Trump okays to Netanyahu completing the Gaza Genocide.
22 August 2026, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)
This is one of the many interesting allegations by the retired chief U.S. diplomat, Chas Freeman, in an August 21st interview, the transcript of which will be published below. We start by introducing him.
Wikipedia says of “Chas W. Freeman Jr.” that
He served in the United States Foreign Service, the State and Defense Departments in many different capacities over the course of thirty years.[2] He was the main interpreter for Richard Nixon during his 1972 China visit and served as the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia from 1989 to 1992, where he dealt with the Gulf War.[3]
He is a past president of the Middle East Policy Council, co-chair of the U.S. China Policy Foundation[4] and a Lifetime Director of the Atlantic Council.[5] In February 2009, it was reported that Freeman was then-Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair‘s choice to chair the National Intelligence Council in the Obama administration.[2] After several weeks of criticisms, he withdrew his name from consideration.
On 25 February 2009 (six days after Obama’s choice of Freeman to become the NIC’s Chair), the Israeli Government asset Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal published an Op-Ed against the Freeman nomination, “Obama’s Intelligence Choice: The president picks China apologist and Israel basher to write his intelligence summaries”, which Israel-propaganda-piece opened: “During the presidential campaign, a constant refrain of Barack Obama and other Democratic candidates was that the Bush administration had severely politicized intelligence, resulting in such disasters as the war in Iraq. The irony of course is that, if anything, President Bush badly failed at depoliticizing a CIA that was often hostile to his agenda.” Charles Schumer and Joe Lieberman led Senate Democrats in opposing Freeman’s nomination, which is why Freeman quit trying — both Parties opposed it; so, it had no chance.
n 27 March 2009, Al Jazeera interviewed Freeman, “Riz Khan - Chas Freeman and the Israeli lobby - 26 Mar 09 - Part 2”, and he was asked why the Senate had forced him out; he replied:
(1:15) Well, I think what it revealed uh was a basic intolerance on the part of members of the Senate and the Congress uh um for any viewpoint that didn’t conform to their preconceptions or policy preferences uh, and it raises a question about whether intelligence uh will, is to be sliced diced and stir fried, uh to the taste of the consumer [the President] or whether it is to represent an objective look at the facts. Is it, is intelligence, simply uh ammunition for polemics and uh arguments on behalf of policies that uh uh are already decided, or or is it a guide to policy formulation. I would hope it would be the latter, but the whole incident raises a serious question, question about uh the extent to which uh our intelligence Community will be allowed to be objective. >> Interestingly enough, it was uh the statement from the intelligence Community saying that Iran uh didn’t have the kind of capability, nuclear capability, that uh the Bush Administration seemed to be looking for as as a reason to to take some kind of offensive action against Iran that took the wind out of the sails of the Bush Administration. >> [Freeman nods yes].(2:23)
In other words: the billionaires who place Senators in office require the President to have, as the people who filter ‘reality’ for him, only individuals who are acceptable to those paymasters; and the Senators were simply doing the job that their paymasters had hired them to do.
With that as background, here is Freeman’s latest interview, in which I have boldfacedhighlights:
21 August 2026. Nima Alkorshid interviews the retired chief U.S. Ambassador and Lifetime Director of the Atlantic Council, Charles Freeman
>> Hi everyone. Today is August 21st, 2026 and our dear friend, Ambassador Chas Freeman is here with us. Welcome back, Ambassador. >> Thank you, Nima. Glad to be with you. >> So nice to It’s It’s my pleasure to have you on. And let me, Ambassador, start with one of the latest news from Israel. And yesterday we learned from the Israeli Defense Minister, Israel Katz, he said Erdogan is leading Turkey into dangerous adventures in Syria. Israel will not allow any party to threaten its security. They’re basically talking about the the way that Turkey is moving or bringing new weapons to Syria. And because it was reported on Channel 14 in Israel as well that Turkey has sent another military shipment to Syria. Despite Netanyahu’s warning, which was to attack that part of Syria. They said that they’re building up something. Military build-up is happening in that area. And according to the report on Channel 14 in Israel, Turkey has dispatched a new shipment to Syria including approximately 200 military vehicles among them 20 tanks. The actions come despite Netanyahu’s warning and about Turkish military movement in Syria. This is the new sort of happening in Syria. Not Not It’s not new, but the escalation is new. The attack on the Turkish positions in Syria. Then you see Tom Barrack yesterday said there the administration is somehow concerned about what’s going on there. They have to bring all sides together to talk. But it doesn’t seem that’s happening. And the two sides the Trump administration didn’t show any sort of capability to have diplomatic or you know somehow diplomatic ties or diplomatic talks or maybe some sort of negotiations behind the scene to bring down the tension. Nothing of that sort has been reported so