400 --> 0:12:30.440 campaign for liberation that we've been committed to all these years. 0:12:30.880 --> 0:12:34.200 The moment is approaching very fast. The regime is on 0:12:34.240 --> 0:12:37.440 the verge of collapse. We see elements within the regime 0:12:37.880 --> 0:12:41.320 already talking defections, they get in touch with us. We 0:12:41.440 --> 0:12:44.720 see a leader who is now hiding in a bunker 0:12:44.840 --> 0:12:48.720 like a rat, while many high elements are taking flight 0:12:48.800 --> 0:12:51.800 from Iran. I think all of this is conducive to 0:12:51.880 --> 0:12:55.040 something that may bay soon happen, and finally my fellow 0:12:55.040 --> 0:12:59.080 competits will be able to overcome. And of course there's 0:12:59.120 --> 0:13:02.160 a plan not only for this phase of our struggle, 0:13:02.160 --> 0:13:05.520 which is liberation from this regime, but what happens right 0:13:05.559 --> 0:13:09.080 next the transition to what we hope will culminate in 0:13:09.120 --> 0:13:12.040 a democratic outcome. I have stepped in to leave this 0:13:12.120 --> 0:13:15.320 campaign at the behalse of my compatriots. I have a 0:13:15.360 --> 0:13:18.240 plan of action not only to manage this phase of transition, 0:13:18.720 --> 0:13:22.080 but also to plan for Evan's future recovery and prosperity, 0:13:22.640 --> 0:13:24.280 which has to go hand. 0:13:24.160 --> 0:13:26.160 In love with our democratic GUIDEA just just. 0:13:26.160 --> 0:13:28.920 A question here, who are the compatriots who've approached you 0:13:29.240 --> 0:13:35.239 to try to harmless leadership push. 0:13:33.760 --> 0:13:36.520 Well, I think that you have people who have vested 0:13:36.559 --> 0:13:39.760 interest in preserving this regime, because the whole survival depends 0:13:39.800 --> 0:13:42.920 on this regime all this time, whereas the millions of 0:13:42.920 --> 0:13:45.280 my compatriots who were the first victim of this regime, 0:13:45.640 --> 0:13:48.600 have paid all these four decades a very heavy price. 0:13:49.000 --> 0:13:53.000 We have seen many campaigns that people protested. The latest 0:13:53.040 --> 0:13:55.760 one was two years ago the Woman Live Freedom movement. 0:13:56.240 --> 0:13:58.120 And finally, I think today. 0:13:57.800 --> 0:14:01.240 With this clear weakening of regime, and as I said, 0:14:01.440 --> 0:14:04.400 I'm being on the version of collapse, finally, all these 0:14:04.720 --> 0:14:09.079 people who have reached their lives and honorably put their 0:14:09.120 --> 0:14:11.800 lives on the line and did die for the cause, 0:14:12.200 --> 0:14:15.120 we'll be able to remember that as heroes of this conflict, 0:14:15.440 --> 0:14:18.280 because we'll be liberated sooner than everybody thinks. And my 0:14:18.480 --> 0:14:21.400 entire commitment has been from day one to support my 0:14:21.480 --> 0:14:24.720 competit in the struggle for liberation. And we believe that 0:14:24.760 --> 0:14:26.960 the end is very near for the regime and our 0:14:27.040 --> 0:14:29.560 dreams of liberty will finally be realized very soon. 0:14:29.920 --> 0:14:32.400 Rather on the ground, what we've seen in Iran is 0:14:32.480 --> 0:14:35.760 those in Tehran, for example, trying to evacuate Israel, saying 0:14:35.760 --> 0:14:38.680 more recently that they would look at targeting places there. 0:14:38.720 --> 0:14:41.040 You've seen fear, you've seen strikes, and you've seen death. 0:14:41.120 --> 0:14:43.640 How complicated and how difficult is it to ask a 0:14:43.680 --> 0:14:46.160 populace to rise up and rally behind you when they're 0:14:46.200 --> 0:14:48.680 the very same ones that are under threat right now. 0:14:49.920 --> 0:14:53.160 Look, I think many of my competitors are smart enough 0:14:53.200 --> 0:14:56.480 to understand that if right now, if until now, and 0:14:56.520 --> 0:14:58.320 in fact, many of your colleagues in the media have 0:14:58.400 --> 0:15:00.640 always asked me, how do you find the regime that 0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:03.920 is so repressive, that it's so ruthless, that executes that 0:15:04.200 --> 0:15:08.160 threatened dissidents or activit is at home, to which I said, well, 0:15:08.160 --> 0:15:09.360 obviously the playing. 