Tony Katz & Steve Yates on Iran Moving Houthi's

0:00Why from the heartland and the crossroads of America? It's Tony Katz today. While the focus may be on September 11, you can't take the focus away from the fact that we are in a war. The president may not call it that, or the White House may not call it that, it is what it is. It's a war with Iran. It's a war that I still state we have to win by ending the regime. And now that we're hearing about the possibility of movement at something called pickaxe mountain conversations about what they might be working on next, there is no stopping this regime until they are stopped. They cannot be trusted. What kind of person believes that the Islamist 25 years post September 11 can be trusted. Tony Katz, Tony Katz today, good to be here, good to be with you. Steve Yates joins me right now. He is from the Heritage Foundation Heritage.org. His focus is China policy, but his life has been about world policy geopolitics, including

1:02his time in the Dick Cheney vice president's office. And of course, he was there in the White House on September 11. I was just down the road as a restaurant manager over there on 9th and E and we both have our stories. I want to get to that in just a moment. Let's start with the Iranians funding the Houthi rebels in Yemen. They taking a choke point city called mocha like the coffee, MOCH, they're on the red sea, trying to choke off the red sea and oil exports just like they're trying to do with the Hormuz straight, trying to put more pressure on the United States and the globe on oil prices to get the US to stop the economic siege. That seems to be what they're all about. What is the latest here and how does it get countered? Tony, it's an important angle on things. Just as by way of perspective, the first thing that the Biden administration did after an auguration day in 2021 on foreign policy was to end American arms sales to Saudi Arabia

2:08that were in support of an operation against the Houthis. And that sort of started a cycle where we were in that deficit in terms of capabilities. It's strained an alliance which has never been perfect, but important now in the sense that I think the right approach for the administration to follow is for Saudi Arabia to take the lead in basically mowing the lawn and managing the security affairs on their peninsula, pretty much everywhere that isn't named an Emirate because the Emirates are capable of doing this on their own. And so really what we're seeing is the tentacles of the Iran regime amplifying what terrorists are able to do on the Arabian peninsula at, as you know, a very important key choke point. And as the president has talked about Hormuz becoming strategically less important over time, which is true, this other choke point is still important. And I think that the way forward is maximum support for Saudi Arabia doing whatever is

3:12necessary to eliminate the threat of the Houthis in Yemen. And I think there are ways to do that. They're not overnight solutions. But I don't think that the right approach is for America to expand its operational footprint too much. We have to grow out of the idea of America being the 9-1-1 for every problem, small medium or large in the world. And this falls into that category to me. And that I think is the really astute observation here in that this is the other side of Saudi Arabia. They deal with the ran off of one coast. And Yemen is at the bottom of Saudi Arabia. They're connected by land, but the water at the Gulf of Aden heading into the Red Sea, that is Yemen. It is for other nations to handle. It's clear and obvious what the Iranians are doing. And that's what I want to get into. But this should be for other nations to get involved with, hey, they're affecting how we are able to power ourselves.

4:16So when do those other nations do that? Is it about going to Saudi Arabia and saying, figure this out? Leave us alone. We're doing enough for you. You're welcome, by the way. Or is this for Saudi Arabia to go to Europe and say, get over here and give some assistance? I'm glad you made that latter point. I think both points are valid. But really, it might be one of those times where the United States says, hey, do you want to go together with us to Europe and say, you guys are the ones whose lives depend on this waterway economically and strategically? What are you going to do to make sure that we, the Saudis, are not going to be sanctioned by your sanctimonious leftists for doing what is necessary for you to economically survive against evil that doesn't share any of the values that our civilizations are built upon. And you somehow want to have us fight this with our hands tied behind our back. So whether it's arms sales or staying out of the way when it comes to sanctions and sanctimony