far. >> What is your understanding on the way way the tensions are escalating in Syria which we know two sides don’t like each other at all? >> Well, I think we have to start by recognizing that the Trump administration essentially has disarmed the United States unilaterally in diplomatically. We have no diplomatic capabilities to bring to bear on this situation. Tom Barrack aspires to a regional role but has not been very successful in that. He is a novice at diplomacy. Seems to be quite a capable man but um uh it is after all a profession and uh so I’ll just start with that but I think uh with respect to the situation in Syria it’s pretty obvious what’s happening. First, one of the great achievements that Netanyahu claims uh of his uh many years and in in office in Israel is the disarmament and subjugation of Syria. Basically, he left Syria with no way to defend itself. Uh and although uh it’s run by an ex uh Salafi jihadi uh al-Sharaa, they um uh the Syrian government basically is um uh desperate not to have a a fight with Israel. Uh so it has basically been reduced to an Israeli sphere of influence from the Israeli point of view. The Turks challenged that. Uh they challenge it in terms of their own influence in Damascus, um their role in supporting uh uh al-Sharaa in his um ascent to power. Um they uh they uh exercise influence in Syria now through this the provision of uh military equipment, which would give Syria some minimal capability of defending itself against Israel and thus undo the subjugation that Israelis achieved um with um their profligate bombing of Syria after the uh Assad uh government fell from power. Um So, uh this is all obvious. There’s another element to this, however, and that is that uh there is a sort of bromance between uh President Trump and President Erdogan. And uh the uh this includes the possible uh readmission of Turkey to a role in producing the F-35 and actually acquiring F-35 fighters. Uh Turkey is, of course, building its own uh fifth generation uh jet fighter, the Kaan. Uh but uh that is not easy. Uh these are very complex weapon systems. And Israel is going all-out to prevent that um from happening. Uh so, Israel uh Israel really has generally, you know, any Israeli policy is going to have a heavy information war uh component to it, and I think that’s part of this. Um so, they’re ratcheting up the criticism, uh the alarmism about uh Turkey uh for reasons related to their position in the United States as well as what’s going on in the region. Uh and as you said at the outset and I I I do underscore it, uh the United States is uh has no capability to maneuver in this in this space. Uh let’s look at US-Israeli relations. Uh essentially Israel has defiantly rejected everything that Trump has asked them to do or not to do, as the case might be. Uh we’ve had the sickening spectacle of uh Mr. Trump’s son-in-law uh going to Jared Kushner going to meet with Netanyahu and basically telling Netanyahu he can continue the genocide in Gaza. Uh this happening as uh Ben-Gvir Itamar Ben-Gvir, the Minister of Security, uh says things that are bone-chilling. Uh He We always knew he was a sadist. Now he’s an openly professed mass murderer. Uh and uh so the Trump administration has shown no willingness to rein in Israel in practice. It talks about it. Um but it doesn’t do anything. And that is true also in Lebanon, which Mr. Barak Ambassador Barak is mostly concerned about as a Lebanese-American. Um And it’s true of Syria. Um and so uh I think the prospects that uh there will be an escalation between Syria between Turkey and Israel are real. And we’ll just have to keep watching that space. I don’t think anyone can do anything. Maybe the most the best positioned country to do something um uh is actually Russia. Uh but the Russians have their other concerns at the moment and don’t seem to be very active, either. >> Do you think that Israel would do something I would argue that because the way they’re attacking Lebanon, they they’re attacking Syria and Gaza, there is no limitations to what they’re doing and this attack on Syria on Turkish positions, if we can put it this way, would would bring a new front for the United States, which what which didn’t exist before. How is that going to be perceived? How is that going to be Is that going to be manageable? Do you think that, militarily I’m talking about, because if something happens militarily, they have to respond. You know, put the Turkish government in a position that they they have to respond and that brings a new escalation to what’s going on. >> Well, exactly. I mean, the possibility of of horizontal escalation in the in the region is has always been there, but this is this is very dangerous, indeed. Um uh I think um uh they the Turks don’t want to have a fight with Israel. Uh in part because of they they want to hang on to their relationship with the United States and they know that Israeli uh political power in the United States would be brought uh to bear on them. I don’t think many Americans appreciate uh the strategic importance of Turkey uh and I I just remind everyone that um uh whereas Israel is a liability for the United States, it gets us into trouble and uh causes instability in the region, Turkey is a force for stability, but it is also at the center of uh a vast array of American and other interests. Um you simply cannot conduct a policy toward uh Israel, toward Palestine, toward Syria, toward Lebanon, toward Iraq, toward Iran, uh toward the Caucasus, toward the Black Sea, uh toward uh uh the European Union, NATO, uh Greece, Cyprus, the Balkans, uh the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, uh