Trump Administration in Chaos Over Iran War Plans

0:00Welcome to Navarra Live. Coming up tonight, it's become increasingly clear that Donald Trump has no real plan for the war on Iran, but we speak to Middle East expert Valinast on how Iran's response has surprised the world. Reform UK can't get its story straight, and will discuss why Israel's propaganda machine has been unusually quiet. I'm Aaron Bistani, and I'm joined tonight by Karen Andrade Kiran. How are you? How's your week been? He's been probably that most of our viewers and listeners, and certainly like you, are in completely consumed by the news. We're probably going to have to put bunk beds in this studio at some point soon. I look forward to it. There was a great line, I saw an ex saying that we used to call him sleepy Joe because traders could sleep. So we're not the only ones who are constantly keeping up with the news. If you'd like to support our work here at Navarra Media, you can of course sign up at NavarraMedia.com forward slash support, big long show tonight.

1:03I hope you'll stay with us for a little bit, probably an hour and a half. Usually, these are an hour. This is going to take a little bit more attention from you guys, and it's taken a lot of work from us, more support, more preparation over time for our crew here at Navarra Media. If you like what we're doing with this show, if you want to support our work while we go this extra mile during this really important story with Israel and the United States illegal war on Iran, you know what to do. Click the link in the description below. That's NavarraMedia.com forward slash support. Last week, we've got 100 new supporters. We're doing something really unique in British media. I think we're going to break our record for the most views in a month this month. We've had 10 million views already in March. You can also listen to the show on Spotify and Apple podcasts, and don't forget to let us know what you think in the comments below. Let's go to our first story tonight. It's been apparent from the beginning of the illegal US-Israeli war on Iran that President

2:05Donald Trump has no real plan, and the goals of the war have shifted on almost daily basis. First, it was regime change, then it was destroying Iran's nuclear program, then it was eliminating their ballistic missiles. Obviously, 11 days in, this war has achieved none of the above. But if you think the messaging was mixed before, on Monday, the White House managed to put out at least three different plans in the space of just a few hours. It began on Monday afternoon, when CBS published this. Trump says the war is very complete, reporting a phone call she had with Trump. The Asia-Jang of CBS said he considers the war almost over, and at a US takeover of the Strait of Hormuz was being considered. This was the full quote from Trump. I think the war is very complete. Pretty much, Iran has no navy, no communications, they've got no air force.

3:05Their missiles are down to a scatter. Their drones are being blown up all over the place, including their manufacturing of drones. Now CBS published that interview around 3pm local time. Earlier that day, markets had responded pretty badly to Israel bombing oil depots around Tehran, with oil prices surging to almost $120 per barrel. That was their highest price since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Share prices also took a tumble, with the markets spooked by the prospects of high inflation and economic disruption. The US officials have said to have been pretty annoyed by the Israeli oil strikes, with one Israeli official saying the message they'd received from the US was WTF, what the F. For people not familiar with acronyms in the 21st century. But Trump's comments to CBS appear to calm at least temporarily, the markets troubled water. By the close of play in the United States, the oil price had dropped to well under $90

4:08per barrel, still pretty high, but something over recovery. And stocks had also recovered. Now, Trump's message may have bolstered the markets, but it was directly contradicted by his Department of War. They posted this online. We have only just begun to fight. Hours later, however, Trump held a press conference where he seemed to endorse a contradiction. Mr. President, you've said the war is, quote, very complete, but your defense secretary says, this is just the beginning. So which is it and how long should Americans be working on this? Well, I think you could say it both. The beginning. It's the beginning of building a new country, but they certainly, they have no Navy, they have no Air Force, they have no anti-aircraft equipment. It's all been blown up. They have no radar, they have no telecommunications, and they have no leadership. It's all gone. So you could look at that statement, we could call it a tremendous success right now, as

5:09we leave here, I could call it, or we could go further, and we're going to go further. We could call it a tremendous success right now. I don't think the Iranians that want regime change, you're cheering your name, would agree, but anyway, we'll talk about that more later. So what Trump's saying is that this is the end of the war from the point of the view of degrading the Iranian military, but the start of the war, if the U.S. wants to do something like state building. Once again, the country's Department of War appeared to disagree with Secretary for War, Pete Hankseth, holding a press conference this morning. It's a laser-focused, maximum authority mission delivered with overwhelming and unrelenting precision. No hesitation, no half measures, as President Trump declared yesterday. We're crushing the enemy in an overwhelming display of technical skill and military force. We will not relent until the enemy is totally and decisively defeated.

6:09But we do so, we do so on our timeline and at our choosing. For example, today will be yet again our most intense day of strikes inside Iran. The most fighters, the most farmers, the most strikes, intelligence, more refined and better than ever. Either Iran is completely crushed, or it isn't, either the war's aims have been met or they haven't, which is it? Of course, the Trump administration isn't just playing the markets and its base, they also have a partner in this war, Israel. And they may not be happy with the suggestion that it's Trump and Trump alone who'll decide when the war ends. Speaking to the telegraph, the former head of Israel's National Security Council said this. If Trump decides at some point that the time has come to end the war while the key threats are unresolved, that would put Israel in an uncomfortable position. If he did so without the key undertakings, that would give the Iranian regime a huge boost

7:11of confidence and problems will persist into the future. Iran has also said the timing of the end of the war is not up to Trump, with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the RGC, the saying this. It is we who will determine the end of the war, the equations and future status of the region are now in the hands of armed forces, American forces will not end the war. Of course, the whole world is at the mercy of these decisions. The Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world's supply of both petroleum and natural gas, passes from the Gulf, remains closed, with only two ships having braved the passage since last Friday. Normally, 140 would pass through each day, on average, through that tiny slither of space of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. That puts mounting global economic pressure on Trump to end the war, and he's not happy about it, posting this on true social. If Iran does anything that stops the flow of oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they already

8:14are. They will be hit harder by the United States for America, 20 times harder than they have been hit thus far. Additionally, we will take out easily-destroying targets that will make it virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back as a nation. Again, death, fire and fury will reign upon them. But I hope and pray that it does not happen. This is a gift from the United States of America to China. And all those nations that heavily use the Hormuz Strait, hopefully it is a gesture that will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your attention to this matter, President Donald J. Trump. Who says this guy is senile? Who says this guy who's 80 in June or July? At some point this summer is suffering from cognitive decline. If Joe Biden was publishing posts on social media, that incoherent during his presidency, every single slop right when podcaster would be using those terms. But of course they don't, because it's their guy.

9:15It's Donald J. Trump. Iran's caretaker leader, Ali Larajani, who's also the Security Council Secretary, said this in response. The assurer-loving nation of Iran is not fear your paper threats. Even though it's greater than you could not eliminate the Iranian nation. Watch out for yourself, lest you be eliminated. The Straits of Hormuz will either be a strait of peace and prosperity for all or will be a strait of defeat and suffering for war mongers. Kiran, I hear Hexeth, a TV guy, by the way. He's so certain and he's so clear and it's all strategic communications, you know. Real certainty and emphasis, and eagerness, and he's on top of the messaging. He sounds almost too confident, and I get the sense also with Trump. They've clearly come down on the Iranians like a ton of bricks, they're saying we've destroyed your military, but we're now going to increase the potential destruction 20 fold. Unless you're going to use a nuclear weapon, I don't even know what that means.

10:18What do you make of this strange juxtaposition of changing the mission, changing what apparently has happened, and almost two weeks since this thing, using increasingly violent language? So I'll come to the reason why I think that's the case at the moment, but nothing that anybody says is bankable. What's really remarkable about this, and actually it's a rupture with Trump's first administration, you have to say, is that nothing anybody says is bankable, you can't trust anybody, and I think it's because they don't trust themselves. Everything is written in disappearing ink, and all of the firm statements are as firm as waterfront kites as things turn out. Israel says one thing, the United States says another, Hegseth says one thing, Trump says another, I think it's obvious genuine chaos. It's not chaos as a war strategy, as a form of fog of war, keep them guessing, keep them

11:18confused. It's genuine internal chaos, and I think it's for three main reasons. Number one, they massively and faithfully underestimated the Iranians. They underestimated the stockpile of ballistic missiles that Iran had, and I think crucially, they underestimated the degree to which those missiles were fortified under fortified geology. I mean, it sounds quite dirty, but it's part of this equation. They also underestimated the degree to which martyrdom is given the premium ill-shear Islam. I think they underestimated the degree to which Iran was willing to sit back, take its beating, and basically just fire out its ballistic missiles, raise the costs across the region, right? So that's the first thing. They faithfully underestimated the Iran, now they have to double down, which means becoming increasingly more violent. The second thing is they overestimated the degree to which they could control the narrative back home.