5:19about this Houthi regime, whether it's zero redeeming qualities for what the Houthis are and what they're about. And it's scalable in that the Europeans together with the Saudis ought to be able to make whatever the meaningful difference is for freedom of navigation, but also for peace on that peninsula. Talking to you, Steve Yates of the Heritage Foundation has also got the podcast. Is it Yates on States or is it States of Yates? I love that you bring that up, but it's nation states with Yates rolls off the tongue and has a certain sound quality to it. Yes, I can claim no credit for it because a good friend made the name and I couldn't approve upon it. So it showed my limits of creativity. We actually have an episode that is our latest just saying, hey, let's take 30 minutes and talk about are we at war and just talked about the history of the founders debate when we've officially declared war the way it has largely understood the last time we did that was actually 1942. And what the the the president's authority is the what the Congress did in the Vietnam war

6:24or low points to him in and every president since has largely ignored or challenged the constitutionality of it, but it gets at that fundamental question. So anyone who wants to dial in nation states with Yates, we go into just the simple question of are we at war, but we also have an episode of 9-11, which we can we can talk about later too. We were like podcasting and hopefully getting people to feel empowered to engage these conversations themselves. So they don't have to listen to a bald guy on TV or your radio. They don't know that you're bald. And when I explain you, you are the Fabio on policy experts talking to Steven Yates, Heritage Foundation, nation states with the eights. I just wanted to make sure I gave it. Thank you. The plug that that it is due, but you brought up something about Europe and you brought up these leftists, which immediately sent me, I didn't even have this on the run down to discuss with you the conversation about the United Kingdom and how they decided to engage in these sanctions against Israel for settlements. Now, I should say to you that I'm not somebody who has ever been swayed by the settler argument

7:28or conversation. I don't believe there are such things as settlements. I believe when land is won in a war as it was one in 67, it belongs to the winner. It belongs to the Israelis. I do not believe there is any conversation about whose land it is. Every international list that in the other, I believe, is a bigoted fraud of a conversation. The Golan Heights belongs to Israel. They want it just like California belongs to the United States. It is ours. End of discussion. But what the UK has done here in saying we're going to sanction these business and sanction is because these settlers and going after the Israeli government, it's caused the Israeli government to say, okay, we'll expel this ambassador. We'll expel this consulate. Oh, we might not sell you these medicines that we develop over here in Israel, right? The Israelis pointing at themselves there. And furthermore, maybe we'll work with the United States to get you, the United Kingdom, out of the F-35 strike fighter program. Lord only knows how that's going to affect business and trade, etc. Has the UK never minded I disagree with them?

8:33Has the UK made a strategic error in what they have done under this new Andy Barnum government? Yeah, I think the saying goes, jump the shark. It took me most of my life to understand what the heck that means. I was scared as a young child about the movie, jaws, and why would anyone jump a shark? But basically, the leftist, and it's been a long, slow slide in the United Kingdom. There have been some alleged conservative governments that have contributed to this leftist slide. And of course, there are genuine leftist governments now. And I hope that there's an awakening in the UK like there needs to be and is in some ways in other parts of the world. I say, look, these priorities are completely out of whack. You have the world's formerly most populous nation in China engaged in what is widely recognized as true genocide against a majority Muslim population in their northwest, the Uyghurs. And there are several clothing lines that depend on slave labor, genocide products coming

9:36out of that manufacturing hub. That is where your sanctions and moral eye are ought to be focused, not on settlement goods. And I firmly agree with the idea. I mean, the world is not fair, my grandfather taught me. And it might be that the settlers engage in behavior that I don't want to condone. At the same time, if you are a real country in the real world, you have a minuscule proportion of your national interest and your national economic interest tied in with that. And you're exposed in this other area. And if you won't talk about that other area, I can't take seriously your virtue signal on this other one. And that leaves aside, you know, who wins what? In the world of nation states, war is basically how boundaries have been set for millennia and almost all of human history. And when they're over, that's it. You can lament it. But there is no such thing as stolen land as people say. There's land that has been claimed by tribes and nations, but largely by militaries.

10:42And that's the way boundaries are set. And sometimes they're set by other countries because you're too weak to draw them yourself. But have they hurt themselves? Have they created an issue not necessarily with the Israelis in the United States, which it's possible? Well, we're going to find out. But with other European nations, with other allies, have they created an issue that goes beyond just the economic or is this in your view an isolated case? And then there'll be fine relationships with other nations on other subjects. It's not isolated in the sense that I think the error that's being made here with low politics and low priorities, making higher priority problems, they might be making themselves ineligible for the five eyes intelligence relationship that we have had for decades. They might be making themselves ineligible for sensitive procurement. So as we want countries who have the wherewithal to amp up their military capabilities to do more to defend themselves and to protect their national interests without us having to

11:43do it outsourced for free to them, they are making themselves ineligible for the programs that could help them be leading partners in that kind of an enterprise. So the Australian government faces this challenge, the Canadian government having forbid faces this same problem, maybe even worse. And the UK government basically in the same stew. Does any of this talking to Stephen Yates, the Heritage Foundation, nation states with the eights, that's the podcast, just find it on your favorite podcast platform? Do the Iranians look at this? Remember how we started the conversations and get emboldened and say, well, if they're at each other's throats, this is a good time for us to go about this strategy in Yemen, because after all, we need the pressure on the US to end this economic blockade because it is indeed killing us. Yeah, well, there's a political warfare campaign at a foot. That is nothing new. We seem to be naive and willfully blind to it if you ask me.

12:44And part of it is that America is isolated. Allies are weakened or lack trust in American reliability. I actually think from the Abraham Accords through to this current conflict, we have some major allies in the broader Middle East that are more vested in the alliance with the United States, more vested in partnership and burden sharing with the United States. But when they look at the UK preening on these kinds of issues, they see that they can have maybe a moment of opportunity to buy time, maybe survive, and continue to divide the great Satan from the little Satan and those that have traditionally allied with the great Satan and the little Satan. In fact, if the people are not getting the reference, Israel has been referred to as the little Satan, and it wouldn't exist. And a lot of the territories we talk about fighting over now are really former British

13:44territories. And it's sort of the British Empire is responsible for some of the vestiges of what we deal with. And yet here they are exercising some version of high church that divorces themselves from the realities that they brought to the conversation. The next part of this is as we are watching a ran-try and engage in another front and try and create some division try and show some strength. We also hear about them firing a different level of missile, different capability. My argument has been that when backed into a corner and left with no other choice, they're going to unload whatever it is they can and the things they have held back for a moment just like this. What is it that we believe they have in the back for a moment just like this? Well I think that what they have talked about having and what our intelligence community may have assessed they have is probably an overestimation of what they have. It doesn't mean we should be flippant or callous about what the risks are.

14:46I think they, this theocratic regime, see this as an existential struggle. And while we might toy it with ourselves about is this a regime change effort or not a regime change effort, they see this as an existential struggle. And you don't negotiate your way out of existential struggles. And so it's only going to be ultimate power forcing an end to this theocratic regime. That means either ending them as human beings on this planet or ending that regime as we've known it because the overwhelming pressure has compelled a break in that system and something else comes in that will probably be better but not good necessarily in the near term. But that's sort of the way the imperfect world goes. And so I mean I think that's fundamentally the challenge that people have wanted not to face. I think the president's maximum economic pressure is the right way to responsibly hold things

15:48where they are to episodically use overwhelming power to do what is necessary is also a responsible use. It avoids the Iraq 2.0 boogie man while at the same time say we hear of reports of nuclear programs reviving we can hit those without anyone knowing about it from continental United States and maybe that's what we have to do to mode along over the over the foreseeable future. We're not at what people think of as a ground war because that's not what it is but we are going to engage in what are legally determined to be acts of war to stop the launchers to stop the nuclear sites in their place and then hold the blockade and hold the financial measures in place. And we may have to do that for the foreseeable future but that's not an overwhelming financial or military burden when you think of Vietnam or Iraq or other kinds of things. It's manageable and we should make our allies pay for what we have to do to maintain the

16:51global order in a way that no other power can. We will leave it there this September 11th 25 years later. I appreciate you taking the time. Leave Yates is his name, the Heritage Foundation and of course nation states with the Yates find it on your favorite podcast platform. More is coming up. I'm Tony Katz and this is Tony Katz today.