Central Asia, Afghanistan, uh without uh or for that matter the Arabian Peninsula, without um at least uh the acquiescence of Turkey, if not its cooperation. Uh and um Turkish-American relations uh have been, in my view, largely neglected by Washington, uh which is very risky. Um and when you come down to a crunch like the one that you’re you’re positing, that is um uh Israel Katz, the defense minister of Israel, talking about the unacceptability of any hostile force on Israel’s borders. You know, my when I saw that, I my immediate reaction was, “What borders?” Israel has no agreed borders. Israel is expanding its borders. Should Israel be surprised if it um uh murders and maims other people that they fight back? Uh I suppose it has surprised because so far the only effective opponent it has encountered is Iran. Um you know, Hezbollah in in in Lebanon has done a pretty good job of defending Lebanon, um but it’s uh it has not really gone after Israel on its own. Its actions have been reactive uh and defensive. And now we have uh in the case of Iran, a clear uh change of policy from a purely defensive posture uh to one that will that is open to going on the offensive. What does this mean? Um I think it means a number of things, um One of which is that uh uh if uh if there is a provocation of some serious sort from the United States, Iran may very well strike Israel directly. Uh I think Iran has done a pretty effective job of convincing the Gulf Arabs that they cannot afford in the long run to have American bases on their territory. That those bases are an invitation to attack rather than a defense against it. Uh and of course we have the uh the situation now looking at Iran uh uh where Iran uh does occasionally apparently um strike vessels trying to evade its control of the Strait of Hormuz. Uh there’s talk in Tehran I gather about uh an escalation against the US Navy blockade presence, actually striking the ships. Um which um uh Iran has been pretty careful not to do. It’s made some menacing gestures, but it has not actually struck an aircraft carrier or a major another uh escort vessel. Uh so um we we face the possibility of escalation now not just in the Persian Gulf and against Iran and in the Strait of Hormuz. We’re seeing an escalation in Yemen. Uh or at least the reemergence of Somali piracy as a an adjunct threat to transit of the Bab el Mandeb. Uh and uh you’re quite correct to point to the escalating tensions between Turkey and Israel as it as a danger. Uh so this is not a pretty picture as seldom is, but this is particularly bad. Finally, I note that uh the Treasury Secretary uh Mr. Bessent um is proposing to violate international law with secondary sanctions against American allies and others and uh this at a time when the dollar is quite shaky. Um the bond market is showing signs of nervousness that have not been evident before. Uh and uh I think this is this uh effort by Mr. Bessent um uh to um uh implement Donald Trump’s proposed all-out economic warfare on Iran is very likely to draw uh a rebuff from American allies and to isolate the United States and damage the uh uh the financial credibility of the United States and blow and have and generate blowback rather than support for the Iran policy. So I think um this is all very uh dicey. And I’ll stop here. >> Looking at the policies in Washington vis-a-vis the conflict in the West Asia with Iran is that they were before announcing that Donald Trump and the announcement of Donald Trump yesterday and the day before that they’re going to go all out economically, financially to put pressure, tremendous pressure on Iran. Before that we had a report from Marjorie Taylor Greene what talking about Donald Trump and his administration, they’re talking about the use of nuclear weapons to be used against Iran. And she said in that tweet she said, “I’m not speculating; I know that’s happening.” It means that she has, you know, direct information from someone there who is informing her or some somehow he’s she’s getting the information first hand. What is your understanding of the conflict? Is that Do you see the possibility of having, you know, of having a nuclear war or attacking Iran by nukes? >> Uh well, I certainly hope not, but you can’t rule this out. I mean, there are two factors operating here. One is the slow erosion of the so-called nuclear allergy. That is the recognition um that um the use of nuclear weapons again, of course, the United States is the only country ever to have used them uh against uh a civilian population. Um they uh they There are efforts being made to downgrade the significance of that. People saying, “Well, you know, the firebombing of Tokyo killed a lot more people uh than uh Hiroshima and Nagasaki did.” Maybe that’s true. That’s not the point. Uh those were relatively low yield uh initial initially developed uh nuclear weapons. Um nuclear weapons today are vastly more destructive. Uh and um and so uh what would be What would be the target in Iran? Uh you know, you could make a case for uh a nuclear target nuclear targeting of a nuclear facility that is deep underground on the theory that the only way you could destroy that facility would be with a nuclear strike. But if you do that, you cross the barrier into the use of nuclear weapons as a routine tool of war. Uh and that opens Pandora’s Box. Uh and uh of course, there are those who speculate that Iran has in fact produced a nuclear weapon. I doubt that. Uh but um if you attacked Iran with nuclear weapons and it did have a nuclear weapon, you can be sure it will respond. Um and so uh I think uh the other factor here