HEATED Debate: Should Donald Trump Have An ICC Arrest Warrant Like Benjamin Netanyahu?

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-31

[00:00:00]Let's look at the there's a kind of asymmetric war going on involving the straight of Hor moves and we've discussed that earlier. There's also an asymmetric war going on in terms of the aspirations and interests of America and Israel. It seems to me where all the mood music coming out of Netanyahu and we saw a bit of it with Naftali Bennett earlier is that they believe this is nowhere near finished this mission that there cannot be any kind of victory until Iran's nuclear capability is destroyed and the enriched uranium has been removed. Now, I don't see that they're anywhere near doing either of those things, and nor is there any incentive right now for Iran to surrender those things voluntarily. Um, so where are we? Because the pressure, as Paul Reichov rightly observed just then, is piling on Donald Trump. I I'm sure from the softening of his own rhetoric in the last few days, he's desperate to get out of this thing, but he doesn't quite know how to. Um and he's got the Israelis saying we cannot just walk away. This job is only half finished.

[00:01:06]>> Yeah, I agree. And uh look, the whole um enrich uh uranium um nuclear program is a is a smokeokc screen. The reality of it is is Israel has wanted uh the regime change in Iran since 79. So is parts of the US government as well. and they're using the nuclear program as a way of trying to uh uh uh basically distract from the real purpose. And that's why, you know, they they went in last year uh and there was a 12-day war and that was called a success by the Israelis and the Americans and we're back to where we were. And and the other massive point is look, we're talking about the the strategy and who might win and who might lose. This was a major international war crime. This was a violation of article two of the UN charter. You can't just attack a country which is not a threat to you and it's not a threat to them. Uh and they should be indicted for it. You know, we've already got the the prime minister of Israel already has an restaurant out from the ICC. Another one should go out to Donald Trump. And I actually think it's a bit uh uh disgusting to talk about the war in these kind in these terms of how how can we open the straightforward blah blah blah. We're talking about a a a major international crime where the Americans and the Israelis killed nearly 200 school girls. It's one of the first acts of the war. And they claimed that it was a mistake, but it might not have even been a mistake. We've seen how the Israelis act. Um we've seen how the Americans act and we've seen what they've done in Gaza, what they've done in Lebanon. They target civilians. They target kids. They want to send the impression that they will tolerate no resistance. So we're dealing with outlaw rogue states that need to be held in check. and the legal institutions can't do it. The ICC and West Frerons have done nothing. In fact, European partners of Israel have not enforced it at all.

[00:02:49]Even members of the ICC. So, where do we go from there? We we live in the law of the jungle now. And I think that you're going to the reason that this will carry on, the reason there's this breach is because they don't even know uh what to do now because they they obviously believed going in hard as you said that Netanyahu uh gave this PowerPoint presentation to Trump and said look the IRGC will collapse if we kill the Ayatollah. It didn't happen. So where do they go now? where this the uprising which they've been trying to ferment by the way for for years and there was a good article in the Israeli press which came out in recent days about how Mossad has been fermenting unrest in Iran and was even involved in the December protests. Um it's not working and as you said they this this uh this criminal attack has actually had the opposite impact. It's got people behind the government in Iran, people who previously weren't because they see that they're being attacked by hostile violent powers that want to take control of their country. Because why is Iran a threat? Iran's a threat because it's not under the control of the United States and Israel. The Gulf dictatorships, many of them are worse than uh the the political situation in Iran. Look at Saudi Arabia. You get put to death for a tweet there. Uh who's the biggest supporters of Saudi Arabia? UK and US.

[00:04:03]So the whole human rights stuff is rubbish. The the uranium is uh nuclear program is rubbish. And look, Pers, I'll end with this. you led the uh charge against the war in Iraq which was based around supposedly based around WMDs that was completely false. So the nuclear deal is the same is part of the same dynamic and look Tulsi Gaba Gabbard who is who was who is the uh director of national intelligence for Trump. She made uh uh um uh testimony in Congress in March 2025 where she said the intelligence community has come to the conclusion that Iran has no nuclear program uh nuclear weapons program.

[00:04:41]That's Tulsi Gabard saying that and then Trump obviously rubbished it a couple of months later. But we we we're we're we live swimming in propaganda and so much of this war is propaganda. The the real reason they are bombing Iran is they want to get rid of a government that does not do what they're told. Okay, Colonel Kemp, I mean there's a lot of people that share a lot of those views about this. You know, my view is slightly more nuanced in that I can understand, you know, for example, when the the Iranian nuclear capability was attacked from the air last summer in that 12-day war, it seemed a very clean, surgical, effective military action with a specific purpose that we were told had been incredibly successful. Part of the failure of trust now is that we were told after that 12-day war, their nuclear capabilities been destroyed. And yet here we were back within just 8 n months launching a full war against Iran to get rid of their nuclear capability which they were about to imminently deploy. And this reminded me of what happened with the Iraq war in 2003, which as editor of a Daily Mirror newspaper in the UK, I very loudly opposed, even though I had my own brother fighting in it uh when it when it started. Um but the reason was I wasn't convinced by the evidence that said that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was about to use them and could hit London in 45 minutes.

[00:06:07]None of which turned out to be true. So those with long memories, you know, are very cynical about this. What would you say to try and reassure people who are cynical that Iran did have the nuclear capability, was about to use it? And how do you explain if that is the case that what happened last summer clearly wasn't a success after all?

[00:06:31]>> Well, I'm not I don't suggest that Iran was about to use a nuclear weapon. I don't think Iran had a nuclear weapon, but it was clearly and I think you know even there are plenty of conspiracy theorists around who say that there is no such thing as an Iranian nuclear program. Well, I think the International Atomic Energy Agency would um disagree with that and has disagreed with that in its reports. Um I don't to my mind all the studying I've done, I have no doubt that Iran was working on a nuclear program and and it's not just me who thinks that. It's not just the West who thinks that, but it's many countries in the Middle East who saw that program in progress and were themselves taking steps to arm themselves against it. For example, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UEE, all of them have been looking at the potential for their own nuclear weapons program in light of what Iran's got. And those people who say, "Oh, yeah, well, Israel's also got nuclear weapons."

[00:07:31]Well, it's it it's it says it it doesn't except that it has, but I think most people agree it has. But none of these countries ever started embarked on their own nuclear weapons program in defense against an Israeli nuclear system. So, it's Iran that's the the threat and that's understood I think by it's certainly understood by the United States administration. It's understood by most of the Gulf states and it's understood of course by Israel. So I think that the reality is that there was a nuclear uh program. It it it was potentially going to become a nuclear weapon that's capable of being delivered certainly around the region and potentially even further a field and it had to be put a stop to. As far as the um as far as the damage done in the 12-day war, I don't think anybody as not no one that I read or heard uh in positions of authority around the US or elsewhere said that uh the 12- day war had completely destroyed Iran's new >> Donald Trump did.

[00:08:31]>> I I maybe he did. I I I didn't see that.

[00:08:35]>> He's he said he had been set back decades. He's the president of the United States. He was the one who basically ordered the strike. So the very most powerful and important person imaginable was the one who publicly declared we have set back Iran's nuclear capability decades. It turns out we hadn't even set it back. But here's my point though, Colonel Kemp. We hadn't, it turned out, even set it back eight months.

[00:08:57]>> And in fact, the threat seems to have worsened according to those who support this war to the degree there had to be an immediate massive strike and a war launched. And I and I find this those two positions extremely inconsistent.

[00:09:12]How can we go from it's been set back decades with this triumphant series of air strikes last summer and now suddenly it's so so perilous and imminent that we have to launch a massive war right now.

[00:09:25]>> Well, set setting it back decades is not the same as destroying it. And the reality is that whatever President Trump may have said, until you actually remove the capability of creating a nuclear program, you can't end it. And and that what that means in reality, Iran Iran, you know, even if you do remove all Iran's nuclear uh sorry, enriched uranium, that doesn't end their program.

[00:09:49]The only thing that I in my view will end an offensive nuclear program by Iran is the removal of this regime. And that of course is what most people desire.

[00:09:59]Most people who are fighting this war anyway desire. It's what Middle Eastern countries desire. It's what Israel, >> right? But that has ceased to be that cease to be one of the aims of the war because they all know it's not happening. And and so so they so they very they have very quickly moved away from talking about regime change. You don't hear anyone from talking about regime change. certainly not on the American side because President Trump knows from his own intelligence people there is no chance of this happening um unless there's a massive commitment of troops on the ground which is politically impossible for him. So I I do think I mean we bring uh Benjamin Rad in here. I mean >> I just say yeah >> I don't think the regime change was a specified objective of the war. It was the desired out >> and it was being talked about on day one again by President Trump >> and you and I say there's no chance of a regime change hap change happening. I don't believe it's going to happen as a result as a direct result of military action but I do believe that within the Iranian regime now both within the political echelon and within the IRGC there is severe fracturing. Now that in turn and Naftali Bennett said he can't predict how long it's going to take for the reg. You said years.

[00:11:13]>> Well, it could take years, but it but it but certainly I think this action will facilitate potential regime change by weakening the regime and causing internal division in the regime.

[00:11:23]>> The trouble is I Okay, let me bring in uh Benjamin Rad. I mean, the the problem is I just don't see the hard evidence this regime has been weakened. I can see they've lost their supreme leader, a lot of their top people, but they seem to have been replaced very quickly. Um the new lot appear to be pretty intrangent, unwilling to do any kind of easy deal that Donald Trump would like them to do.

[00:11:48]And the straight of Hormuse, which is the only really discernable thing we can look at as to whether they have control or not, they are controlling the straight of Hormoose in a way that is causing enormous economic damage the longer it goes on. And I that is unsustainable for the Gulf States, for the United States, for everybody apart from probably Israel who don't care that much about straight of Hormuse, but but they can afford not to. But everybody else who does care is seeing just massive economic hardship.

[00:12:20]>> Yeah. Let me let me touch on several points that have come up. Number one, on the nuclear program, Iran was through last summer a nuclear threshold state, a breakout state. If we divide, if we separate the nuclear program into the weapon side and the enrichment side, uh you want to prevent Iran from enriching urania beyond the 20 19% threshold, which is basically beyond that you're now passing civilian use, medical grade use, energy use, right? You're going into weapons grade territory, 90% being nuclear bomb level. Iran had, it's been proven, it's been shown both by the both by IAEA and uh intelligence sources had exceeded that 20% threshold in violation of the JCPOA or excuse me, in violation of the NPT going back to uh the 1970s when it was first drafted. So then what the United States would target would be Iran's ability to construct a warhead because it's not enough to actually enrich uranium to 90%. You need to then make it small enough and workable so that you can fit it onto a warhead. It's possible the United States set back its warhead production facility capabilities. That we don't know. We haven't received a lot of clarity on that. We need to separate that from its enrichment capability. It can still enrich if it has centrifuges.

[00:13:30]Centrifuges buried under mountains. That is the concern. If your concern is that this is a country that should not go beyond that 20% threshold, no country under the NPT should, then that is a legitimate cause for concern. Is it enough to go to war? I'm not saying it is. But I want to separate the two elements here. Number two be yeah the second part of this becomes again revolutions which is what we're talking about here when we say regime change we're talking about a revolution they happen slowly until they happen quickly you cannot predict the timetable nobody can there's a whole host of factors number one there is an imbalance of arms you have the Iranian people are not armed it wasn't until the sha's army started defecting we started seeing weapons pouring into the hands of civilians we started to see a hesitation on the part of the sha's army and police to shoot the protesters in 1979 that the tide began to turn. We haven't seen that yet. We might not see it, but to say sort of, okay, why hasn't this population risen up? Why haven't they done this? They are genuinely afraid of being mowed down like they were January 7th and 8th earlier of of this year. So, there's all of those concerns at play.

[00:14:34]Now, the straight of Hormuz, that is a card that this regime gets to only play one time. By that I mean it will be a matter of time before the Gulf States, uh, regional allies, the international community, trade, all of this figures out a way to circumn or bypass the chokeold that Iran has on the straight.

[00:14:53]And it is a chokeold that goes both ways, by the way, because if there is a blockade, if there is a if there is a hesitation of of of maritime traffic and trade to come through, it impacts Iran as much as it impacts the U international community. So if we're looking at a war of attrition based on who will capitulate first, I don't think anyone can confidently predict how that will turn out except that I think the international community will develop the means, methods, and resources to eventually figure out a way out of the straight whether it's bypassing through land routes, other routes, and then what does Iran have left? That's why I said it's a card it can play one time and one time only. Then what will it do going forward? So and then your question about the status of the regime, again, there is a lot that we do not know. We know that there's an internal division. We know that the president for example has been bypassed in the power structure completely. We know that you know Kalibah who is a prominent figure the the speaker of parliament has now been marginalized as well. Where is power currently residing? There is disarray.

[00:15:50]There is a a I think a degree of dysfunction that we simply don't hear about. But if you read the Persian press or Persian social media, you catch glimpses of this. You see the infighting, the inconsistent messaging that comes out. That to me signals there's more beneath the surface than we can