12:20They overestimated the degree to which Trump was and is the political weathermaker on the American right. And yeah, it's true. You can see why they overestimated that because to a degree, to a large degree, he has been. But this war was never popular with the American right, even the American right. It was never really very popular, and it's going to get a hell of a lot less popular if more and more American serviced people come back in body bags, say that. And then third, and these are all linked. This is all happening because of a lack of experience in Trump's administration. In Trump number, in Trump part one, there were people like Mike Pompeo, Mike Peltz, Rex Tillerson, people from the business world, the security world, Washington Hacks, with a lot of experience. In Trump the sequel, all of those kind of figures have either been repelled by the toxicity of the project. They don't want to go anywhere near it, or they've been designed out because Trump wants

13:23inexperienced, pliant people like Hegsf, Rubio, you could argue, isn't exception to this. But generally speaking, there is a serious derp of experience in Trump's administration. Now, inexperience could be a virtue in subdomain, sometimes, but in complex military warfare, it's completely insane. There's a great, I don't know how to talk about great tweets, but there was a great tweet I saw today saying. You can be a madman in politics and get away with it. You can't in warfare, you can't talk your way out of unforeseen circumstances and unforeseen consequences when it's literal life or death for the people that you're meant to represent on the world stage. When the US and Israel launched its illegal war against Iran, it soon results in the killing of over 165 people at a girl's school in Iran's Minab, at most of them were young girls aged between 7 and 12. Footage released by Iran appeared to show that a US Tomahawk missile struck an RGC base near to the school at around the same time, where the rising smoke suggesting the school had been hit shortly before. The New York Times, a bell and cat, another Ocent teams, all determined that the missile

14:28in question was American. The US has not officially claimed responsibility for the crime, the very big crime, against children. This was Donald Trump's reply when he was asked about that attack. Did the United States bomb a girl's elementary school in southern Iran on the first day of the war in 175 people? Based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran. Is that true? Mr. Hexat? That was Iran. You did that. We're certainly investigating it. Still investigating it. But the only side that targets civilians is Iran. We think it was done by Iran. I mean, that tells you about the value you should place on the words of these people. We think it was by Iran, and they're the only ones hitting civilians on purpose. Literally in response to a question about double-type attack on a school of children. In Trump's press conference last night, one journalist was prepared to really take the president to task on this issue.

15:28You just suggested that Iran somehow got its hands on a Tomahawk and bombed its own elementary school on the first day of the war, but you're the only person in your government saying this, even your defense secretary wouldn't say that when he was asked standing over your shoulder on your plane on Saturday. Why are you the only person saying this? Because I just don't know enough about it. I think it's something that I was told is under investigation, but Tomahawks are used by others, as you know. Numerous other nations have Tomahawks. They buy them from us. But I will certainly, whatever the report shows, I'm willing to live with that report. Should be clear, Iran doesn't have Tomahawk missiles. There is absolutely no record of Iran having those weapons. We know which countries have Tomahawk missiles, it's not a particularly long list. Kieran, two people, I've seen two people, publicly, prominently, saying that they think Iran did this. One is the President of the United States. The other is Omnitjilili, a token Iranian who goes on BBC News night once or twice a week. He's never been in the country, by the way. Omnitjilili, who is an authority for Iranians on the BBC's flagship current affairs program,

16:33has never been in the country. We'll talk about that later. Never. Not once. I've been once for a month, and I am not an authority on Iran. I'm the first to say, I like to speak to smart, inform people about this, and I make my mind up, and I try and help you make your mind up, but I'm not an authority. I can barely speak fast. Omnitjilili has never been there, and he's on the BBC every day. It's just him and Trump that are talking about this. It's become a talking point for, you know, pro-Israel or Israel-aligned media like Iran, international, and so on. All the evidence available to us suggests it's the United States, but even now Trump can't admit the truth. I think it's a display of a pathological liar running out of road and being boxed in increasingly. And this is somebody who's spent his entire life and career and laterally political career getting away with, spewing the most extraordinary nonsense, and it actually not having any consequences

17:37for him, it actually advancing his career. I think, I want to talk about this a bit more later on, Aaron, but I really think that all in all this war will have been a major inflection point in American decline. In retrospect, we'll regard it in such a way. I think the spectacle of the US president lying so patently, not getting away with it. I suspect won't get away with it this time. I don't mean the base will be a backlash from MAG or anything like that, but we'll have to accept that this isn't as he claims it is. We'll be a footnote in that overall process, but I think it's a very depressing and disgraceful spectacle. Let's go on. That wasn't Iran, and it wasn't Tel Aviv either, or rather that was just one of a series of Israeli airstrikes on Beirut southern suburbs earlier today, because while we've all got

18:40our eyes glued to Iran, Israel has been making inroads into Lebanon again. In fact, Israel has said to expect its war in Lebanon to at last its war in Iran, with the Israeli military preparing for an extended ground campaign against his balar. That's as reported by the financial times who say this. The goal is to inflict enough damage on his balar so that there is not this constant fear of having to evacuate the northern residents. One of the people said referring to Israeli communities evacuated in previous rounds of fighting with his balar. An Arab diplomat said the message on timing had been related countries in the region. Quote, the Israelis are preparing international players the prospect that the war with his balar could drag on in the last longer than the war with Iran, the diplomat said. There have also been diplomatic efforts to prevent a broader Israeli operation with France offering to help disarm his balar, according to a person briefed on the matter, and Lebanese officials saying publicly they will be open to direct talks with Israel. Meanwhile, Israel has mobilized thousands of reservists as some of its military and equipment

19:41have now entered southern Lebanon that they haven't yet pushed deeper over the Lebanese border in the way they did during the 2024's ground invasion. That doesn't mean it isn't coming though. Israeli soldiers typically heavily rely on air support, clearing competence and civilians out of the way before ground troops enter an area. They're not very confident about their infantry's capability, it turns out. Of course, the country's air force is currently otherwise occupied in an illegal war on Iran, and busy bombing sites in Iran. Still, that hasn't stopped Israel from massively disrupting the lives of ordinary Lebanese people as their force to evacuate their homes. This was UNCHR representative for Lebanon, Carolina Lindholm speaking at the UN today. No, as you know, it's been just over a week since the new escalation in conflict started on the 2nd of March when these Israeli evacuation warnings to residents of more than 53 bridges and densely populated areas in Lebanon.

20:42And the intensified air strikes forced families across Lebanon to flee. And what we see here is that lives have been upended on a massive scale. I mean, according to the Lebanese authorities, as of today, more than 667,000 people in Lebanon have now registered on the government's online platform as displaced. And this is an increase of 100,000 in just one day, and the numbers continue to rise. So you've got roughly 700,000 people displaced across the country with 100,000 of them being forced to leave their homes today alone, 100,000 people. Many people, including families with small children, are now living in tents, slimy streets, and in parks, as government infrastructure gives way. So far, 500 people have been killed in Israeli strikes on Lebanon. Compare that to Iran, where 1,300 people have been killed. Of course, it has a much bigger population. And that gives you a clue as the kinds of areas that Israel is attacking in Lebanon.

21:43Not strategic sites, not munitions stores, but heavily built up, highly populated, very dense areas of the country. At 20% of those killed in this latest Israeli assault on Lebanon have reportedly been children. Kiran, look, I find this also remarkable. And of course, you're half French. It's worth talking to you about this. We've got to clip a bit later on about about a French politician having very strong words in relation to Israel and how it's behaving right now. France is saying they want to help Israel effectively deal with this issue in Lebanon. Of course, Lebanon was at one point a League of Nations protectorate of France. Historically, had a proportionally large Christian population in the country, etc. Why not even the Europeans saying to Israel, you've just displaced 100,000 people in a single day. This is not exactly 100,000 people. We talk about cars are a lot right. Hundreds of thousands being displaced in Gaza.

22:44100,000 in a single day probably beats anything in Gaza. I'm sure it beats anything that's happening in Iran right now. And yet, the Europeans don't have anything to say about this country, which a century ago was meant to be a place under their jurisdiction. As long as Israel has cast iron support from America, which it has, as long as Europe is seemingly happy to become a multi-state wastelage of the United States, which is the place we're in right now. It doesn't mean it will be forever. It doesn't mean the European Union, and this speaks to the clip we've got coming up in the while that you referenced Aaron. It doesn't mean it has to be that way. But so long as Europe is unwilling to use its latent economic power to distance itself from the United States, it is not going to, in any meaningful sense, distance itself from Israel either. It's as simple as that. I mean, we could talk till the cows come home, but the reality is that at the moment, of course, there are small nuances around the margins.