after aside from the erosion of the nuclear allergy and a tendency now in the military, I think, uh very foolishly to talk about um uh low-yield nuclear tactical nuclear use of nuclear weapons. Um this this is deplorable. Um they’ve actually developed some systems where you can dial down the or dial up the explosive power of uh of a submarine-launched missile. Um Anyway, um the other factor here is the madness of Donald Trump. Uh he is clearly unstable militarily uh mentally, and he has shown a appallingly bad judgment uh on military matters. And he started this war, which is destroying his presidency, uh and uh uh menacing the global economy, uh done huge damage in Iran, uh significant damage to American protected states in the Persian Gulf. Um Great damage to Israel, much more than they’ve admitted. Um uh and with the prospect of further damage. Um His judgment is poor, and that is very clear. And so um could he make a decision to use nuclear weapons? Um I don’t think you can rule that out. Um and um if if he does make such a decision, the next question is, will the US military obey it? Because it would be an act of such folly with such long-range uh strategic consequences. Among other things, inviting nuclear attack on the United States. Uh and here I just I I I want to end by by by pointing out that American policy uh toward uh North Korea has produced a nuclear power with probably 60 warheads capable of striking the United States, South Korea, or Japan. And um this menace did not exist before the inept diplomacy of a series of American administrations beginning with uh the uh Clinton administration. Of which I was part. Um uh which simply didn’t understand the Korean issue and previous dialogue with the North Koreans in the uh George H.W. Bush administration. So, um uh there is reason to be worried. And let’s also note that Israel is a nuclear power uh and it has a record of savagery and indifference to mass slaughter that is completely well documented and in fact being demonstrated as we speak. When you talked about Israel having no boundaries on its behavior, you did not mention the West Bank. And there is a full-scale uh uh pogrom program uh supported by the Israeli Defense Forces uh to drive Palestinians from their homes to seal off uh corridors of contact between the enclaves that have been left to the Palestinians and uh basically to accomplish the purpose of Zionism which is to evict everyone who isn’t Jewish from Palestine. Uh so um you know, this is not a good moment. Um uh there’s a lot of irrationality going on and uh and I don’t think you can rule out the nuclear uh the use of nuclear weapons. And by the way, Marjorie Taylor Greene isn’t the only one hearing this. Um Larry Johnson’s hearing it, too, and other people with uh with ties to the Pentagon are aware of it and I I don’t know if you’ve got uh uh the two Larrys on later today, but I’m sure they have something to say about this. >> No. No. The point of putting pressure on Iran and forcing them by economic and financial pressure is is not This is not something new. The Trump administration did the same in his first administration in 2018, withdrawing from JCPOA and putting tremendous pressure on Iranians. In those days, European decided not to be part of the game, but they stay they stayed aside and they did nothing in to confront that policy. And coming to 2026, what has changed? For example, yesterday we learned China said President Donald Trump’s threat to launch economic warfare on Iran and its trading partners wouldn’t work. They said they’re not going to be part of this. They’re not going to obey you know, participate or cooperate with Donald Trump. We know the same case about Russia, as well. This is a new atmosphere and the whole world has been changing since 2018 that Donald Trump started this economic warfare against Iran. How do you see the capabilities? Are they overestimating their capabilities in Washington or they feel that they can bring them to their knees, Iranians to their knees? >> Uh well, um Iran has been under these sorts of economic pressures from the very outset of the Islamic Republic 47 years ago. And so um this is nothing new. Uh Iran knows how to uh cope with this. Um the very countries you mentioned, Russia and China, have made it made it clear after the uh uh after the uh uh so-called uh uh or the return of sanctions, um what was that called? Snapback. Uh snapback >> Snapback sanctions, yeah. >> They made it very clear they didn’t regard that as a legal decision and wouldn’t cooperate with it. I think um uh of course the situation has changed greatly um in since 2018 the American reputation internationally has suffered grave uh uh discounts. Um Donald Trump is not respected internationally. He’s regarded as a bit of a fool and a dangerous one. Um the role of the dollar has diminished uh in reserves and in trade settlement uh not decisively but significantly. Um And of course obviously Russia and China are not going to accept this uh effort to uh sanction them if that is what is done. Uh I think probably the Chinese would call off their uh Xi Jinping’s visit to Washington if that if that happened, but um uh one can’t be sure. The Chinese are pretty pretty self-controlled uh and they’re out there for their own interests uh and they don’t like to dance to the tune of the United States or anyone else. But, uh quite aside from that, this is a moment when your American allies may break with the United States. You said uh you know, the allies basically uh tried to stay uh separate from the American policy, but they didn’t oppose it. I think they might now oppose it because