US-Iran War: Iran's Military Big Claim, 'We Have Humiliated US And Israel' | Top Stories This Week

[00:00:03]Well, the big story today, the US and Iran have agreed to a peace deal which will end the military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon.

[00:00:11]>> Now, the initial announcement from mediator Pakistan was quickly confirmed by Washington and Tehran, and an official signing ceremony has been scheduled now for the 19th of June in Switzerland. In a post on his Truth Social network, the US president said that the Strait of Hormuz would reopen, US naval blockade would be removed after the planned signing of the deal on Friday, apparently contradicting an earlier statement that the crucial waterway would open immediately.

[00:00:37]>> And Trump added that the deal will bring peace and security to the whole region.

[00:00:41]Soon after Iran said that the newly announced agreement with the US puts an immediate end to the country's war.

[00:00:49]>> Now, Iran's deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, in a televised comment said that negotiations for a final deal will be held during a 60-day period, adding that Iran would take its own measures in case of breaches from the other side.

[00:01:06]>> This memorandum of understanding was reached despite our complete distrust of our enemies. We have no trust in the enemy. Our trust lies in our military strength, our diplomatic capabilities, and the support and unity of our own people.

[00:01:23]>> The content of the agreement remains unclear. Iran's Mehr News Agency reported that the US will release $12 billion in frozen assets to Iran before the start of negotiations. It quoted a 14-point memorandum of understanding between the two nations, which it said stipulated the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets during the 60-day negotiation period that begins after the MoU is signed.

[00:01:49]>> Just hours before the deal was announced, Tehran had vowed to retaliate for an Israeli strike on Hezbollah in Beirut's suburbs, a move that threatened to derail the agreement.

[00:01:59]>> Iran's military claimed it had humiliated the United States and Israel in a statement issued after the deal was announced. It said that the two countries, which it described as its enemies, had no option but to accept defeat and surrender.

[00:02:23]>> All right, for more on this, we're now being joined live by Colonel David B.

[00:02:25]Des Roches. He is a professor at the Fair Marshall Institute and former Deputy Director for peacekeeping in the office of the Secretary of Defense.

[00:02:33]Colonel, always a pleasure. Thanks so much for making time.

[00:02:35]Uh I just want to get your assessment.

[00:02:39]The key sticking points, Iran says they want to hold some autonomy over the Strait of Hormuz. Israel says they want to continue fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon. Do you feel the sticking points have been achieved? Have they been resolved? What is leading to this signing on the 19th of June?

[00:02:55]>> Well, um honestly, I'm a little bit confused. I I uh have Iranian interlocutors that I appear with on other networks, and what they're describing is something that I just I can't imagine President Trump has signed up to. I think that there's probably still some substantial difference in how things are interpreted. So, for example, if you look at Lebanon, uh Iran is um kind of compelled by their ideology to say, "Oh, yeah, Lebanon's included in this peace treaty." But, you know, Israel's not a signatory, the state of Lebanon is not a signatory. So, uh I I just don't see how that can uh function. The other thing that I've heard from some of my Iranian interlocutors is that there'll be a gradual opening of the strait, that it takes time for Iran to set up procedures. And, of course, I don't think that's acceptable to President Trump, and it's it's really uh not uh a truthful statement. I mean, um all they have to do is just stop threatening to attack ships that go through the Strait of Hormuz. So, >> [snorts] >> I think there's still a little bit of distance here. Part of this is I think both sides want to portray the other side of as capitulating.

[00:04:04]Um, so, uh, this thing could still fall apart. Uh, and I think that we're more likely to get a general statement of agreement rather than a an implementable truce with terms that are agreed upon and clear guardrails. I think those will still be fought over.

[00:04:19]>> Mhm. Of course, as you mentioned, Colonel, that of course there are sticking points that remains to be resolved and we'll have to wait until Friday to see a fresh memorandum to see what has been resolved. But then even if that signing is done, uh, does it mean that we're actually back to square one?

[00:04:33]We're back to the nuclear talks, we're back to the, um, to the talks on enrichment. So, according to you, is this actually a win for Trump?

[00:04:43]>> Uh, it's it's not an unalloyed win. It's it, you know, I mean, his detractors will say that he, uh, wasted a lot of money, uh, just to get to where, you know, he could have been in 2018.