0:15:09.080 --> 0:15:11.640 Field has to be more equalized. This is a case 0:15:11.680 --> 0:15:14.160 where for the first time in four years, we see 0:15:14.200 --> 0:15:19.119 this d cloud literally d cloud. But it is also. 0:15:18.920 --> 0:15:21.520 Important to have the support of the world community because 0:15:21.680 --> 0:15:25.000 until now, many times my compatriots have been thrown under 0:15:25.000 --> 0:15:27.400 the bus when they had an opportunity to be backed 0:15:27.600 --> 0:15:31.840 because of a policy of appeasement or containment. I think 0:15:31.880 --> 0:15:34.080 now the situation for the first time exists for the 0:15:34.120 --> 0:15:37.040 world to realize that it is not availed to expect 0:15:37.040 --> 0:15:40.680 this regime to change its attitude and behavior. Ali Hamena 0:15:40.920 --> 0:15:43.240 is at work with the world, not the Iranian people. 0:15:43.560 --> 0:15:46.520 He's the main culprit for being here and having Iranians 0:15:46.560 --> 0:15:50.920 also have innocent victims and civilians to whom my heart 0:15:50.960 --> 0:15:53.560 goes up, of course, but I think right now we 0:15:53.640 --> 0:15:55.600 need to be focused on the goal and the aim. 0:15:55.960 --> 0:15:59.280 We have a tremendous opportunity to overcome this regime. I 0:15:59.320 --> 0:16:01.400 think the world would be the sigh of relief with 0:16:01.440 --> 0:16:04.760 this regime no longer be there. We are carrying on our. 0:16:04.760 --> 0:16:09.440 Finances because the goal and the aim is a regime change. 0:16:09.520 --> 0:16:12.000 What we have heard from Israel is that their goal 0:16:12.400 --> 0:16:15.040 is to dismantle the nuclear forces from Iran. Is it 0:16:15.040 --> 0:16:18.080 you're understanding that a regime change is also a goal 0:16:18.120 --> 0:16:20.520 from the Israelis, and have you been in contact with them. 0:16:21.840 --> 0:16:25.800 I'm not asking any foreign governments to state the policy 0:16:25.840 --> 0:16:28.160 of regime change, although I think many of them do 0:16:28.280 --> 0:16:31.320 believe that ultimately that would be the best formula to 0:16:31.360 --> 0:16:34.200 get rid of so many problems at the same time, 0:16:34.280 --> 0:16:35.760 and not just the nuclear threat. 0:16:36.080 --> 0:16:38.960 As a result of this regime track record. 0:16:38.600 --> 0:16:43.600 Of behavior in the region and beyond formatting terrorism, supporting, 0:16:44.600 --> 0:16:49.320 you know, their their proxies like Eyler Hamas in the 0:16:49.360 --> 0:16:52.760 region and so on, so the disappears. 0:16:52.240 --> 0:16:52.960 Of this regime. 0:16:53.280 --> 0:16:56.880 We're eliminating too many problems that this regime has caused 0:16:56.920 --> 0:17:00.200 in one shot. The first beneficiary of regime change are 0:17:00.200 --> 0:17:01.680 the running people themselves. 0:17:01.840 --> 0:17:02.920 But we believe that. 0:17:02.760 --> 0:17:05.560 Our immediate neighborhood and the region, whether it is the 0:17:05.600 --> 0:17:10.439 Israelis or Arab neighbors, and beyond that the rest of 0:17:10.480 --> 0:17:13.880 the free world will understand that the running people, who 0:17:14.000 --> 0:17:17.720 unlike this regime want to be part of the civilized 0:17:17.720 --> 0:17:20.680 world with the same values and principles of liberty and 0:17:20.760 --> 0:17:27.560 freedom and human rights. Unlike this regime, would be certainly 0:17:26.480 --> 0:17:32.240 the element of change, and if you will, the alternatives 0:17:32.280 --> 0:17:33.040 to this regime. 0:17:33.119 --> 0:17:35.680 I think this is where the world needs to be focused. 0:17:35.280 --> 0:17:38.800 Now, beyond the immediate campaign that is a result of 0:17:39.080 --> 0:17:42.280 the stubbornness of how many must dragged our country into it. 0:17:42.520 --> 0:17:44.919 But let's look at the positive aspect of once we 0:17:45.200 --> 0:17:48.280 get rid of this regime, how we can envisage your future. 0:17:48.320 --> 0:17:51.080 We're or back to an element of stability and regional peace, 0:17:51.760 --> 0:17:56.040 which is in everybody's interest. 0:17:54.680 --> 0:17:56.879 Just to build them. What Danny was asking, have you 0:17:56.920 --> 0:17:59.080 been in contact with the Israeli leadership. 0:18:00.080 --> 0:18:03.280 We are reaching out to everyone and everyone, including the 0:18:03.359 --> 0:18:06.280 Israeli side, to understand what it is that we stand. 0:18:06.600 --> 0:18:09.200 What is the expectation of the Iranian people in terms 0:18:09.200 --> 0:18:12.080 of world support. I think it's pretty much the same 0:18:12.119 --> 0:18:15.600 thing that many struggling nations under totally tenor regime. 