this absolute does absolutely no good at all. It’s very unlikely to work. Uh that is the judgment of the intelligence agencies in the United States and elsewhere. Uh Iran will resist. It will have support from many countries, not just Russia and China. Uh and we are we are doing this in a context where the United States is conducting uh a blockade in support in effective support of Iran’s own blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. So, United States is helping Iran shut off the world’s oil supply. And the clock is ticking. Uh the storage uh stored oil is being depleted rapidly. Uh they’re talking about uh crises for diesel first, jet fuel next, uh and of course the price of gasoline uh is likely to go up um with huge effects on secondary effects, inflation, consumer angst, uh political opposition, um and uh more soul-searching about the absolute folly of this uh war that Israel uh basically persuaded the United States to launch against Iran. So, um uh what is all this? Um uh it is a it is uh a game of Russian roulette being played by the United States. There may be a gun in the chamber a bullet in the chamber when you pull the trigger next week, I guess. According to Scott Bessent. Um and uh you know, this could be suicidal for the United States in terms of our our our role as the financial hegemon, which is the key to every other aspect of hegemony. Just a final thought, you know, in other words, uh this is really an act of desperation because it it reflects a recognition that there is no military option that has any prospect of doing anything but uh generating Iranian counterstrikes on Israel and other countries. And so there’s no more military option. Uh the fleet that is conducting the blockade is uh tattered, worn out. Uh of course the Abraham Lincoln has been withdrawn, the George Washington has arrived. But en route one of the escort escorting destroyers lost power for 4 days. The wear and tear on American ships and their crews is taking its toll. And the assertion by uh the self-styled Secretary of War, uh Mr. Hegseth, that um the United States can sustain this blockade indefinitely is absolutely false. Uh that is not true and it has no credibility in Tehran. So where are we now? We are in a a situation where both sides are trying to inflict maximum economic and therefore political harm on each other. Um and the question is who’s going to outlast the other. Uh and the answer is Iran holds all the cards. Um because there is a midterm election. There is rising opposition in the United States to this war. Uh there is crazy talk in the United States about things like nuclear weapons. The economic warfare that is proposed is very likely to do more damage to the American position than to the Iranian position for the reasons I’ve mentioned. Uh and uh um Donald Trump is in a box. Um Iran has options. Um but Iran but the United States really doesn’t. Iran, for example, has military options. And if indeed it is on the offensive and the strategy the political strategy of the White House is to keep the Iran issue out of the headlines, then Iran has the ability to launch a strike or two and put Iran back on the headlines uh to the disadvantage of the White House. So, I don’t think this is If this is a game of chicken, uh I don’t think it’s one that the United States can prevail in and uh I say that with some pain uh because it is so foolish of us Americans to have put ourselves in this position, but we did. >> Do you see Donald Trump continuing this conflict? I assume he’s going to continue with the same policies that he had in 2018, 2019, 2020 until the last moment he left his position in Washington. Is that going to be the case because the the straight of war most is somehow is so important strategically that Donald Trump doesn’t want to accept what has happened so far, the reality of what has happened so far. He wants to hand it over to the next administration, maybe whoever that would be. But he doesn’t accept the defeat, you know, or the strategic defeat in this Strait of Hormuz. I’m talking about the Iranian control in this strait, which wasn’t the case before the war started. >> Correct. So, um I think it was Mark Twain who remarked that denial is not only a river in Egypt. Um denial is the typical Trump response to unpalatable realities. He doesn’t adjust to them. He denies they exist. He then invents a narrative to demonstrate their unimportance. And so [clears throat] he’s been having all kinds of conversations and negotiations with imaginary friends in Tehran. Uh you know, uh you have children, they have imaginary friends, don’t they? But usually when you grow up, you don’t you don’t have that anymore. He he has imaginary friends, um everywhere, um in including uh people who are willing to talk to him. Well, you know, we have He just claimed that he’s been in touch with uh Kim Jong-un in North Korea. Uh Kim Jong-un’s sister said, “No, that hasn’t happened.” And um frankly, she has more credibility now than Donald Trump, which is a sad statement to make. Uh so, uh what is he going to do? Um his usual tricks, you know, it didn’t happen, it won’t happen, it’s about to change, I can change I can talk oil prices down and make a lot of money doing it, um and uh you know, all these things, uh this is over. Uh they don’t work anymore. And um so, uh I don’t think um uh Uh, you know, he’s uh and and I would argue that um if the midterm elections go the way I think they’ll go, um he’s going to get impeached for multiple reasons. Not just this, but massive corruption, disregard for the Constitution, illegal actions. Um you know, he’s a megalomaniac and he