[00:04:55]Um, Trump's backers will say that the 2018 deal was fatally flawed. Uh, that, um, uh, Iran was probably moving towards the bomb and that this will have, uh, more harsh conditions on Iran, but we honestly don't know. I mean, one one other, uh, sticking point is Iran Iranians have said that they will get 12 billion of their, basically half of their frozen assets immediately.

[00:05:19]President Trump has said all along that he's not going to give money to Iran just for talks, that that there has to be some action there. So, so there's still a lot that is unclear here, a lot that it that has to be defined and I think there's going to be some kind of furious shuttle diplomacy, um, uh, and and, you know, there there may not be a sign. I think it's, you know, there's a good possibility that there won't be a sign, I think, as these issues are are out.

[00:05:46]>> So, you're saying that there is a chance there won't be a signing on the 19th because things can fall apart just in the matter of these next 4 days as well.

[00:05:53]But, then you have that 60-day period when the Strait of Hormuz is gradually to be opened. That's again differing between the two sides. Those assets are to be gradually released to Iran. Again, that's gray between the two sides.

[00:06:06]Israel doesn't want to let up on Hezbollah in Lebanon.

[00:06:09]Uh these next 60 days would be hinged on these next 4 days, which itself seems shaky.

[00:06:16]>> Well, that's perhaps a little bit more negative than I would put it, but yeah.

[00:06:21]I I agree with you in general. I mean, look. Um the United States has said nothing about Israel and Lebanon. Um they clearly don't want Israel and Lebanon to be fighting right now. But, but if President Trump is told by the Israelis, "Look, we've located, you know, the the strike in South Lebanon killed a guy named uh Dakdouk who was a real bad hombre who uh uh executed four uh US Army soldiers in Iraq." Um he's not going to break with Netanyahu over the over, you know, killing a guy like that. And at some point, you know, if Israel uh perceives a threat to their security, they're going to take action.

[00:06:56]They don't care what the United States thinks. So, they'll make it up later. Um they're not parties to this agreement.

[00:07:01]And, you know, Iran will betray them again uh you know, when they when they uh see that they have one of their interests at stake like getting $12 billion frozen assets. Um so, uh there's that. But, you know, I I mean, President Trump uh tweeted out that the the strait will be opened immediately. And the Iranians say, "No, it's going to take time."

[00:07:23]Well, it's it's not going to take time.

[00:07:25]Uh you know, if if if if the Iranians want it open, it could be opened immediately. The 60 days is supposedly to come to a nuclear agreement. And I think Trump's vision is that um as that agreement is implemented, which means uh uranium being down-blended or removed from Iran, then they start to get funds.

[00:07:45]I think the Iranians are expecting to see money immediately upon signature.

[00:07:48]So, there's a lot to be defined here and and you know, it's it's almost like we we have two different narratives that are from two different worlds. So, I I hope for the best, but I honestly don't see it right now.

[00:08:01]>> And also, you mentioned Israel. The involvement of Israel, how do you assess that to be? Because for now, of course, Lebanon is another sticking point that Iran has always focused on. At this moment, the war that was was raised up on on Iran was together with Israel. And now, do you think that Israel will not play any role when it comes to a deal with Iran? Or US is going to ensure that Israel, you need to listen to me when I go to a deal with Iran.

[00:08:27]>> Well, I think I think that Israel has the ability, you know, to I mean, relations between the United States and Israel generally pretty good. So, you know, President Trump calls up, says, "Look, this is a critical moment. I need you guys to back off."

[00:08:40]Um, Israel will probably say, "Fine."

[00:08:41]But, they're not going to do it indefinitely. I mean, Israel is still recovering from the trauma of the October 7th attacks. And they have fantastic intelligence on Hezbollah. If they get a sense that, you know, Hezbollah is massing rockets to fire on northern Israel and make it uninhabitable, they'll take action. And, you know, they're not signatories to this. So, they'll probably do their best to give President Trump a political win, but they're not going to compromise their own security for that. And they define their security and they protect their security in a broader and perhaps some less out of proportion manner than the United States does.

[00:09:21]>> Uh, Colonel, I wanted to ask you, do you see an irony here that this entire war, ever since Feb 28th, eventually led to Iran having an upper hand in the negotiations compared to where they were before Feb 28th? Because Strait of Hormuz is also in play. They're demanding for Lebanon and they're also threatening Bab el-Mandeb.

