Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along
Speaker 2: with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day
Speaker 2: for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics
Speaker 2: from our global headquarters in New York City. We are
Speaker 2: live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine
Speaker 2: am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
Speaker 2: anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app. To extend the conversation,
Speaker 2: the former senior US intelligence official, Normal Raw joins us
Speaker 2: now for more Normal Welcome back to the program sir.
Speaker 2: Just a quote from the Defense Secretary pet Agseth called
Speaker 2: it an incredible and overwhelming success. How should we define success?
Speaker 2: This Monday morning?
Speaker 3: Good morning, Well, we have a changed Middle East. The
Speaker 3: United States and Israel of conducted devastating attacks against all
Speaker 3: ofver Ron's air defense, his leadership nuclear programs in Iran's
Speaker 3: response has been generally feeble. What response Iran has been
Speaker 3: able to conduct, to include missile attacks against Israel have
Speaker 3: not impacted the strategic course of the conflict. The numbers
Speaker 3: are moving in a direction where Iran's missile program is
Speaker 3: being whittled away, and Iran's nuclear program is effectively destroyed.
Speaker 3: There will be elements that remain, there will be elements
Speaker 3: that are concerning, but its nuclear program is effectively destroyed.
Speaker 4: Norman, no one really understands Iran quite like you. What
Speaker 4: do you think that Iotola is weighing up right now?
Speaker 4: The menu of options in terms of a response.
Speaker 3: Well, there are many people who understand Iran are better
Speaker 3: than me. But within Iran, the decision making structure is
Speaker 3: going to be challenged. His leadership has been changed. He
Speaker 3: himself is in a difficult, hidden location. Some of his
Speaker 3: leadership is being hunted, perhaps by the Israelis. They're under attack,
Speaker 3: their economy is poor, their population is restive. Let me
Speaker 3: give you an example of options and the challenges. If
Speaker 3: they close the straight of her moves, they close off
Speaker 3: most of the many of the food stuffs, the vegetable oils,
Speaker 3: the primary goods that come into the country to feed
Speaker 3: the population. Now, that is something that you really don't
Speaker 3: want to do at a time when your population may
Speaker 3: erupt into major unrest. So they have many challenges with
Speaker 3: all of the decisions they make. But again, if they
Speaker 3: close the straight of her moves, it does not impact Israel,
Speaker 3: and it will bring in the United States and could
Speaker 3: likely lead to the end of the regime.
Speaker 4: Do you think these strikes get around to the table?
Speaker 4: The President continues to say he wants to see a
Speaker 4: diplomatic path forward.
Speaker 3: Not immediately. But what it does do is it tells
Speaker 3: the world that the United States is pushing for diplomacy,
Speaker 3: and that actually encourages the world to push back on
Speaker 3: Iran's efforts to escalate the contact conflict or isolate the
Speaker 3: United States. So in the past, in some cases the
Speaker 3: United States seemed as the aggressor or are alone. But
Speaker 3: the United States is an essence saying you can't have
Speaker 3: a program that is moving towards a nuclear weapon, but
Speaker 3: we're interested in a diplomatic deal. Be reasonable. Iran is
Speaker 3: not being reasonable and it has no allies.
Speaker 1: No, I mean you said that the nuclear program has
Speaker 1: effectively been destroyed. There's a lot of concern among a
Speaker 1: number of circles about the four hundred kilograms of enriched
Speaker 1: uranium that have gone missing that previously were held near Isfahan,
Speaker 1: as well as equipment that was taken out of four
Speaker 1: Dah before the attacks. Do you have any sense of
Speaker 1: either where that could be or how close that could
Speaker 1: be to being to restarting some of the nuclear programs
Speaker 1: that are on previously had So those.
Speaker 3: Are valid concerns. So we should be concerned about Iran's
Speaker 3: remaining nuclear material. It will have nuclear scientists, it will
Speaker 3: have nuclear knowledge, and it will have parts and equipment
Speaker 3: related to centrifuges that it did not declare to the
Speaker 3: IEA that it could in theory assemble and recreate in
Speaker 3: a covert facility. But let's think about that for a minute.
Speaker 3: If you believe what you read in the newspapers, the
Speaker 3: United States and Israel have is some extremely good intelligence
Speaker 3: on Iran. So they're going to have to put this together,
Speaker 3: get away with it, and then the United States and
Speaker 3: Israel are going to have to not learn about it
Speaker 3: and not destroy it. Now that's possible, but it's unlikely.