has behaved accordingly. He has not He himself has said he has no constraints on his behavior other than his own morality, which is nonexistent apparently. So, uh uh Will he change? He hasn’t changed in 80 years. He’s been the same. He still has imaginary friends after 80 years. So, I don’t think he’s going to change. Uh I think, you know, and this is a test and let me, you know, the the tests of the American system, the American system has failed to constrain this man. And will it now fail to constrain the consideration of a nuclear attack on Iran? Will it fail to constrain actions by the Treasury that put the dollar and the position of the United States internationally, uh generally, in grave jeopardy? Will the Will the country stop this? Will Will the Congress do what it is supposed to do? The representatives of the people? Uh Well, we don’t know. I mean, this is a sad moment in American history. >> His What do you make of the way that he’s lashing at the South Koreans? And this is this there is something deeply strange about the Trump administration. One of them appeared firstly with the attack on Oman. He said, “I’m going to attack Oman. I’m going to destroy the country.” The country has been peaceful to each and every party in that region. The Iranians to Americans to all the parties, they tried, you know, the the role in JCPOA, their their significant role on bringing the United States and Iran and together. JCPOA was negotiated, facilitated by the Omani government. And you see in these conf in in this new conflict, he talks this way against two times. He said, “I’m going to bomb Oman.” And again in in putting that together with what he said about South Korea, and he says that what is that? What is is he does he have any sort of a strategy? Does he have any sort of even short-run sort of a strategies? >> No, I think the basic problem is he demands loyalty above everything else. And he provides no loyalty. He provides no no reliable support for those who support him. He’s indifferent to them. Look at his reaction to the the sailors suffering aboard the Abraham Lincoln. You know, he basically had no sympathy. Expect no sympathy with for them at all. He said that they should be deployed for a longer period. No recognition of no empathy, no understanding of other people’s feelings. In the case of Oman, you’re absolutely correct. Oman has been an exemplary diplomatic player of great benefit to the United States on numerous occasions. It was the venue for the JCPOA, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Difficulty, you know, a lengthy negotiation uh Iran uh aided by the Omanis, uh produced what was it, you know, pretty good agreement, um which Donald Trump destroyed. I think he probably wishes he hadn’t done that if he’s serious. Um and um so to threaten Oman with bombing is uh an act of pique. It is uh not a serious uh thing. It is a petulant uh threat uh from a man who does not have control of himself and is unwilling to accept uh reality. I think the case of Korea is a little different. Um uh he um I I think correctly um uh made an effort It was a not an effective effort. It was inept and it was sabotaged by some of his own uh assistants. Uh he made an effort to reach out to Pyongyang. Uh basically, uh uh I think there’s a you know, it’s usually better to be talking to people than not talking. Sometimes not talking to them is a form of negotiation. Uh but generally speaking, um it’s better to be talking to them. But of course, if you talk to people, you have to know what you’re going to say. And he really doesn’t. Uh he just makes it up. Uh so his uh initial opening to Kim Jong-un, uh dramatic as it was, uh went nowhere. Um and uh I think um the latest uh imaginative, maybe fictitious, effort to reach out to North Korea uh is a des- an act of desperation to seize some sort of legacy from the debacle that his foreign policy has created. I mean, here is a man who came into office um promising to all not not to start new uh new forever wars. Uh he would solve the Ukraine issue in 24 hours. Five years into it, it’s uh still going on. Um uh with Russia slowly advancing and Ukraine escalating against Russia with producing counter escalations from the Russians. This is not an uh uh not an inspiring uh the uh Witkoff and Kushner have in that context showed themselves to be uh amateur and ineffective. Um uh Look at what happened in Gaza. Um uh we have uh we have an ongoing genocide. It’s not stopped. Um Donald Trump came up with a real estate scheme uh to solve this. I mean, building a resort on top of dead Palestinians. Um uh This is macabre. He’s done nothing to rein in Israel on Lebanon. Uh he’s done nothing to halt the carnage in the West Bank. Uh he may complain. He may complain about uh uh or worry about the Turkish-Syrian contest in Syria that you opened by mentioning but um he’s done nothing about that. Uh he fell for Netanyahu’s and David Barnea, the head of Mossad’s blandishments about Iran and attacked Iran with a disastrous effects on the American military uh posture generally and globally um with a tremendous loss of credibility for uh for the military, the US military, and and for an ongoing threat to the well-being of the United States. You know, there’s uh uh And of course, uh uh creating a wartime atmosphere, feeding the warfare state, has greatly eroded the civil liberties and the democracy of Americans. So, uh this is not a record uh that he can go leave office being proud about. So, he reaches out to North Korea. At least I I can I can maybe I can resurrect that uh that diplomatic achievement, he thinks. Uh well, the North Koreans don’t