[00:09:42]>> Well, you know, honestly, I've never heard any American source mention Lebanon. So, I have a feeling that that that is something that the Iranians are doing for their domestic audience, but you know, look, they betrayed Lebanese Hezbollah when they ordered them into action against the Israelis knowing that they were not ready to fight. They have really done next to nothing to to help out Lebanese Hezbollah as the Israelis have been pushing in areas that they haven't occupied since in almost 20 years.

[00:10:11]>> Mhm.

[00:10:11]>> And you know, they'll betray them again when their interests are greater. I mean, you know, Iran, you know, if you go back 3 years, Iran was saying that Hamas was a critical part of the axis of resistance which Lebanese Hezbollah is.

[00:10:26]They haven't mentioned Hamas. So, you know, they they've betrayed Hamas.

[00:10:31]They they will betray again Lebanese Hezbollah.

[00:10:35]The bottom line is these Arab elements of the axis of resistance exist to serve Iranian interests. The Iranians do not compromise on their interests just for the sake of their Arab subordinates.

[00:10:47]>> Mhm.

[00:10:48]>> I want to come to that point because you mentioned Arabs. Considering the fact that a deal is done, how do you see do you see any change in in you know, the region and the diplomacy or militarily?

[00:10:58]Do you see anything any change after a deal is done?

[00:11:02]>> Well, yeah. I mean, first off, um the the attitude of of many of the Gulf states, there's really two camps.

[00:11:12]There's people in the Gulf, there's people in Lebanon. The attitude of the Gulf states had been that Iran was a troublesome neighbor, but that they had to find a way to deal with it. It was sort of like the attitude of some German politicians towards the Soviet Union in the '70s. You know, this idea that you know, we don't like this necessarily, but we got to learn to live with it. So, let's make concessions.

[00:11:35]But, the indiscriminate nature and pre-planned nature of the Iranian attacks on the GCC states, I think have have really There's a tipping point there. You know, the geography is still there. They still have to work with these guys, but you know, their civilian infrastructure was attacked and they had denied US access basing and overflight. So, so they are not viewing Iran It's going to take regime change in Iran and a generation to go back to something like a normal relationship between the Gulf states and Iran. There'll still be interaction, but it will be extremely guarded. When you look at the Levant, what's really interesting here is for the first time you've had direct negotiations between Israel and the Lebanese government. And what that suggests to me is that Israeli military action has so degraded Lebanese Hezbollah that this state within a state is uh uh possibly going to be subsumed by um the Lebanese government and that Lebanon may become a sovereign state again. Uh that is a That is a huge change, but it's going to be one that Israel has a hard time dealing with and and even the United States because we want the Lebanese state to be fully sovereign.

[00:12:44]Um you know, we want to get rid of Lebanese Hezbollah that operates lawlessly and But, at the same time we don't want to see Israel attacked or or an Israeli incursion opposed by the Lebanese forces. So, we're going to have We have some thinking to do there.

[00:12:57]>> I hear you. Let me quickly get one more reaction from you. You visit the Gulf region very frequently. You understand the region very well. You've served there. Do you find or do you foresee US downsizing its West Asia imprint post this war?

[00:13:12]>> No. And and by the way, that's another Iranian demand is that the United States remove from the region. But, look, we're there.

[00:13:19]We didn't have a a significant presence there before the Iranian revolution. And honestly, we didn't have a significant presence before Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait.

[00:13:29]Um, uh we're there in a reactionary base and it's at the request there basically to preserve the sovereignty of some very small countries against, uh, a rapacious, uh, adversary or potential adversary that that views the natural order of these states as being subordinate to them. So, uh, that relationship will be there. It's It's a lot smaller, the numbers are smaller than people think, but they're still substantial and I think our presence, uh, you know, we're not going to negotiate that away. That's where there for the long run.

[00:14:02]>> All right. Uh, Colonel, thanks so much for joining us here on World DNA. Always a pleasure speaking with you. These next four days are going to be very critical as you pointed out as well. We need to wait and watch. There'll be more to discuss. Look forward to having you here with us again.

[00:14:14]>> It's an honor. Thanks for having me.