Speaker 3: But it is something that's going to require diplomatic pressure
Speaker 3: so that it can be identified and removed, and it's
Speaker 3: probably a card Iran will play in the talks.
Speaker 1: What do you think the Foreign Minister of Iran is
Speaker 1: doing over in Russia today, we know that he is
Speaker 1: meeting with Vladimir Putin, and there's a real question around
Speaker 1: what the ask is and whether it will be the
Speaker 1: response that Iranians are looking for.
Speaker 3: Diplomatic support pressure in the UN. Iran has obtained consistent
Speaker 3: diplomatic support at the United Nations Security Consul, the International
Speaker 3: Atomic Energy Agency, and other diplomatic fora from Russia and
Speaker 3: China over the years. In fact, these two countries have
Speaker 3: block any major pressure on Iran for its proliferation missiles,
Speaker 3: nuclear program and terrorism. And this is really the moment
Speaker 3: where these two countries can can produce this. It's unlikely
Speaker 3: that either of these countries are going to provide any
Speaker 3: military support. The Strategic Agreement that has been signed between
Speaker 3: Russia and Iran it doesn't provide for that sort of relationship.
Speaker 3: But Iran, again it has no allies, but it does
Speaker 3: have partners who have provided a support in international fora
Speaker 3: that may help on diplomatic talks.
Speaker 2: Norman, just before you go, just a brief assessment of
Speaker 2: this operation thirty seven as long one hundred and twenty
Speaker 2: five aircraft B two bombers, fourth and fifth generation fighters
Speaker 2: as well thirty thousand pounds bunker buster bombs missiles launched
Speaker 2: from a submarine as well. Norman, how smooth, how well executed,
Speaker 2: with the logistics, the precision of this operation.
Speaker 3: This operation speaks to the training, leadership, and the technology
Speaker 3: of the United States military has had for a number
Speaker 3: of years. This operation has been stayed in the press,
Speaker 3: has been practiced for many years. This is not something
Speaker 3: that has occurred in any recent administration, but this recent
Speaker 3: administration it had to refine. It significantly matched the target set.
Speaker 3: But what you are seeing is a technology and capability
Speaker 3: in leadership and no country can match. And I think
Speaker 3: North Korea and other countries in the world to include
Speaker 3: China and Russia are looking in the past weeks and
Speaker 3: saying the world is also a little different from their perspective.
Speaker 2: It's a strong final point Norman appreciated time. Sir Norman
Speaker 2: role Valley, former senior US intelligence official. Down story for
Speaker 2: a gobent snacks right in the following. A hypothetical sustained
Speaker 2: a very large disruption of energy supply transit would likely
Speaker 2: push oil and European natural gas price is above one
Speaker 2: hundred and ten dollars per barrel. Joining US now is
Speaker 2: down story for a golment Sachs, Dan, that's the hypothetical.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about a base case. What is the base case?
Speaker 2: Forem of the team so found the smarting.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so base case remains that we don't see significant
Speaker 5: disruptions neither of oil or natural gas in the Middle East.
Speaker 5: And in our base case without disruptions, we actually have
Speaker 5: energy prices gradually declining, with brands reaching around sixty dollars
Speaker 5: per barrel in the fourth quarter of this year, and
Speaker 5: with TTF europe natural gas prices also declining, especially next
Speaker 5: year with the arrival of all these extra energy supply
Speaker 5: cargo terminals.
Speaker 4: Dan, how high could oil go if Iran does not
Speaker 4: close the Strait of Hormos but does other potential attacks
Speaker 4: on energy infrastructure or tankers that potentially disrupt the flow
Speaker 4: of energy coming out of the region.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so you know, old prices could rise significantly in
Speaker 5: those scenarios. And the key reason is that the Middle
Speaker 5: East the Gulf countries are remain the largest regional producer
Speaker 5: in global global oil markets. In general. Our estimate is
Speaker 5: that for every one million barrels per day drop of
Speaker 5: supply that sustained for about a year, brand should be
Speaker 5: about eight dollars per barrel lower. That takes into account
Speaker 5: the fact that higher prices reduce demands somewhat an incentivized
Speaker 5: USHL two to produce more. I think one challenge big
Speaker 5: picture with potential supply disruptions in the Middle East is
Speaker 5: that the most important buffer that the oil market benefits
Speaker 5: from against supply disruptions namingly quite a bit of spare
Speaker 5: capacity among OPEC core producers that's not necessarily available if
Speaker 5: the production to the capacity to produce would would be
Speaker 5: affected by bipotential disruptions because we think the bulk of
Speaker 5: the spare capacity oil markets is concentrated both in Saudi
Speaker 5: Arabia and the UI.
Speaker 4: Are you seeing any reductions to Iran in barrels right now?
Speaker 5: No? In fact, are now casts of Iran crude supply
Speaker 5: is added three year high three point six million barrels
Speaker 5: per day of crude. Iranian supply has actually doubled over
Speaker 5: the last three years or so, and we're actually seeing
Speaker 5: very high export flows at the moment. I think the
Speaker 5: idea is to get the barrels out safely. Why while
Speaker 5: we can, and at the moment, prices are are relatively
Speaker 5: attractive given that Dan.
Speaker 1: Do you think that if there is some sort of
Speaker 1: calming down of the tensions, you could see a huge
Speaker 1: decline in oil prices.
Speaker 5: Yes, So we estimated the jubilical respreamum around Tendall's per Beryl.
Speaker 5: You know, if we if we increase, if the market
Speaker 5: were to increase its its probability of our base case
Speaker 5: that you don't see disruptions, this respremum could you know,
Speaker 5: could come down. Uh, you know, it may take some
Speaker 5: time for for us to to really learn whether we're
Speaker 5: going to see see disruptions. Now. I think the hypothetical
Speaker 5: scenario where where the three spremium comes up the more
Speaker 5: quickly would be uh, you know, a successful rotori into
Speaker 5: the negotiation tables between the US, the US and Iran.
Speaker 5: But I think otherwise it would take some time for
Speaker 5: for markets to you know, to get more confidence in
Speaker 5: the basic case outlook for disruptions.
Speaker 1: On the flip side, Dan, there's this question about how
Speaker 1: much the US is going to be affected versus other
Speaker 1: countries or other regions. I'm thinking of Europe, I'm thinking
Speaker 1: of Asia. How big is the dispersion in terms of
Speaker 1: which areas would get disproportionately hit in terms of their
Speaker 1: energy costs based on a myriad of potential disruptions to
Speaker 1: oil supplies.
Speaker 5: Yes, so I would rank the vulnerability of the three
Speaker 5: big regions as follows. Most vulnerable Europe, both because of
Speaker 5: the exposure to oil prices but also natural gas prices,
Speaker 5: and but also diesel prices where Europe no longer imports
Speaker 5: diesel products from Russia, but it is heavily dependent on
Speaker 5: the Middle East. Second, I would put Asia and the
Speaker 5: third vulnerable, But the least vulnerable is the US because
Speaker 5: the US natural gas market is quite insulated from global markets,
Speaker 5: because the US is a large producer, and because the
Speaker 5: US exports are basically at capacity. So if we were
Speaker 5: to see large disruptions, oil prices would also rise and
Speaker 5: increased costs for the US, But the US would be
Speaker 5: the least vulnerable among the top three regions.
Speaker 4: Here, Dan, I love to pick up your point about
Speaker 4: how Iran is at a three year high when it
Speaker 4: comes to their barrels that they're producing and exporting. At
Speaker 4: the same time, the Trump administration says they have maximum
Speaker 4: pressure right now on Iran's oil industry, and they're going
Speaker 4: after the teapots and the banks in Hong Kong and
Speaker 4: China that facilitate all of this. How are they so
Speaker 4: high if this administration says they're at max pressure.
Speaker 5: Yeah, So to your point, about ninety percent of Iran's
Speaker 5: liquids exports. Iran is exporting just over two million barrels
Speaker 5: play of liquids. About ninety percent goes to China, and
Speaker 5: I think over the last two years the system has
Speaker 5: built out an alternative supply chain with shipping companies, with ports,
Speaker 5: with refiners, with alternative financial institutions that together ensure that
Speaker 5: these barrels continue to reach global markets, and in particular
Speaker 5: are quite price sensitive Chinese deepot refiners which have margins
Speaker 5: and they basically need those those discounts to continue operating.
Speaker 2: Donks Jovan of Goma Sachs down, Thank you, sir as
Speaker 2: always stunning events. Over the weekend America's attack on around
Speaker 2: years in the banking a stewth thirty six don long
Speaker 2: operation named Midnight Hammer pilots dropped some of the largest
Speaker 2: bombs in their arsenal on Iranian nuclear facilities. Joining us
Speaker 2: now to discuss is the former US Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
Speaker 2: Mister Secretary, welcome to the program, sir. We'd love to
Speaker 2: lean on your experience the work to execute an operation
Speaker 2: like this one and your rarely high level assessment of
Speaker 2: his success.
Speaker 6: Well, good morning. Look, it was clearly successful in terms
Speaker 6: of the execution. Our aircraft were able to make it
Speaker 6: in drop what fourteen GBU fifty seven's, the submarines launched
Speaker 6: ta lambs from offshore. We were out with impunity. Nobody
Speaker 6: was hurt, and I just I think it speaks to
Speaker 6: the skill and professionalism of the United States military. And
Speaker 6: now I think what we have to do is two things.
Speaker 6: First of all, get a good battle damage assessment, and
Speaker 6: that will take a few days and maybe even then
Speaker 6: will be incomplete until we get inspectors on the ground.
Speaker 6: And then secondly, we're all waiting to see what Iran's
Speaker 6: response will be. And there are various predictions you guys
Speaker 6: have been talking about it what they may or may
Speaker 6: not do. But that's what we're all waiting for now.
Speaker 4: If you're advising the president right now, what would you
Speaker 4: say to him in terms of what to expect in
Speaker 4: terms of Tehran's retaliation.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Look, I think there are a range of things
Speaker 6: they could do, you know, were they could first of all,
Speaker 6: use Shia militia groups in Iraq to target our people
Speaker 6: and facilities there. Secondly, much like they did during my
Speaker 6: time in early twenty twenty, they could launch Asavov missiles
Speaker 6: against US forces in the Middle East, and there are
Speaker 6: a couple dozen bases there with over forty thousand US
Speaker 6: service members that they could go after. A third, there
Speaker 6: could be sales here in the United States and globally.
Speaker 6: Or they can go against American officials as they did
Speaker 6: a couple of years ago and try that. And then
Speaker 6: they could go after shipping in the straight of Hord moves,
Speaker 6: which I think is unlikely, but to me, those are
Speaker 6: the range of outcomes that they may pursue here in
Speaker 6: the coming days.
Speaker 4: In twenty twenty, when cost them Sulimani was struck with
Speaker 4: that drone strike, we did see retaliation, but it was
Speaker 4: telegraphed through back channels to the US administration. Do you
Speaker 4: think we could see Iran take that same approach this
Speaker 4: time around?
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 6: I think what they have to do is calibrate this
Speaker 6: so that they do enough for domestic consumption, feel like
Speaker 6: they've satisfied the military. They've struck back, tell the Iranian
Speaker 6: people they struck back, but not so much that President
Speaker 6: Trump really upset anti climbs that escalation ladder and really
Speaker 6: hits them back fairly hard. Within hours of the missile
Speaker 6: strikes at Eli Saud, we had Iranians on the phone
Speaker 6: privately reaching out to us saying they were done, they
Speaker 6: had no more, they wanted to stop fighting, et cetera.
Speaker 6: And that was, of course long before we knew that
Speaker 6: Americans service members suffer concussions and TBI. But nonetheless they'll
Speaker 6: do a lot of backchilling because they look they can't
Speaker 6: go much further. They're being dismantled, their leadership, certainly the
Speaker 6: military side is being taken apart. Their nuclear sites have
Speaker 6: been pummeled, and so the question is how long? How
Speaker 6: much long can they go on?
Speaker 4: How can they even decide on some sort of retaliation
Speaker 4: or strike against the United States. If the Supreme Leader
Speaker 4: is reportedly hiding in a bunker, he's in his late
Speaker 4: eighties and he has no access even to electronic communication.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Look, that's the big question is who's in charge,
Speaker 6: How complete, how effective is the chain of command right now?
Speaker 6: Are there instructions left behind to the IRGC or to
Speaker 6: the missile forces to launch attacks that may may explain
Speaker 6: why they haven't responded here in the twenty four to
Speaker 6: thirty six hours since the US strikes on FDA, n
Speaker 6: Ton's and Esfahan.