seem to be interested. I mean, they’ve had their experience with him, and they judge him not to be as the French say, “sérieux.” Not serious. Not a serious interlocutor. So, this is thrashing around by someone who’s drowning politically. >> Here is what Foreign Minister of Syria said just moments ago. Is Syria is considering whether to join the Mecca joint defense agreement between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, and has not yet made a decision. And I think that would be something different. I don’t know how is that going to change the whole atmosphere in Syria. But it’s going to be a new move on the part of the Turkish government. >> No, I think about it in historical terms, you know, I was ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War to liberate Kuwait from Iraq, uh from Saddam, and um uh I remember very well the Syrians were part of the Saudi coalition uh that attacked uh Iraq to liberate uh liberate Kuwait, um uh they were they were uh part of the proposed post-war uh regional order. Uh that was basically undone by the Israel lobby in the United States, which and the Israelis who um uh who refused to um basically did not reach an agreement with Syria on a variety of issues, including the Golan Heights border uh where it approaches the Sea of Galilee. Anyway, um that’s all history. Um but Syria um you know, Syria is a is a very interesting country and it is now under Sunni Salafi [jihadist] control. Uh Syria is a multi-religious society with many branches of Shi’ism, uh you know, Druze, Alawites, and so on, and and more conventional Shi’a. And um but um it uh it has an affinity with the uh with the uh Sunni uh uh domination of the uh uh Pakistan-Saudi-Turkey uh entente. Um and Israel would be alarmed and very alarmed if Syria were actually to join that grouping. Uh so it’s uh this is obviously a threat by the foreign minister, which is meant to answer Israel Katz’s uh statements about uh uh holding on to things in Syria and so on. There’s actually there’ve been pictures just the last couple of days of uh the head of the Israeli armed forces, uh the prime minister, the defense minister, and so on, in Syria. And the fact that nobody regards this as peculiar is is itself peculiar. Syria is an independent state, supposedly. It’s being treated by Israel as uh an extension of Israeli sovereignty. Uh so, uh yeah, I see this as a um diplomatic uh uh warning to Israel that if you push too hard, we have options. Um and uh uh whether they actually have those options or not is another question, but um this this this is not a trifling matter at all. >> Here is what he said about the Foreign Minister of Syria said. He said Israel is seeking not to give not to give space to Syria to have stability in the country or to rebuild the country. And he was asked about whether Syria would accept Pakistani mediation to restore relations with Iran. And the Foreign Minister said that no such initiative was proposed during his visit to Islamabad, but left open the possibility of future talks. >> Yeah, in the end, everybody in the region, as you and I have discussed before, uh has is setting aside uh religious identity and pursuing national interests. And the national interest of Syria is to reconstitute itself uh as a a state capable of defending itself. And if you can’t do that on its own, it has to do it with the support of others. And then there’s the question of whether uh the Turks, the Pakistanis, and the Saudis would be willing to join in that is an interesting one. I think other Gulf Arabs uh who who have ties to Syria, historic ties to Syria, uh might well see this as an important and useful development. But we’re a long way from it. Um uh and you know, I think this also gets to the question um that we’ve discussed before, for which we have no answer. And that is okay, you have a Pakistan, Saudi, Turkish uh, entente, a tripartite entente to which others are invited, maybe invited to join. Perhaps Syria, perhaps Iraq, perhaps others, who knows. Um, but uh, what is the relationship of this grouping to Iran? Uh, it is obviously intended uh, to do several things. First, it is a statement that the these countries are no longer reliant on the United States. They need to chart their own destiny. And they need self-reliance, uh, not reliance on a foreign patron. Uh, that is a success for Iranian uh, diplomacy, which um, Iran has openly declared, um, to be a success. Um, but it is also a counter to Israel, which is the source of instability in the region, uh, which is expansionist, which has no borders. Normally, a state is defined by its borders. Israel has none. Uh, Israel feels entitled to uh, take everything from the Nile to the Euphrates, as that patch on the shoulders of some Israeli uh, soldiers indicates, and the map in the Knesset indicates. And so, um, of course, Israel is generating a uh, a counter to itself. But what is the relationship of that counter to Iran? Uh, would, um, would, um, uh, you know, it’s entirely possible that they’re this is an entente, it’s not an alliance in the sense of NATO. There’s no uh, command in, you know, in somewhere in the Persian Gulf that coordinates all three armies. Um, uh, they’re not there won’t be. But, there it is a a relationship which invites consultation. So, it it just as you’ve had this, um, uh, quadripartite consultation including Egypt with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, uh, uh, dealing with, um, uh, dealing with, uh, the regional issues, uh, uh, now, uh, uh, you could have a consult consultative relationship with Tehran. Uh, no, uh, actually not Tehran coming in as a member of