0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:18.760 We're looking at any country that understand. 0:18:18.359 --> 0:18:20.920 That they have to stand with the people of a 0:18:21.000 --> 0:18:23.760 country that is trying to liberate itself. And again, whether 0:18:23.760 --> 0:18:26.480 it's the Israeli government or the American government or any 0:18:26.480 --> 0:18:29.840 other government for that matter, the question is whose side 0:18:29.880 --> 0:18:32.080 are you going to stand with today the i Ruanian 0:18:32.160 --> 0:18:35.080 people or continue to insist negotiating with the regime that 0:18:35.200 --> 0:18:36.280 is on the verge of collapse. 0:18:36.320 --> 0:18:39.040 There's also a question of what this new leadership looks 0:18:39.119 --> 0:18:41.199 like or as are you talking about re establishing the 0:18:41.240 --> 0:18:45.040 monarchy when that was controversial and it might not have 0:18:45.119 --> 0:18:49.800 full support from all parties, particularly the more religious elements 0:18:49.840 --> 0:18:51.280 of the Iranian society. 0:18:52.240 --> 0:18:54.919 Well, I have never advocated for one for of a 0:18:54.960 --> 0:18:55.840 regime or another. 0:18:56.000 --> 0:18:59.240 What I did and have advocated, and in fact it's 0:18:59.280 --> 0:19:01.959 part of my trans plan, is a process that it's 0:19:02.040 --> 0:19:05.720 totally democratic. That means that the running people have to 0:19:05.760 --> 0:19:10.160 have the ability to ponder upon whatever a constitutional assembly 0:19:10.200 --> 0:19:15.399 will propose as a constitutional formula, a future constitution, the 0:19:15.520 --> 0:19:18.720 form that the regime can take, what it will mean 0:19:19.000 --> 0:19:22.040 and Unlike nineteen seventy nine, when people had no cluer 0:19:22.119 --> 0:19:25.280 idea what an Islamic republic means and by the time 0:19:25.320 --> 0:19:27.640 they figured it out it was too late. This time, 0:19:27.680 --> 0:19:30.600 in full transparency, that'll have the option to look at 0:19:30.640 --> 0:19:33.320 what's the best model that fits them and let the 0:19:33.359 --> 0:19:36.119 ballot box decide the majority what the running people will 0:19:36.160 --> 0:19:38.280 look for. Will it be a republic, will it be 0:19:38.320 --> 0:19:42.000 auctional monarchy, or whatever it is. My objective is not 0:19:42.119 --> 0:19:44.879 to stand here as the result of that, and my 0:19:45.000 --> 0:19:47.879 responsibility right now, my only focus is to see this 0:19:48.359 --> 0:19:52.840 process through so we can ensure that ultimately we replace 0:19:52.920 --> 0:19:58.240 this dictatorship with a democratic and let me underline, a 0:19:58.400 --> 0:19:59.920 secular democrat. 0:20:00.080 --> 0:20:03.480 See what's the key separation of religion from state as 0:20:03.520 --> 0:20:05.359 a prerequisite to that point. 0:20:05.760 --> 0:20:09.240 Past attempts to engineer regime shifts in the Middle East 0:20:09.720 --> 0:20:13.640 haven't often ended in liberal, pro Western governments. There are 0:20:13.680 --> 0:20:18.240 examples many out there Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, all ending 0:20:18.600 --> 0:20:22.000 in things that look like fragmentation or current armed forces 0:20:22.040 --> 0:20:24.400 having the most power and being the ones that emerge 0:20:24.840 --> 0:20:27.320 in the chaos of a regime shift. What do you 0:20:27.440 --> 0:20:29.639 suggest that it is different this time? 0:20:30.920 --> 0:20:35.040 I think Iranian society not just for centuries of proving 0:20:35.200 --> 0:20:38.400 that they have as a nation state, a concept of 0:20:38.800 --> 0:20:44.160 a nationhood, national identity, natural pride and objective, a culture, 0:20:44.280 --> 0:20:48.600 a civilization, but also a polity, and a generation today 0:20:49.240 --> 0:20:53.720 very shrewd and very clever by knowing what it is 0:20:54.160 --> 0:20:56.720 that would be in their interest. They see the world 0:20:56.760 --> 0:21:00.480 and how it has evolved that have since successful campaign 0:21:00.480 --> 0:21:04.879 of liberation. They understand the key elements that sustains and 0:21:05.000 --> 0:21:08.440 preserves democratic order, and I believe today's gen z and 0:21:08.480 --> 0:21:11.800 Iran is more than ever equipped to understand not only 0:21:11.840 --> 0:21:14.480 the needs, but how and what it will take to 0:21:14.560 --> 0:21:15.199