Speaker 1: There's one theory out there, Secretary, that this could potentially
Speaker 1: reignite some of the efforts that are on has made
Speaker 1: to achieve nuclear status, because that is the only deterrence,
Speaker 1: and especially with the four hundred kilograms of enriched uranium
Speaker 1: missing into action, how concerned are you about that reality
Speaker 1: going underground and really having the Iranian officials expedite those efforts.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Look, you bring up a good point that I
Speaker 6: was going to raise. There's still nine hundred pounds of
Speaker 6: sixty percent enriched uranium that's fairly close to what they
Speaker 6: would need for ten nuclear weapons out there that we
Speaker 6: don't have control. We don't know where it is. The
Speaker 6: IE doesn't know where it is, so first of all,
Speaker 6: we have to track that down. Secondly, we don't know
Speaker 6: to what degree the Iranian infrastructure has been destroyed, and
Speaker 6: even if it has, it's just a matter of time
Speaker 6: before they rebuild. Now that at this point probably looks
Speaker 6: more like years than anything else than months, but nonetheless,
Speaker 6: until there is a fundamental change in the ambitions of
Speaker 6: the regime or a fundamental change in the regime itself.
Speaker 6: This is likely an ambition that will grow back over time,
Speaker 6: arguably moreized than before because of what has happened here
Speaker 6: in the last couple weeks.
Speaker 1: There's a larger point, Secretary that other people have been
Speaker 1: making this morning, which is that it is a deterrent
Speaker 1: to say Russia to China, showing what the US military
Speaker 1: can do and is willing to do in the face
Speaker 1: of some sort of red line that gets crossed. Do
Speaker 1: you see it that way or do you see other
Speaker 1: nations and seeing the need to become nuclear or having
Speaker 1: some sort of deterrent that really takes this potential outcome
Speaker 1: off the table.
Speaker 6: You know, deterrence is based on two things, capability and will.
Speaker 6: And I think everybody's understood the United States military has
Speaker 6: the capability to do a lot of things. I don't
Speaker 6: think anybody ever doubted we could do what we did
Speaker 6: with regard to be two stealth bombers entering Iranian airspace
Speaker 6: and dropping these bunker busters. I think what is different
Speaker 6: here is President Trump has shown the willingness to do
Speaker 6: it despite domestic voices coming from both the right and
Speaker 6: left saying he shouldn't do it. So I think in
Speaker 6: this regard it's more of his willingness to take action,
Speaker 6: which probably caught Rushes and Beijing's attention.
Speaker 2: Well, this is one criticism of the previous administration, as
Speaker 2: you know, missed the secretary. The faibiates provide a satisfactory
Speaker 2: terrance in key waterways in this region, and I'm thinking
Speaker 2: more of the Red Sea over the last few years
Speaker 2: as we think about the Strait of Hormos, Can you
Speaker 2: just share with us what you learn about the best
Speaker 2: way to provide it to Terrance and to prevent the
Speaker 2: disruption of those waterways. Yeah.
Speaker 6: Well, look, I think sending a clear message first ball
Speaker 6: is important. But secondly, and I say this in light
Speaker 6: of the fact that the Iranian Parliament yesterday voted that
Speaker 6: Iran should close the Straight of Horror Moves, I think
Speaker 6: there's going to be a good argument if they strike
Speaker 6: back to take out the Iranian Navy, particularly those elements
Speaker 6: of the navy that could shut down or obstruct or
Speaker 6: hijack shipping in the Straight of hor Moves. So you
Speaker 6: could sink the mind layers of the navy. You could
Speaker 6: go after the swarm boats that tend to come up
Speaker 6: upon cargo tankers and take them ashore. You could knock
Speaker 6: out Iranian missile batteries on the coastline. So I think,
Speaker 6: to me, that would be the top of my list.
Speaker 6: If Iran tries to shut down the strait or takes
Speaker 6: more aggressive action, beat it to take that card out
Speaker 6: of their hand, because everybody is concerned about shutting down
Speaker 6: the straight of horror moves, and yet even though we
Speaker 6: fly in the face of their own interests, they continue
Speaker 6: to threaten.
Speaker 2: That difficult to answer the next question, sir, but just
Speaker 2: to find a question. Do you get the sense that
Speaker 2: American involvement in this operation is over or do you
Speaker 2: think this might be ongoing.
Speaker 6: I think it's to be determined based on how Iran responds.
Speaker 6: I think President Trump's instincts have long been since the
Speaker 6: time I work with him. He does not want to
Speaker 6: get involved in wars. He doesn't want this to go
Speaker 6: on and on and on. I think if Iran shoots
Speaker 6: missiles and they're largely effectless, I think we stand back.
Speaker 6: We probably continue to support the Israelis with munition and
Speaker 6: intelligence and defensive air defense capabilities. But I think in
Speaker 6: terms of continuing strikes, we probably step back at that
Speaker 6: time and then urge a negotiation. By the way, a
Speaker 6: negotiation between Iran and Israel that's going to have to
Speaker 6: include a return to the non proliferation room and inspectors
Speaker 6: and verification mechanisms on the ground in Iran.
Speaker 2: That's absolutely critical parteically thoughtful conversations. And we appreciate your time.
Speaker 2: They former US Defense Secretary Marc Astro stop of the
Speaker 2: price section and your morning coast. Let's send back to
Speaker 2: our top story about pricing for Iran's response after the
Speaker 2: US attacks. It's nuclear sites over the weekend, joining US
Speaker 2: now is standing and is ready. Ambassador to the United Nations,
Speaker 2: ambassador com monitor.
Speaker 7: It's good to say morning, thank you for having me.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about the events over the weekend, and let's
Speaker 2: talk about this also. Who's in charge in a round
Speaker 2: right now? Amory has been talking about this all morning,
Speaker 2: the chain of command. Who's in charge?
Speaker 7: Well, it's Aututel, you know, the other regime which still
Speaker 7: hath control over the population. But you know, U see
Speaker 7: statements coming out the minute door for in a furld
Speaker 7: is flying all over sending threats to either to the US.
Speaker 7: I don't think that they run today in a position
Speaker 7: to threaten anyone. They should think very carefully about the
Speaker 7: next steps, what they want to do, what they should do.
Speaker 7: You know, our position was very clear that we had
Speaker 7: the gold in this operation to degrade the capabilities. I
Speaker 7: think we achieved a lot so far. We still have
Speaker 7: more targets, but I think when you look at Iran
Speaker 7: today and you compare it to the last time I
Speaker 7: was here a week ago, it's a different ballgame. They
Speaker 7: don't have those capabilities over the reactors, and I think
Speaker 7: we were able to push back, you know, significantly a
Speaker 7: one more than expected.
Speaker 4: You were here just a little of a week ago,
Speaker 4: the morning after those versus rarely strike started and you
Speaker 4: said it would take days or weeks.
Speaker 8: This operation.
Speaker 4: We heard from the Prime Minister's day Benjaminett and Yahoo
Speaker 4: he said they're very close to completing the goal of
Speaker 4: elimiting the dual threats pallistic missiles and nuclear capabilities.
Speaker 8: Where are we on the timeline?
Speaker 7: So I can also give you exact dates, but I
Speaker 7: think you know the main challenges we had, which were
Speaker 7: the nuclear reactors. You know, with alt of the US
Speaker 7: attack magnificent, you know, the US they had the capabilities
Speaker 7: that we don't have. So on that issue, I can
Speaker 7: tell that we achieved most of what we wanted, but
Speaker 7: still we have the ballistic missiles, which is a major threat.
Speaker 1: To as well.
Speaker 7: It's important to know that we all speak about the
Speaker 7: nuclear threat, but when you have one thousand ballistic missiles
Speaker 7: targeting well, it's a problem. So we took a lot
Speaker 7: of those launchers, but we still have.
Speaker 8: More to go when it comes to nuclear facilities. Though.
Speaker 4: This morning the IDEA said that they went after four
Speaker 4: dough dreances and exits to make sure they were preventing
Speaker 4: the removal of these materials. How do you assess what
Speaker 4: is what around has right now in terms of their
Speaker 4: nuclear capabilities.
Speaker 7: Well, it is a big country and they were hiding
Speaker 7: a lot of the materials and they were trying to
Speaker 7: move stuff. So we cannot guarantee the result. But when
Speaker 7: you look at the infrastructure, at the machine of tale
Speaker 7: that they built, and by the way, they spent hundreds
Speaker 7: of billions over the years, now it's not there. So
Speaker 7: we cannot guarantee one hundred percent result, but we can
Speaker 7: tell they don't have the the actors. It would take
Speaker 7: them decades. Do we build it.
Speaker 1: There is a question about how much regime change is
Speaker 1: part of what Israel is trying to do. We've heard
Speaker 1: President Trump discuss that as well. What's your sense of
Speaker 1: how much that's also one of the aims.
Speaker 7: Well, I can tell you feelings. You know, we all
Speaker 7: wish that they would be a regym change for the
Speaker 7: people of Iran. They're victims of this regime, you know,
Speaker 7: so we pray for that. But the question if it's
Speaker 7: the goal of the operation, I think you know, it's
Speaker 7: not our goal, and we help President Trump also, it's
Speaker 7: very hard to tell the people of Iran what's good
Speaker 7: for them. They should decide, and I hope that they
Speaker 7: will take the right decision.
Speaker 8: They deserve better. You're the ambassador's in that Nations.
Speaker 1: Earlier this year, Israel withdrew from the You and Human
Speaker 1: Rights Council, following the US and doing that. What role
Speaker 1: does the United Nations have to play in some of
Speaker 1: these negotiations at a time where people are wondering about
Speaker 1: its institutional relevance.
Speaker 7: Well, I agree with you that they should think for carefully.
Speaker 7: Yesterday there was an emergency session of the Security Council
Speaker 7: in some countries condemned the US, and they told them,
Speaker 7: where will you or all though the US when they
Speaker 7: reach the UN, you when they build the reactors, now
Speaker 7: you come and you and you condemn Israel in the US.
Speaker 7: So the UN should be much more effective. And basically
Speaker 7: they're allowed Iran to do what they did all those
Speaker 7: the US and I still believe in the UN, but
Speaker 7: I think the UN should be reformed. We expect the
Speaker 7: new US ambassador to arrive soon, and I think that
Speaker 7: together we can change what's happening there.
Speaker 2: There's a line that used earlier in the conversation. You
Speaker 2: reflected on the US capabilities and you said that the
Speaker 2: US has capabilities that we don't have, and it raises
Speaker 2: the question I think makes some people in this country uncomfortable.
Speaker 2: This Israels start an operation knowing that they wouldn't be
Speaker 2: able to complete it without US involvement.
Speaker 7: No, absolutely not, And I said it. I think last
Speaker 7: time I was here, we have the capabilities. It will
Speaker 7: take longer, it would be more painful, but we can
Speaker 7: deal with the threats. So I think what the decision
Speaker 7: of the US was the right decision because now it
Speaker 7: would be a s shorter wall, and I think it's
Speaker 7: much more effective how are.
Speaker 8: You preparing for the retaliation?
Speaker 7: So first we have to acknowledge it's not easy for us.
Speaker 7: You know, the entire country is not functioning today. You know,
Speaker 7: people are not going to walk, people staying next to
Speaker 7: the shelters, and they talk about nine point five million
Speaker 7: people for almost two weeks. It's heavy. But we are
Speaker 7: willing to continue as long as it takes. But we
Speaker 7: believe that we as they said earlier, we achieved most
Speaker 7: of the goals. Now we have a few more things
Speaker 7: we want to take it off.
Speaker 8: And now with are those few more things.
Speaker 7: You know, mainly the ballistic missiles, the industry. You know,
Speaker 7: they built a huge infrastructure to produce ballistic missiles. They
Speaker 7: wanted to compete with the US and Russia and they
Speaker 7: were very close to get there. So we want to
Speaker 7: make sure that it would be very hard for them
Speaker 7: to rebuild those capabilities, these.
Speaker 4: Kind of blistic missiles coming from around and their nuclear program.
Speaker 8: This is the point of the regime.
Speaker 4: Can you decimate their ballistic missile program, their nuclear program.
Speaker 8: Without death mating the regime.
Speaker 7: Well, we hope that they will not have the desire
Speaker 7: after what happened in the last two weeks that they
Speaker 7: will understand that we will be there if they will
Speaker 7: continue with the aspirations to eliminate Israel, it will will
Speaker 7: be there before the attack us. We learn the lessons
Speaker 7: after October seventh, we are not taking any chances.
Speaker 2: Ambassador. We appreciate your time. Once again, thanks for thanking
Speaker 2: the Australian pansador to the un There, Danny Denaud, This
Speaker 2: is the Bloomberg Sevenans podcast, bringing you the best in markets, economics,
Speaker 2: an gio politics. You can watch the show live on
Speaker 2: Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am to nine am Eastern.
Speaker 2: Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else
Speaker 2: you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg Terminal and
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Business Amp