this entente, but as a dialogue partner, as a coordinator. Uh, and that ought to scare the uh, living daylights out of the Israelis. Because that is an effective counter to their, uh, to their, uh, expansionism. Iran has shown the ability to maul Israel. And it can do it again. Uh, Turkey has that capability, but it has not demonstrated it. Uh, so, this is, um, this is a sign of the times. Uh, capitals in the region, whether they’re Riyadh or Damascus or, for that matter, Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, uh, uh, are all pursuing their, uh, what they regard as their interests without regard to foreign advice. Uh, that is a declaration of independence for the region. And that is very important, and that is why, um, I use the phrase West Asia to describe the the region, not the Middle East. Because the Middle East defines the region in terms of its relationship with, in that case, the United States. Um, the Near East is a declaration, uh, defining the region in terms of its relationship to Europe. Um, so, now West Asia is a term defining the region in its own terms, uh, as a thing in itself and that is exactly what is emerging. And uh some people in the region don’t like that. But tant pis as they say in French, you know, too bad. It’s happening. >> Ambassador, there is something big going on in the region to my understanding. Why? Because looking at the war in Gaza, whoever their people arguing that the Israel is capturing the West Bank and destroying Gaza. They want to capture 70% 100% of Gaza. But they don’t understand to my understanding what has happened so far, they have unified all Muslim world. Because of what is happening in Gaza, they unified they brought all of them together. It doesn’t mean that they’re going to be as you mentioned going to be in NATO allies or something of that sort. But Israel has defined them as two sources of problems. Shia and Sunni or maybe the axis of resistance and the Sunni front as they call it or Muslim Brotherhood. This is the way that Israel sees the conflict. I see the signs in Iran that they’re talking about improving the relationship with Syria if Syria is willing to end the occupation of the southern part of Syria. >> Sure. And you know, as I said, you know, I think the re-question of religious identity which has been a been a a feature of uh societies in the region for a long time. For example, the Saudis as an answer to Arab nationalism as promoted by Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, they proclaimed themselves to be an Islamic have an Islamic identity. That is the origin of that. When the Islamic Revolution in Iran happened, um they were very scared because uh they thought, well, maybe that could happen in Saudi Arabia. Uh because uh you know, I I remember when I arrived in Riyadh as ambassador in 1989, uh going to visit um an opera house that King Fahd had commissioned. Um it was a spectacular. Uh it had uh elevators to take two elephants onto the stage to stage Aida, the opera. Uh and of course it was closed. Why? Because it was too at odds with Salafi Islam. So, the Iranian Revolution had the effect of reinforcing the religious identity, the Sunni religious identity in Saudi Arabia. All that’s gone now. I mean, uh Saudi Arabia is not the Saudi Arabia that I served in. Uh gender apartheid has been eroded. Um not completely eliminated, but eroded. Um uh the rights of women have been recognized to an extent that would have been unthinkable. Um there are music, which was outlawed, is now there are now rock concerts. Um uh you know, you can be cynical about this and say that uh Mohammed bin Salman has provided bread and circuses for the for the people. Uh but the fact is he’s changed the country fundamentally and downgraded the grip of uh of uh religious extremism on that country. Same thing is happening in Iran as a result of the war. Uh Iran is now uh much more under the control of the IRGC uh as a military institution uh than it is uh under the control of uh of the religious authorities. Uh and uh you know, if indeed Mojtaba Khamenei, I mean, hey, is uh, seriously injured as we imagine he is, uh, also hiding from Israeli assassins, um, then uh, the trend in Iran is not going to be interrupted. Uh, Iran is going to continue to become less religiously driven, more driven by national interests as uh, the Iranian military see it and the intelligence agencies. So, uh, that’s happening everywhere in the region and if you don’t recognize that and you continue to see the the region through the optic of of uh, religious differences between uh, Shia and Sunni, this is uh, going to mislead you greatly. Of course, the irony is that uh, Judaism went to Israel to Palestine to die. Uh, statements like the ones that Ben-Gvir makes, uh, that some rabbis, you know, there’s a rabbi in Israel who was saying, you know, Christians should thank Jews for having killed Jesus. “We did it,” he said. “You should thank us.” Um, you know, this is a kind of uh, talk that is totally incompatible with Judaism as it is practiced outside Israel. So, Zionism bears less and less resemblance to it. It is the equivalent of Daesh [ISIS] to Islam. The Islamic State is the Islamic version of Zionism. And um, and and this is just totally unacceptable to the world. The question is, when will the world have the guts to do something about it? Uh, and you know, if Israel keeps misbehaving, we will find out. >> Yeah. Thank you so much Ambassador for being with us today. Great pleasure as always. >> Grim circumstances. But, thank you for what you do. >> Thank you. >> [music]
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten