Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: Stunning events over the weekend America's attack on around years
Speaker 2: in the banking a snow thirty six sound long operation
Speaker 2: named Midnight Hammer. Pilots dropped some of the largest bombs
Speaker 2: in their arsenal on Iranian nuclear facilities. Joining us now
Speaker 2: to discuss is the former US Defense Secretary Marc Hesper
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 3: Well, good morning. Look, it was clearly successful in terms
Speaker 3: of the execution. Our aircraft were able to make it
Speaker 3: in drop what fourteen GBU fifty seven's, the submarines launched
Speaker 3: Ta lambs from offshore. We were in out with impunity.
Speaker 3: Nobody was hurt, and I just I think it speaks
Speaker 3: to the skill and professionalism of the United States military.
Speaker 3: And now I think what we have to do is
Speaker 3: two things. First of all, get a good battle. Damage
Speaker 3: assessment will take a few days and maybe even then
Speaker 3: will be incomplete until we get inspectors on the ground.
Speaker 3: And then secondly, we're all waiting to see what Iran's
Speaker 3: response will be and there are various predictions you guys
Speaker 3: have been talking about it what they may or may
Speaker 3: 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 3: Yeah, Look, I think there are a range of things
Speaker 3: they could do, you know, were they could first of all,
Speaker 3: use Shia militia groups in Iraq to target our people
Speaker 3: and facilities there. Secondly, much like they did during my
Speaker 3: time in early twenty twenty, they could launch Asavov missiles
Speaker 3: against US forces in the Middle East, and there are
Speaker 3: a couple dozen bases there with over forty thousand US
Speaker 3: service members that they could go after. Third, there could
Speaker 3: be sales here in the United States and globally. Or
Speaker 3: they can go against American officials as they did a
Speaker 3: couple of years ago and try that. And then they
Speaker 3: could go after shipping in the straight of hor moves,
Speaker 3: which I think is unlikely. But to me, those are
Speaker 3: the range of outcomes that they may pursue here in
Speaker 3: 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 3: Yeah? I think what they have to do is calibrate
Speaker 3: this so that they do enough for domestic consumption, feel
Speaker 3: like they've satisfied the military, they've struck back. Tell the
Speaker 3: Iranian people they struck back, but not so much that
Speaker 3: President Trump really upset anti climbs that escalation ladder and
Speaker 3: really hits them back fairly hard. Within hours of the
Speaker 3: missile strikes at Eli Saud, we had Iranians on the
Speaker 3: phone privately reaching out to us saying they were done,
Speaker 3: they had no more, they wanted to stop fighting, et cetera.
Speaker 3: And that was, of course long before we knew that
Speaker 3: American service members suffer concussions and TBI. But nonetheless, they'll
Speaker 3: do a lot of backschilling because they look they can't
Speaker 3: go much further. This is they're being dismantled, their leadership,
Speaker 3: certainly the military side is being taken apart. Their nuclear
Speaker 3: sites have been pummeled, and so the question is how long,
Speaker 3: how 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 eighties,
Speaker 4: and he has no access even to electronic communication.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Look, that's the big question is who's in charge,
Speaker 3: how complete, how effective is the chain of command right now?
Speaker 3: Are there instructions left behind to the IRGC or to
Speaker 3: the missile forces to launch attacks that may may explain
Speaker 3: why they haven't responded here in the twenty four to
Speaker 3: thirty six hours since the US strikes on FDA, NA
Speaker 3: 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 3: Yeah, look, you bring up a good point that I
Speaker 3: was going to raise. There's still nine hundred pounds of
Speaker 3: sixty percent enriched uranium that's fairly close to what they
Speaker 3: would need for ten nuclear weapons. Out there that we
Speaker 3: don't have control. We don't know where it is. The
Speaker 3: IE doesn't know where it is, so first of all,
Speaker 3: we have to track that down. Secondly, we don't know
Speaker 3: to what degree the Iranian infrastructure has been destroyed, and
Speaker 3: even if it has, it's just a matter of time
Speaker 3: before they rebuild. Now that at this point probably looks
Speaker 3: more like years than anything else than months. But nonetheless,
Speaker 3: until there is a fundamental change in the ambitions of
Speaker 3: the regime or a fundamental change in the regime itself,
Speaker 3: this is likely an ambition that will grow back over time,
Speaker 3: arguably more energized than before because of what has happened
Speaker 3: here 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 chig now showing what the US
Speaker 1: military can do and is willing to do in the
Speaker 1: phase of some sort of red line that gets crossed.
Speaker 1: Do you see it that way or do you see
Speaker 1: other nations and seeing the need to become nuclear or
Speaker 1: having some sort of deterrent that really takes this potential
Speaker 1: outcome off the table.
Speaker 3: You know, deterrence is based on two things, capability and will.
Speaker 3: And I think everybody's understood the United States military has
Speaker 3: the capability to do a lot of things. I don't
Speaker 3: think anybody ever doubted we could do what we did
Speaker 3: with regard to B two stealth bombers entering Iranian airspace
Speaker 3: and dropping these bunker busters. I think what is different
Speaker 3: here is President Trump has shown the willingness to do
Speaker 3: it despite domestic voices coming from both the right and
Speaker 3: left saying he shouldn't do it. So I think in
Speaker 3: this regard it's more of his willingness to take action,
Speaker 3: which probably caught Russia's and Beijing's attention.
Speaker 2: Well, this is one criticism of the previous administration. As
Speaker 2: you know, miss the Secretary, the fibiets provide a satisfactory
Speaker 2: defterance 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 straight of Hormos. Can you
Speaker 2: just share with us what you learn about the best
Speaker 2: way to provide it to terrence and to prevent the
Speaker 2: disruption of those waterways.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Well, look, I think sending a clear message first ball
Speaker 3: is important. But secondly, and I say this in light
Speaker 3: of the fact that the Iranian Parliament yesterday voted that
Speaker 3: Iran should close the Straight of Horror moves. I think
Speaker 3: there's going to be a good argument if they strike
Speaker 3: back to take out the Iranian navy, particularly those elements
Speaker 3: of the navy that could shut down or obstruct or
Speaker 3: hijack shipping in the Straight of Horn moves. So you
Speaker 3: could sink the mind layers of the navy. You could
Speaker 3: go after the swarm boats that tend to come up
Speaker 3: upon cargo tankers and take them ashore. You could knock
Speaker 3: out Iranian missile batteries on the coastline. So I think
Speaker 3: to me that would be the top of my list.
Speaker 3: If Iran tries to shut down the Straight or takes
Speaker 3: more aggressive action, beat it to take that card out
Speaker 3: of their hand. Because everybody is concerned about shutting down
Speaker 3: the Straight of Horror moves, and yet even though we
Speaker 3: fly in the face of their own interests, they continue to.
Speaker 2: Threaten that difficult to answer the next question, sir, But
Speaker 2: just to final 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 3: I think it's to be determined based on how Iran responds.
Speaker 3: I think President Trump's instincts have long been since the
Speaker 3: time I work with him. He does not want to
Speaker 3: get involved in wars. He doesn't want this to go
Speaker 3: on and on and on. I think if Iran shoots
Speaker 3: missiles and they're largely effectless, I think we stand back.
Speaker 3: We probably continue to support the Israelis with munition and
Speaker 3: intelligence and defensive air defense capabilities. But I think in
Speaker 3: terms of continuing strikes, we probably step back at that
Speaker 3: time and then urge and negotiation. By the way, a
Speaker 3: negotiation between Iran and Israel that's going to have to
Speaker 3: include a return to the non proliferation regime and inspectors
Speaker 3: and verification mechanisms on the ground in Iran. That's absolutely critical.
Speaker 2: A deeply thoughtful conversation, sir, and we appreciate your time.
Speaker 2: The former US Defense Secretary Mark Esper