23:45You know, the UK says, you can, you can't use our bases for offensive, but only defensive to the United States. Defensive bombing. Defensive bombing. Yeah, exactly. Never heard this terrible. Exactly. Purely defensive bombing. Highly or well-earned, the oxymoron. You can, you can, you can do that. France says X, England says or UK says Y, but generally speaking, we should be under no illusion that the Europe is extremely close to the American position on all matters, geopolitical and military, and by extension, that means that it is not going to descend from the Israeli position. Regardless of what Israel does, I mean, we've just lived through the flattening of Gaza and the killing of, we don't know how many people, but at least 80,000. And virtually no European state did anything about that. Flagrant war crime amounting to genocide. So we can expect much more of this, unfortunately. We can expect much more of greater Israel boxing out into southern Lebanon, maybe in the parts

24:49of Syria, further in Syria, making incursions, further into Syria, and continuing with this failed state strategy in Iran. We don't know how it will go because of the Iranians taking in. You can expect nothing in the, in the way of, meaningful or substantial criticism or scrutiny, much less sanctions or leverage from Europe. So you're insinuating there, and I, this is my position as well, that southern Lebanon is effectively part of a long-term strategy of Israel trying to expand its borders. Yes, extend its borders. While in Israel simply annex the West Bank before it then moves on to southern Lebanon, because of course that's a different country, obviously the West Bank is not part of Israel, but it's got a particular kind of relationship to it that will be much easier to annex than southern Lebanon. You presume, of course, both would be in violation of international law. Why have they not done that, but they seem to be pursuing their strategy now? Why do you want, when you could do both? They're doing both. If you look at the rate at which parcels of land are being annexed in the West Bank,

25:51and of course that's always going on. It's as reliable as a metronome, but since the beginning of this war with Iran, the speed at which that's happening in the West Bank has picked up. It's sped up. So more and more price tagging, which is the burning of olive trees and the destruction of Palestinian agriculture. And with it, the swallowing up of Palestinian land is happening right now under the auspices of the destruction of the war in Iran. While they're doing that, they're also pushing up into southern Lebanon and using it as an excuse for a land grab and liquidation of southern Lebanon and southern Lebanese communities in populations. Again, under the auspices of the war, but with the justification of, well, we're creating a buffer zone against Hezbollah, but it will become a permanent buffer zone. I'm confident of that. Even if they retreat in the short term, I think that the overall, the long-term strategy is to try and swallow up as much of southern Lebanon. As possible, when you even saw the Israeli opposition

26:53leader, yeah, Lapid, say this the other day, said if we have to liquidate, if we have to ethnically cleanse, he didn't use the term ethnically cleanse, it's important. So that, but if we have to liquidate two or three Lebanese villages in southern Lebanon, so be it. And it's important to say that whether it's the West Bank or whether it's southern Lebanon, this is the exact same thing that the Europeans, the Americans, or most of the Europeans, are very critical of Russia about in Ukraine, which is, of course, withdrawing boundaries. But even that logic of, we need some kind of space between the aggressor and us. That's what Russia would say. We need a buffer zone. It's also the exact same stuff. The exact same stuff. And the crazy thing is, not only do we give them political support, right now, Britain is assisting Israel in this water, and I'll tell you why. British jets are scrambled as our US jets to literally stop ballistic

27:54projectiles going into Israel. I mean, so that's purely defensive. If Israel can wage a war, and its defense is being assisted by America, by Britain, by France, then, of course, the incentives to stop waging war dramatically for, because you can throw a load of stuff and it's going to stick. And actually, you only get very little retaliation and return, although actually, quite a lot is hitting Israel at the moment. It would be a hell of a lot more if you didn't have the likes of the RAF and the US Air Force help them out, the Jordanian Air Force, and so on. So we are absolutely assisting in what is illegal annexationist politics in southern Lebanon, in the West Bank, and war crimes in Iran. And of course, people might be watching all this, they think, well, what about Iran? We're not supporting Iran. We don't send components for F-35s to Iran. We don't have our politicians in the labor party, in the Tory party, utilizing Iran. We have people like Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves saying that the Israelis made

28:58the desert blue. We have, before the last general election, 70% of all Tory MPs were members of conservative friends of Israel. We don't have that for Iran, so don't throw that counter-argument at me. The US and Israel's completely illegal war on Iran is already having knock-on effects across the globe. Oil prices are fluctuating and stop markets are feeling the impact. As soon as there may be genuine shortages of certain resources followed by inflation and the knock-on social problems that follow. Then there's security as the war risks spinning out of control. Nobody's ever really in charge of second-order consequences. It's all very reminiscent of 2003, when the UK and the US illegally invaded Iraq, causing the deaths of up to a million Iraqis. France sat that one out, very wisely, it turns out, and were ridiculed by the US at the time for what they called their cowardice. Remember how Americans started calling French fries, freedom fries? While the American media called the French cheese-eating surrender monkeys. Now, at that time Dominique de Voudin was

30:02France's foreign minister and he's lived to see his stance on Iraq completely vindicated. Now he has a take on Iran, and it's really worth listening to. To say no means to say no. One, we do not accept under every circumstance he's getting involved in this war. Two, we condemn using all international mechanisms. Three, we sanction them. We sanction Israel for engineering a tragic humanitarian situation in the Middle East. We can take measures. We can always say we are dependent. Yes, we are dependent on the balance of payments on military technologies, but the US is very dependent on us as well. Don't underestimate our capacities. And so I think we must take the simple approach of convening an extraordinary meeting of the European Council, in which we say to the United States, and we say to Donald Trump,

31:02Mr. President, what you are doing is nonsensical. Today, you are unleashing war unto the world. Today, you are destabilizing Europe. You are destabilizing in higher regions of the world, and we will not accompany you anymore on these adventures. And we have to arrive at the conclusion that we will stop buying F-35 planes. We will stop imagining that the United States is here to help us in Ukraine. I understand all of that, but in 2003, we weren't in the majority among states either with our position. But the people of the world are with us, and it's with that that we can reinforce the legitimacy of our lives. And like the catastrophe that's about to unfold, as I'm trying to tell you, the Europeans might have a chance to open the eyes and show those in the administration to show Donald Trump the way things are. So clearly, to the United States, that their war is illegal. It's illegitimate, that it's dangerous.

32:07Just to be clear, France doesn't have F-35s. He's talking about other European powers, Belgium, Britain, Germany, Italy, France had the good sense not to buy those F-35s, which, by the way, almost certainly have a kill switch. If America doesn't want you to use those planes, just like it didn't want Russia to use the John deer tractors, which it pinched from the Ukrainians in 2022, 2023, they had a kill switch too. All of this stuff has a kill switch. Of course it does. You have to be stupid not to have a kill switch. Just in case it's ever used against US service personnel. You never know, right? After all, the Taliban got hold of so much kit when the US withdrew from there. Kiran, what did you make of this clip? Of course, Deville Park has a ton of legitimacy on this because he was one of the foreign ministers who was entirely proven right when it came to Iraq after 2003. Yeah, Deville Park on the right of French politics under Shirak. He made absolutely the judicious the right decision on Iraq. He kept France out and he led the group of states in Europe that

33:11Germany, others that didn't go to war in Iraq. Obviously, that's been vindicated by time in the most spectacular fashion, as you say. It doesn't mean he was great on everything or anything else, but on this, he was absolutely right. On this, he's absolutely right. I think watching that Aaron, it makes me, Deville Park speaks as those sovereignty is still a real thing. He speaks as those sovereignty is still a real thing. Forget international law for a minute. We know that international law, not so sad like Mark Cardi, who was deploying it cynically, but to speak truthfully about international law, we know that it's always been at best a partial whatever. But sovereignty is a concept that long predates there. And it's hardly a soft liberal concept. It's actually the opposite. It grew out of something much more reactionary in politics, demarcation of territory and so on. Even that seems like it's vanishing now completely. And it's just this kind of partial, we have to put it on the same Asheepers international law.

34:11Deville Park speaks as though sovereignty was still a real thing. I think there's something else here as well. Deville Park didn't go to war ever in his life, but he was a protégé of Jacques Chirac's. And there's a brilliant story, Aaron, about Chirac and Tony Blair meeting just before 2003, just before the war in Iraq. They had this long meeting and Tony Blair was trying to convince Jacques Chirac that going to war was the right thing to do in Iraq. Chirac said to him, listen, Sunny Jim, I've been in the war. You haven't. I served in Algeria, and it was a bloody horrible thing. Blair left the room and he said to, I think it would have been, anyway, one of his advisers, he said to him, poor old Jacques, he's getting very old, as he doesn't really, he doesn't get it. We now know, of course, that for all Jacques Chirac's many flaws, he absolutely did get it about this, about Iraq. And so Deville Park was heavily influenced.

35:15I mean, Chirac was his mentor. He was heavily influenced by a man who actually was of a generation where he went to war. And I think that says something about the political class that we have now. I'm not saying that there should be more wars that the political class could go to them, but this total detachment of the political class or any of the consequences, horrible consequences of war, is something that marks out the difference with Deville Park in his reaction to things like Iraq and Iran. I'm sure of it. They certainly never took it lightly, right? I mean, that post-war generation of politicians in this country, Millen, Wilson, etc. Yes, they got involved in foreign escapees, but they didn't take it lightly like the present generation do. And that's so Antonio Blair, isn't it? He just doesn't get it. Get what? Make an argue. He just doesn't get it. You've got to modernize. You got to get up with the times. You got to kill brown people. That's what we do now. It's the 21st century, Jack. It is, it is really remarkable to reflect on. And Deville Park, who was also the prime minister at one point, I think now he owns like a gallery, and he's an art dealer with one of his sons, a very good-looking son in Paris.

36:20And I think why can't more of, why can't more of the right just be like this? You've made loads of money. You've had loads of state to some prestige. You've influenced your, your country's national life, enjoy your family, have a family business, make some principles, arguments in public about this or that issue, whatever it is, I might not agree with you, but you know, of course, still be involved in public life. But in this country, people like Blair, with a property portfolio and the tens of millions, including buy-to-let, some bloody stockpile, has some dignity, Matt, being more like Dominic Deville Park. In the shadow of power, one of the richest cities on earth. A man dies, homeless and unseen. Julie Ramesh died in an underpassing Westminster, just meters away from the buildings that govern Britain. Around him were empty homes, dark, locked, untouched. How can someone lose

37:21everything in the heart of so much wealth? Follow that question and it leads to a hidden world of money, secrecy and power, a system that decides who gets a home and who doesn't. This is a kind of place for our relationship between dirty money and the city and the kind of dark money that goes into political machine kind of niche. Where could this lead? Where does it end? What else can we become desensitised to? I'm Kojo Karam, writer and researcher. Since 2018, this story has haunted me. Death and Westminster's are four part series from Navarra Media, produced by Planaby Productions. Death in Westminster arrives on the 10th of March in the Navarra Media podcast feed. At the end of February, the US and Israel launched joint airstrikes against Iran, killing the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Hamane. Many, including Donald Trump,

38:25thought that would be the end of the government as we knew it, and that even if the Islamic Republic of Iran stayed in place, a new leadership would emerge that was ultimately more amenable to the interests of Washington. And yet, in the almost two weeks since, the precise opposite has happened. With the Iranian state showing genuine resilience and for now, still able to project force beyond its borders. So what precisely has happened? And how has Iran exceeding expectations? Evalina asked as a professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at Johns Hopkins University in the United States. He's also the author of Iran's Grand Strasgy, a political history. That was published last year by Princeton University Press. Earlier today, I spoke to Professor Nast, and started by asking him whether the war so far had gone to plan for Washington and Tel Aviv. Perhaps he's gone more to plan for Israel than for the United States. Israel expected the long campaign. It wanted to bring down the Islamic Republic, dismantle its military capabilities, and even perhaps

39:29break down the Islamic state, the state in Iran as a whole. I think President Trump expected a much shorter, cleaner war that they would assassinate the supreme leader, a number of other leaders in Iran, bomb some strategic sites. I think there would be a new leadership in Iran, and very quickly the war would end, and he would be able to declare victory and claim that he brought Iran out from the cold and changed its trajectory. So I think for the United States, the fact that this war has gone so long, that it's got messy, that it's impacted global energy markets, that it's impacted the Gulf countries, and it has spread much more, has been a surprise. And what about for people like Pete Hegseth or others within the sort of the retiny of Trump, they would be more sympathetic I presume to the desired outcomes of Israel, and that presents a strange problem, doesn't it, that you don't necessarily have unity even within the American side, let alone between these two allies. On the American side, essentially you have only one decision maker, which is President Trump.

40:34I think everybody around him just follows his lead, particularly the Secretary of Defense who really does not have a strong policy position of his own, and parrots essentially the President's wishes much more forcefully. And Israel essentially focused on converting one person to the war. This was not an effort to change American policy, to sell it to the American public, to make a case that would be debated and over months before you arrived at the idea of a war. There was one person that Prime Minister Netanyahu needed to focus on and convince, and that was President Trump. He decided on the war. He didn't think much about how to justify why February 2026 had to be the start of a major war in the Middle East, and he didn't think through really what the consequences would be. And as a result, he was surprised by the fact that the war has unfolded not according to his imagination. And why was he so amenable to persuasion by Netanyahu?

41:36There were those memorable scenes, of course, during the 12-day war last summer where you had at the end of it, clearly sleep deprived, traveling between one location and another by helicopter. I think at the time he even said he hadn't slept for 24 hours, where Trump memorably said they don't know what the F they're doing. He was clearly upset with Tel Aviv as much as Tehran. It's a strange trajectory, isn't it, to go from that in June last year to February this year, where he's amenable, persuadable to a course of action, which is so radically different, not just to preceding U.S. foreign policy, but also his own stated political positions. I can only venture, guess as to why he was persuaded by Prime Minister Netanyahu. Perhaps there's domestic pressure from a lot of other donors and politicians in the U.S. like Senator Lindsey Graham, who are amenable to Israel's position. Perhaps he thought, as Secretary Rubio has said, that Israel may go to war anyways, and then the United States would be forced to go in. But I think when the demonstrations happened in Iran, President Trump got overexcited,

42:41that the regime is about to fall, and this would be a moment where he could claim for a major American foreign policy victory, that he is the American President that ended the Iran problem for the United States, that closed the book on the Iran issue, and he technically brought in Iran in from the cold. And so he immediately was ready to go to war, to the point that I think President Prime Minister Netanyahu had to pull him back and say, well, you know, the forces on the ground are not yet prepared for proper war on Iran, and you have to first build the armada in the Middle East, and then we go to war. And then his reasons for war kept changing, like he wanted to support the protesters, then he wanted a nuclear deal, then he wanted regime change. But ultimately, I think he was persuaded that there was a big moment in Iran. This was the moment to break the Islamic Republic completely, and so he was sold on going to the war without really thinking

43:46through about alternate scenarios that may unfold. And you know, Iran, this is part of the problem in Washington, because the policy process, you first say, what's your problem, and then they give you certain solutions to deal with their problem, military, and otherwise, and then they would walk you through that all the costs and all the possible things that could be the outcome. But in the United States, you know, President Trump resolves on a decision, and then everybody else rushes to implement it without actually really going through all the scenarios that can happen. So when he says I was surprised that Iran took the war to the Gulf, I mean, that was on the table. The Iranians had said they would do that. The Gulf countries knew that would happen. So the fact that he was surprised about it means that there no discussion happened in the White House about that particular scenario. You just said there's something which hasn't surprised you, and which was quite predictable, much of what has happened in the last week, two weeks has been, of course, predictable. I'm going to ask a question, which is, you know, the opposite of that,

44:50in some respects. What about the response by the Islamic Republic has surprised you? I don't just mean militarily. I mean, politically, in terms of how it's communicated to the rest of the world, as somebody who is very apprised of these matters, you've written a very informative book about all of this. What has surprised you? What didn't you expect? Anyway, I'm not surprised because they are still, you know, fighting the battle of resistance, if you would. But what surprised me is the determination in Iran that this will be the last war they're going to fight with the United States, that either they would go down or they would absorb whatever the US and Israel can throw at them, but then they would essentially force a recalculation on the United States, such that when this war ends, it would not be a return to the status quo, that that's not where they want to go back. And the, I think the audacity and the determination they've shown to pursue this strategy has been somewhat surprising to me, even though,

45:56you know, everything in it about it is very much in the DNA of the Islamic Republic. And what's changed? Because we had, last year, of course, at the start of the 12th they wore these very targeted assassinations of senior people within the Revolutionary Guard, the country's political and military establishment. We, of course, had the pager attacks with Hezbollah. And for a decent period of time, it looked like Iran and its proxies, as well as the upper echelons of the political establishment in Tehran. They didn't look particularly competent or effective. And that sort of, that continued all the way through to the start of this. And of course, Hamane died at home, people were say, well, he wanted to be martyred. I personally by the argument, but nonetheless, since he has been killed, since Hamane's death, Iran's response militarily at least has been much more decisive, calculated, and there I say, violent. What has changed? Because it does feel like we're looking at two different countries

47:00almost. So that would, might be a second surprise here, that how quickly Iran adapted itself after the 12th they wore. And how fast they internalized the lessons from that war. So one lesson was that, okay, they barely survived exactly because they had a state that was built to be decentralized, or at least IRGC had been built to be decentralized. So then Hamane made sure that the entire state is built in a way to survive the capitation, that he delegated authority across across the various institutions. They depend if you would, the decision-making at much, much lower levels so that, you know, you could take out leaders, but the system can continue to function. It looks like they prepared for, you know, with food and varieties of things that this might be a long war. I think they rebuilt their missile capabilities, adjusted it, improved it, and then

48:01built drone capability which has caught the U.S. by surprise, all of which in anticipation that the war would return. And how quickly they did this, I think, was surprising. And also the lessons that they learned in the 12th they wore, that in the 12th they wore, it was the United States that asked for a ceasefire. They believe on, at Israel's behest, not Iran, that U.S. and Israel will try to land a massive punch up front to try to knock you out. But if you don't get knocked out, they're not really capable of fighting a long war. And I think this calculation they made, which has proven very, very effective, that it is not America and Israel's offensive weapons that will decide the war. How many jet fighters, how many missiles, Tomahawk missiles, how many bombs, it's their defensive capabilities that will decide the war. That was also true of the 12th they wore. So Iran has prepared itself to absorb Israeli American hits, but then is following a strategy

49:06to deplete their defenses. And we're seeing this happen in the Gulf, running out of Patriot missile, you know, stocks, interceptors are running out. And I think the sense in Iran is that actually the real war starts after the 10th, 11th day, when their stocks have been depleted. Now, there is an narrative in the West that Iran's missile batteries and launchers and stockpiles has been damaged. But they may, there may be a surprise here that actually after they've really depleted the defenses, the offense will really actually start at that point in earnest. So all of these came out of the, out of the 12th they were. So they've proven themselves to be dysfunctionally in many ways as a state, in managing varieties of things in Iran, economy, et cetera, their intelligence was penetrated by Israel. But at another level, within a six-month theory, they've proven themselves to have adapted and prepared for this war in ways that actually

50:11has to a good extent turned the tables on the United States. Now, that was a clip from a longer 30-minute interview with Professor Nasda, which will be posted in full on our YouTube channel tomorrow. Fantastic into you. A really, really informed person, but also really thought-provoking. He said some things that really made me consider my views and challenged them, which is what we like doing here at Navarro Media. Let us know what you think, of course, on tonight's show. You guys are what make this program and this whole operation possible. If you want to support our work, of course, as I said at the top, go to Navarro Media.com for slash support. Have the kinds of conversations that aren't actually happening in legacy media. One of the amazing things from that whole into which I learned is that Khamenei was a handbrake, Kiran, not just on Iran developing a nuclear weapon, which many people have talked about that, that famous fatwa, which stopped Iran pursuing a nuclear weapon. He was also a handbrake on the

51:11country developing long-range ballistic missiles. The RGC wanted ballistic missiles that could hit Western Europe, us. You think that's kind of an important thing to talk about in the media? And Khamenei said, no, it's not a spirit of influence. We're only interested up to the Eastern Mediterranean. Our region, this is a defensive technology. I'm not here standing for Khamenei. He said it. And yet I've never heard that from a single person in the media in this country that actually the Revolutionary Guard, who now in the Ascendant, in Iran, a country at war with very capable military technologies, they wanted missiles that could potentially hit Germany, France, Britain. I'm not saying that to, you know, be a military hawk. It's just a fact. Why is that kind of information not discussed in the media? And why is the media even saying that Khamenei was an extremist when he was comparatively within the parameters of Iran, actually something of a moderate? Well, it speaks to the complete absurdity of this war,

52:17and also the great shame of it, to be honest, the great tragedy of it, because this is so eminently avoidable. All wars exist on the spectrum of avoidability. This is, I would argue, way out at the end, Aaron, for about 10 years you had cooperation between Iran and the United States. I mean, formalized, treatized cooperation between the Obama administration and the Iatollahs and the Iatollah and the Iranian state. It's extraordinary that that was destroyed in the act of arsonage, and that's paved the way for where we are now. There are so many missed opportunities, but they're willfully missed. These are accidents. These are people telling big ships passing in the night. This has happened because there is a strong political will emanating from Tel Aviv, from Jerusalem, from Israel, and it has coalesced. It's aligned with a political

53:23willpower emerging from Washington as well. It's just the worst and the best time, the best time if what you want is to have war with Iran. Everything's aligned nicely if you're in Netanyahu, and it's the worst if you are basically anybody else. It's completely tragic. All of the stuff that we've been told about Iran desperately pursuing a bomb being completely recalcitrant, even with all their capabilities are bombed back into the stone age. They carry on diligently working away to build a bomb, a fearcratic regime wanting the bombs that can destroy the whole world. There might be things about the Iranian government we really dislike, but I'm sorry, that doesn't mean that all bad things are true. It just doesn't mean that, and this is a bad thing that just was not true. We were nowhere near a nuclear Iran, and we said it before, I'll say it again, if you're a rational state actor and you're being invaded and bombed because you don't have a nuclear weapon, what's the logical answer to that? You develop a nuclear weapon. So even though

54:27that was the logical answer, the Iranian regime didn't do that, and again, this is to paint them in some kind of sacred light. They're obviously complex and bad in lots of ways, but again, not all bad things are true. And not all bad things require you, you know, overseeing state failure and regime change. Oh, they hanged homosexuals. It's really bad. I don't agree with it. It doesn't mean I think we should create millions of displaced people and turn Iran into a cross between Yugoslavia and Syria. You know what? Fractually, people of LGBT communities and ethnic minorities and women, all the people you say you're trying to help, that would also be really bad for those guys. But we can't have that level of conversation in the media, and the reason is it doesn't serve certain interests, certain media were trying to do something about that.

55:30A reform, the party led by Nigel Farage has been topping the polls for months. In fact, they've led in more than 200 consecutive polls for Westminster extraordinary, and powering that success has been domestic politics, particularly immigration, but also issues like law and order, the grooming gang scandal, and the 16 new turns, maybe it's more at this point, that have taken place under the summer premiership. The party has always been vulnerable to foreign policy, however, not least, because reform and particularly its leader, Nigel Farage, have tied their colors to the mast of the Trump White House. And with the US and Israel's illegal war in Iran, that vulnerability has come to the surface. Here's what Richard Tyson, who would be the deputy prime minister of reform government, said on March the second at the start of this conflict. I think you caught the tail end there of my conversation with the defence secretary. I did try and ask him multiple times whether the UK government supports what's going on, or the Trump administration effort in Iran. I don't think I've got very far. I'm not the wiser really on what the UK government thinks about it, beyond the fact that it's happening. Do you support it? We do, and we think the government

56:34and the Prime Minister have been utterly gutless and cowardly in sitting on the fence, the Prime Minister statement yesterday. All he really wanted to do was distance himself from the actions of Israel and the US. This is a once in a 50-year historic moment, and everybody has been appalled by this abhorrent regime, and President Trump has taken the difficult, but we believe correct decision to give the Persian people an opportunity to get their country back. The Iranian regime is behind all of this. They are a clear and present danger to the interests of the UK, and we should be supporting the US. I note that Canada supported the US. Australia have supported the US, and yet we've shown actually what this Labour government has shown basically to be cowardly. In fact, some of them put senior MPs like Emily Thornbury calling it illegal. I mean, it's just extraordinary. I mean, just on the question of the legality,

57:34is it that you think it is legal or that we shouldn't care if it's legal or not? My view is clear. The Iranian regime is a permanent threat to the UK and our interests, and as such, we have to do what is right in order to protect us, and it frankly enough is enough. That's what the President of the US has concluded. That is the logic, of course, that offensive energy. We know what they want to do. Our allies, our democratic allies, in the Middle East, Israel. I mean, the Iranian regime wants to wipe them off the map, and not unsurprisingly, they have defended themselves, and actually the best form of this event is to attack, to ensure that they cannot have nuclear capability. They cannot have ballistic missile capability, or any other military capability. So you think you agree with Trump that the Iranians should rise up against that? This is their moment. You'll notice at one point in that clip, he says, a once in a 50-year opportunity. What it means is that his lamp revolution was almost 50 years ago, and here's the opportunity to

58:35upturn it, regime change, right? Very clear what Richard Tyson is saying there. Very clear, he says, our allies, our democratic allies in the region, they're thinking, I'm not Saudi Arabia, not the UAE. Okay, Israel. Kiran, quickly, before we go back to Mr. Tyson, is Israel a democracy? Israel is certainly not a democracy. It's the part I'd state that latterly practices all our genocide, but even if it weren't practical out genocide in Gaza, the fact that it's an F-Nocracy, it's a country that has in its DNA, in its bone marrow, in its constitution, in other words, that it's a place for one ethnic group above all others, and that the rights of that ethnic group will always take precedent over every minority in the country. I could go on and on, Aaron, you know, Israel uses Israeli Arabs, as they're called, you know, basically Palestinians who took Israeli citizenship, uses them as a kind of poster for this multiracial democracy, but it's

59:37complete nonsense. Israeli Arabs were under emergency laws until 1966. Essentially, they're on the martial law of some form, and that was lifted in 1966, but if I told you some of the things that they are subjected to, I don't just mean at a civic level, I mean at an institutional level, I think your toes would curl. What the firm is that if you, in some universities, it's legal, if you don't want to sleep in a dorm, in a building with dorms with Arabs, you can tick a box. That's completely legal, and it happens across multiple universities, leading universities in Israel. And that's just one of many, many examples, self-same examples, examples of that severity. So absolutely not a democracy on any level, and it comes up with a bad joke that Israel is a democracy. I mean, it would be interesting, wouldn't it, if we had an opportunity for you to ask Richard Ties, do you think that's acceptable? You're calling them a democracy, do you think we should have the same things in this country? I mean, maybe he does, right? I don't think he does, by the way. And if he said, well, no, why don't? Well, how come we shouldn't do it, but they can? What does that mean? And like you say,

1:00:45that's just one example of many. Responding to criticism of his position on ex-Ties said this last Friday. So, James, what is your plan? Wait till Iranian regime commits another terrorist outrage in UK, just to be clear, there has been no terrorist outrage in the UK by Iran. Directly or via proxy, then ring your hands, or just rely on US to protect us. Or be responsible and play our part in degrading once and for all the appalling Iranian regime's ability to terrorise them at least and Western nations. I choose the latter. Just to be clear, he's talking about Iranian terror attacks in Britain, they've not happened. She is, and isn't really disposed to, and I'm not being religiously sectarian, you know, I'm not a religious scholar, but she is a much more hierarchical faith in Sunnism, and as a result, it's much less prone to the horizontalist networks of jihadist terrorism, right? You have suicide bombers in the Iran or our core, but it works in a very different way to the kind of Muslim terrorism, Islamist terrorism we've seen in Europe in the last 25 years. Okay, the Martin thing,

1:01:50the concept of Martin, even more central in shishism than Sunnism, but I think this is a really important difference. Of course, I wonder, does Tyson even know this stuff? Probably not. Probably not. But Iran is committing all these terrorist atrocities in Britain. Has he ever said anything about Saudi Arabia? After all, 15 of the 19 bombers involved the 9-11 was Saudis. I think one of them was from the UAE. So more people from the UAE were involved in 9-11 than from Iran. But it's the Iranians who are the terrorists, and it's the Iranian school kids that need to be bombed. Finally, here's Tyson on Al Arabia, also on Friday. Would you be seeing the RAF bomb Iran? We would be helping the Americans and the Israelis in any way they saw appropriate, because this is a strategic, permanent threat to all of our safety and interests.

1:02:53And look, obviously, the Americans have the greatest military resources. We all know that. But if requests were made, we would have been saying, yes, we're pleased to help. Very clear, right? If a request was made, we'd be very happy to help. That's from the person who'd be, remember, the deputy prime minister if reformer and government. They've been leading in over 200 polls. That was the policy. Now, Tyson wasn't alone in his assessment elsewhere. Nadim Zahali, the former Tory Chancellor who defected to reform earlier this year, said, and I quote, we should join the bombing if needed. If needed. As if the Americans are saying, no, we don't need you. Don't worry. If needed, we should join the bombing. Very clear. And speaking last week, the big man himself, Nigel Farage, said this, we should do all we can to support the operation. I make that perfectly, perfectly clear. So clear, he said it twice, perfectly. The gloves need to come off. We need to accept that we're part of

1:03:57this with the Americans and the Israelis. We have to take the gloves off. We have to get rid of this regime. Globes off, perfectly clear, get rid of the regime. Pretty fair to say he wants regime change in Iran and that we should be involved, as he said, explicitly there with the Israelis and the Americans. But then a handbrake turn like something out of Grand Theft Auto and it started with Robert Generick on the BBC on Sunday morning. But we also want to see, Laura, is this war come to an end as quickly as possible? Because at the end of the day, reform is a party for working people. And working people are being clobbered as a result of rising energy bills. The energy bills are going to go up for people's homes and businesses in the weeks ahead. Next week, no doubt, we'll see price at the pumps for petrol and diesel start to go up yet again, just at a time when everyone is hard up in the country. And we want to ensure those people are properly looked after. What would you do? Well, firstly, I want to see Rachel Rees take action to bring down people's bills, cut the green

1:05:00levers, cut the unnecessary taxes that we already see, obviously make use of every last drop of oil and gas that is in the North Sea for our own energy security. And yes, as I asked Rachel Rees in the House of Commons during the week, cancel the increase in fuel duty. Because later this year, at the worst possible time, she's going to be hiking people's taxes when they fill up at the pumps. And those people right now are finding life tough. We need to lighten the load on them. And that is the first thing that she could do to help. Just to be clear, the fuel duty increase is going to be 5p. I think, right? The fuel duty increase is going to be 53p to 58p. Your guys were supporting a policy which could potentially take oil to $200 a barrel. 5p $200 a barrel, okay? I know they're different quantities of the stuff, but you get the picture. Then there was this post on X yesterday. The Iranian regime is wicked, wicked and not a good way,

1:06:06in a bad way. But this war needs to come to an end as soon as possible because it is making Britain poorer. Reform are a party for working people. This has been focus grouped, I'm sure. Not drawn out wars in far away places. The liberal interventionists of the early 21st century, presumably excluding the ones in his own party, failed our own people, leaving them poorer and more exposed to mass migration. Not to mention the brave British men whose lives were lost. The British people have had enough of them. Except Richard Ties presumably. It's times to be realists and put Britain first. That's why Nigel Farage immediately ruled out suggestions that the UK might deploy boots on the ground. We heard his quote. He didn't do that. Nor do we see why British aircraft should become involved in offensive action. In just a matter of days, people are feeling the side effects of this conflict. The cost of filling up your car or van has already risen sharply. Those who rely

1:07:06on heating oil to heat their homes are feeling the pinch. And very soon household prices will rise more sharply. The fact is that the longer this war continues, the more damage it will cause to British families, businesses and manufacturers. Wow, that's a bit of a shift. Back to Nigel Farage because it turns out he changed his mind too. That's saying this earlier today. There are differing opinions as to whether we should physically join the attacks. I, as leader, I'm saying to you, if we can't even defend Cyprus, let's not get ourselves involved in another foreign war. Yeah, there are differing opinions between Nigel Farage today and Nigel Farage two weeks ago. Those two people disagree. Okay, so they've changed their position. But wait, maybe they haven't, because reform still isn't exactly clear on this issue, even as late as today. Today, with the party apparently doing a vote fast, Andrea Jenkins,

1:08:08the party's metro mayor for Lincolnshire said this on sky news. Do I want to see British troops on the ground? Ideally not at this stage, but I do think we should be not never. You can't rule anything out though, it's too hostile. We don't know the direction it's going to go in. But should we be using more of our weapons and should the dragon be there already most certainly? Yeah. Ideally not. That's not what Robert Jenrick said. That's not what Farage said. Farage said we can't protect Cyprus. We should not get drawn into a war. That's not ideally anything. That's saying no. So even today, almost two weeks into this, you're having really mixed messages from reform. And this isn't me attacking them just because they're on the right and I'm on the left. You could say that, it's probably true, right? I criticize reform generally because I disagree with them. But there's a broader point here, even if you're on the right, these guys could be the government. This is crazy.

1:09:09There's really important stuff. They're saying they're getting involved in a war which potentially could lead to people dying. British service personnel, but also have a massively negative impact on the economy. You can't say, I want to help small businesses and then support a war which is going to make oil go to $200 a barrel. It's crazy. It's completely incoherent and incompetent. And that's not a left wing point. That's just the facts of the matter. So why have reform changed their position so much and so quickly? They looked at the polling for one thing and realized they are very much on the wrong side of public opinion. Do support oppose the military action the United States has taken against Iran? All are strongly support, 10%, 10% strongly support. So, Richard Tyson, Nigel Farage, 10 days ago, or even actually five or six days ago, they were reflecting 10% of public opinion, strongly support, some will support 15%. So, one in four people to some extent support military action alongside the U.S.

1:10:14Strongly opposed, 37%, somewhat opposed, 22%. So basically, 60% against 25% for six and 10, against one in four four. It's pretty obvious what's going on, right? Reform was very much on the wrong side of public opinion. And actually, I think one of those polls shifted 10% in a few days. It was already bad and it was getting worse. Then there's a small fact that they are cheering on a cost of living crisis, not good when you're promising a break with the failed politics of the big two. And when we've still yet to deal fundamentally with COVID and the cost of living crisis of 2022. And yes, this could all lead to a huge cost of living crisis. Far bigger, I think, than people realize this tweet really caught my attention. Breaking, the world is now experiencing its largest oil supply shock in history, losing nearly 20 million barrels of oil supply per day.

1:11:14Top oil supply shocks. Number one, hall moves closure. 20 million barrels a day. Number two, a run revolution in 1978. That was only 5.5 million. And then more recently, Russia Ukraine, 2022, that was only 2 million. The current supply shock is roughly the same size as the top two to six combined. Barely any vessels have gone through the strait of hall moves in the last five or six days. Barely any. It's meant to be 140 a day. And at the same time, you've got attacks on refineries and various sites with regards to the extraction and production of this stuff. And of course, there are other goods as well that are downstream of petrochemicals, fertiliser and whatnot. Very, very little of this, I think, has been explained to a wider audience, just how bad things can be. But believe me, they could get very bad. Earlier today, you had a bank say that we might be looking at 5% inflation last this year. 20% higher energy bills as soon as

1:12:19June, July. Three months away. 20% increase in your energy bills. But don't worry, reform, we're going to stop a 5p hike on petrol. More expensive mortgages. We were going to get an interest rate cut this year. We're probably going to get an interest rate hike. Of course, things can change, but right now that's what we're looking at. So higher inflation, higher energy costs, mortgage costs to go up. And these guys were calling for us to get involved. And also that U.S. can replace Hamane with Hamane. Crazy Kiran, right? There was that line about spending trillions of dollars 20 years so that we could go from the Taliban, ruling Afghanistan to the Taliban, ruling Afghanistan. This story feels like we're speedrunning the same stupidity. Yeah, it's actually, I'm going to try and start from a positive standpoint, which is that it's not often that I find public opinion terribly comforting. But actually, you know, I mean, this sincerely, it speaks to

1:13:23the good graces and the wisdom of the British public and the American public on this issue. Call it war, weariness, call it, I don't know, but living in the legacy of Iraq or whatever, the long legacy of Iraq, the war on terror, something has fundamentally shifted, I think, around war in that region of the world at least. And it has conditioned them on this occasion. And it's immensely for the good, but it has. I think these people who claim to be tribunes of the people, the images they have in their heads of the average person in their country is a kind of gouty, beer-slurping, blood-first individual for whom all you need to do is invoke the terror of a Muslim, and they're ready to die in the trenches for you. And that's just not true, that's not the case. So it's a positive thing in that sense that they've been forced to climb down and reverse. It speaks to their idiocy, of course. I think it's residual mage support,

1:14:26residual pro-Trumpism that led them into that position in the first place, along with, as I say, a perception of their core voters as people ready to die as soon as you invoke the Muslim threat. And I also think it's by extension residual effects of the residual Israel lobby, which is to say, do things that are really, really unpopular. Things that polling consistently shows are really, really unpopular, but you still go along with the position anyway. You still support the genocide. You still, in this case, support the bombing, even if the polling suggests that you're committing electoral suicide for doing so. So I think it's a residual of those things, but it's very, very good that the British public has, it would seem, intervened on this one. Do you know something that really made me think? So we're having a room painted, and of course, yes, we can paint our own rooms, but this needed some class to work, and there's a local company that's fantastic. They're really, really good at what they do, and the gentleman whose company is,

1:15:26gets someone, my wife, and they're doing some work. And he said, I think, on the Friday, I filled up my van and my car, I'm just really worried about the price of the likes of petrol. I think, well, if a tradesperson is saying, of course, people are smart, right? People got access to a ton of information. They don't want to be out of pocket. He's saying that. He was saying he was there, and he was seeing loads of old people as well, filling up. It was busy than it usually would be. People are smart. Equally, this country is, I think, very different than one portrait by much the media. Reform are leading in all the polls. Reform are going to do very well in the May-Logue elections. Absolutely. That doesn't mean everybody in this country is really right-wing, including, by the way, all the reform voters. You saw that you got to poll what was it last week, which had the Greens, amongst under 65s, first by six points. This country is complex, and people have different views. But the idea that the median Brit wants to get poorer,

1:16:27so that Israel can prosecute yet another illegal war, thousands of miles away, I can believe that only 10% of Brit strongly support us getting involved. But my goodness, they are massively, massively out-reflected in terms of the political media class. That's almost like a default presumption across the large parts of the media. It's 10% of people in this country. I think, again, it speaks to the fact that people are war-wearing, but you're right to also talk about self-interest. I think people are aware that this is will cost the money, and it's already having a spiraling effect on markets. Now, I think what that suggests, Aaron, is that our political class or elements of it that supported this war weren't aware that that was going to happen. Apparently, thought that this would be a costless war in the most energy-intensive, important region of the world, which I think is really very shocking.

1:17:32People are in a very different place than 20 years ago. Collectively, it feels like the media and political class, especially the boomers, very much still live in the world of the Balkans war, right? A hell of a change in the last 20 years. There is zero consent, zero consent, or as we saw, 10% consent, for getting involved in these crazy escapades. This country lost 454 people, I think, in Afghanistan, 454 people. Tens of billions were spent. What for? What for? I'll tell you so the Taliban could be replaced by the Taliban, and actually, for 10-15 years, parent production went up. That's what those 454 people died for. Now, I know their families don't want to hear that, and I would never say it to their faces, of course I wouldn't, but it's the truth. And I think, actually, nearly everyone in the country knows that. They don't want to make the same mistakes again, horrific. People making the ultimate sacrifice of this country literally die for the Taliban to replace the Taliban. Sticking with Farage for a moment, here he was earlier today, asked about his party's record on council tax. On the politics of it,

1:18:35your leaflets at last year's local elections promised to reduce waste and cut your taxes. Most of the councils that you took control of are putting council tax up, including Kent, 3.99%. So across the country, we're putting up council tax less than the other parties, where they control councils. Our average increase is less than the rate of inflation. We've made over 300 million pounds of savings across the councils. And, by the way, I never said we cut, I never said we cut your taxes. Well, which means don't, which means don't charge the maximum of 4.99%. No, those people would think that would, that would be cut your taxes. Never once. Never once in the country ever did I say we would cut council tax. Is it mistakes put it on your leaflets? I never put it on my leaflets. You did, it said, reduce waste and cut your taxes. Nothing with my name ever went on that. That was on a reform UK leaflet in Kent, with my name ever went on that. But what I did say is we'd save money, and we are saving money. So no such claims will appear on your leaflets this year then. We did not say we would cut tax, reduce waste and cut your taxes. That was on a reform UK leaflet in Kent. Well, cutting taxes can be not putting them up as much, I suppose, but I never promise

1:19:39cuts and cuts. Here we go, folks. I didn't say I'd cut your tax. I said that we would do tax cuts. Or actually, actually, it turns out that cutting taxes is the same thing as increasing them, but just less than maybe other people would have. Although, is that even true? I've no idea. These guys want to form a government. So presumably, you can transplant what they're saying about local politics and international politics, right? Presumably, when reform were in charge and they're increasing taxes, they'll say, well, we never talked about tax cuts. That's all they talked about for four years. We never talked about tax cuts. My name didn't go on it. If it's reform literature, it doesn't matter. You're the leader of the party. Nigel, this is not a rinky-dain corporation with you and Richard down the dog and duck. This is a party which is led in more than 200 polls. You need to take this stuff seriously. It's not about your name being on it. It was your party's literature.

1:20:39Kiran, I, in no way underestimate reform. I think they're going to do very well in the male local elections. They could even come first and Wales extraordinary. They could come second in Scotland, again, extraordinary. They do very well in England, including bits of London. But I do get a feeling, there's still a long way to go, potentially even three years in the next general election. They had a great 2025, but already this year with the bi-election, polling, just gently ebbing down, now maybe being a bit too close to Trump, scrutiny about their record and local government. It feels like the shine is coming off just a little bit. Yeah, not a moment too soon. As I was saying, I think last week about Matt Goodwin and the loss in Denison, Gorton, they were on their way up. They could do no wrong because they were starting from nowhere. And so every time they did something unexpected or remarkable, it seemed all the more remarkable because they were on their way up. They came from nowhere.

1:21:40But now they're starting to face the problems of some degree of power and some degree of expectation. And they are over the past month or two, not dealing with those particularly well. And I think that's very predictable, actually. I think it's very predictable because they became a kind of Madame Tussauds for fortbertories who were in several failed governments. There is predictable because beyond that, they don't have very much experience. And then beyond that, they have a total and utter charlatan and a liar for a leader. I mean, everybody knows Nigel. He's a very good liar. I mean, he wasn't there. It was pretty obvious. He was like, but generally he's a very convincing liar, I think. And he certainly is a charismatic politician, as we've said on the show many times. You have to hand that to him. He's obviously got something. But he's obviously a liar. And so when you put all those factors together, I think it's a, it's not something that's built to

1:22:45last. I really don't think it's something that's built to last. I think it's something that the more we see exposed to the pressures of actual power, whatever those are, more local government, national government, it is destined to fail very severely. What I worry about, Aaron, because just speak to what you're saying about it, go, you're right, not all reform voters are racist, sub-ar, it's important to say that, but not, but not all of that. So I would say even not even the majority, right? In my experience, perfectly decent people, they care about their country. I think many Frank Cleve has been misled about why this country, why Britain isn't, where they'd like it to be. And we could debate about the quantities, but, but overall, it's clear that people are desperate for some kind of genuine change. They are sick to death of hearing changes in buzzword at election time from the main two parties. And so they're kind of splintering off and we're seeing the birth of a multi-party system in the first past to post framework, which is extraordinary. It's extraordinary for that to happen.

1:23:46And so what I worry about, Aaron, is given that that's the case, given that people are desperate for solutions to the very real material desolation that many of them are feeling. Where does, I think, is it ever to pull reform fails because it's built on charlatanism and greed? I worry about where people go next, hopefully to the greens, or hopefully to the left, but I worry. I think that's part of an important project, isn't it, in the medium term. I mean, you've got lots of reform local groups, local authorities. I think they run eight or nine local authorities around the country. And of course, ahead of May, they're saying things like stop the boats, they're protesting outside asylum hotels, refugee hotels. Now, you can have whatever viewed you like about that. As long as they don't break the law, you know, they're entitled to do that. Of course, they're a freedom of protest in this country. But I find it, perplexing, frankly, that the same people protesting against asylum hotels wants to create millions more refugees, which by the way, if you support war in Iran,

1:24:52is exactly the end game. If you support Israel, displacing 100,000 people in Lebanon in one day, you can't feasibly say, I don't want more refugees. And then you get this lovely canard from the right. They say, well, actually, we can create millions of refugees. We don't have to let them in. We don't have to let them in. They can just go to what France, Italy, Spain. So we can, we can displace, let's say, 100 million people. Let's say that ultimately Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, because Israel doesn't want any regional powers, doesn't want any rival in West Asia. Let's say they all become failed states. Let's say, 100 million people are displaced, let's say, 50 million people. Let's say, how have them come to Europe? In your world view, that would collapse multiple European economies. What do you, what do you know, means for Britain? How about we just don't do that? How about we avoid that? Cause and effects. And by the way, that's why Robert Generick changed the messaging on this, right? The one thing reform

1:25:55has is immigration. It's the one thing. It's the one thing. If they lose authority on that issue, because there's seen to be supporting an unpopular regime change, which leads to millions of refugees, which is what is going to happen if this war carries on. They've lost their one thing. It's like David Beckham without being able to put a good cross into the box. Okay, footballer, but with that, it made the difference, right? It's like Terry Henri being able to cut on the right and then just curl it into that bottom corner. That's the thing he does. Reform what they do is immigration. Lose that and they're cooked. We've got one more story tonight. Well, I'm going a bit longer than usual, like I said at the top, but if you want to support our work, pay for these guys over time. You know what to do. Go to your army.com forward slash support. Help us build a new media for different politics. Our final story tonight. Those were air sirens blaring across various sites in Israel on Tuesday morning, warning residents

1:27:11of incoming missile attacks from Iran. Now, according to Israel's state-run health ministry, just 13 people have been killed in those strikes. According to state-run military, while several Iranian missiles obstruct the country, most have been intercepted. And we've seen very little evidence to suggest otherwise. There's been limited available footage of damage within Israel, and what we've seen appears relatively superficial in most cases and filmed long after strikes have taken place. There's almost something calm about it too, no panic, no upset, nobody's crying. There's also been relatively little footage of Iranian airborne missiles over Israel. Now, that's very, very different to previous attacks by Iran on the country. In 2024 and 2025, we had no difficulty finding verifiable footage of Iranian missiles over Israeli air space, as well as their interception by Israeli defenses. In 2026, though, that's a lot more difficult,

1:28:12partly because social media is flooded by AI slop like this. Now, you might think filling social media with AI-generated rubbish showing new Iranian weapons or Iranian successes aid Iran, though the AI itself is very bad. But it might also help Israel, making it harder for journalists and social media users to find and repost what is legitimate footage. Where we've seen genuine footage of attacks on Israel, it's often come from Israelis, sometimes as part of an unironic attempt to appeal to international law. Sorry, I've stopped myself laughing there. For example, several Israeli accounts posted this footage alleged to show a cluster missile being fired from Iran and exploding over Israeli cities. The use of cluster weapons is a war crime, though Israel appeared to have no worries about using them in Lebanon.

1:29:13Of course, Israel is not a signatory to anti-cluster bomb treaties, and neither is Iran nor the United States, if that matter. International reporting from Israel is also tightly controlled. France 24 has reported this on Israel's restrictions on journalists. The Army has banned live broadcasts of the Israeli skyline when alarms have been sounded to warn of incoming missiles or drones. Images of air defenses intercepting incoming missiles had been a major part of the coverage at the start of the war, and was a feature in the coverage of the June 2025 war between Israel and Iran. However, this is now forbidden. The Army has also banned filming impacts at or near security sites, although it does allow coverage of civilian damage, as long as exact locations are with help. CNN has also reported this on Israeli media censorship. Israeli far-right Ministry of National Security Ithmar Ben Gavir has turned the apolitical military sensor into a talking point, vying to quote act with severity and zero tolerance against international media that violate the censorship rules. In a joint statement with the

1:30:17Ministry of Communications, Ben Gavir said police have been dispatched to several locations, as quote suspects have been detained, incidents investigated, and even arrests made in cases where suspicion arise of violating the guidelines. Anyone who endangers Israel's citizens in the name of quote journalistic reporting will face a determined and tough police force, Ben Gavir said, no concessions, no games. It's not a game, it's just trying to ascertain what's actually going on, kind of the point with journalism. Every now and again, we get a different take on what's happening in Israel that punctures even slightly, ever so slightly, the government narrative. Ory Goldberg is an academic in the country, and he posted this today about the impact of the attacks on Israel. The level of damage is not remotely close to what Israel is doing in Iran and in Lebanon. The issue is that the Israeli government heavily senses any news regarding casualties and deaths, as well as actual missile hits. We also get regular lies about the number of

1:31:19missiles that launchers Iran and Hisbalah have, and about Israeli success in taking such launches out of action. Over the past few days, missiles and rockets have hit Israel with regularity that is being officially denied. Alarms have sounded in the midst of rockets hitting. Advanced warnings are often given without alarm sounding, placing responsibility for sheltering onsits and shoulders. Information about hits is disseminated through unofficial channels. There are clearly hits on any number of strategic sites. We get no official information. Mr Goldberg, I would expect a knock at the door, maybe even from Ismar Ben Gavir. What do you make of all this? I mean, look, Israel has classically been seen as a leader, maybe even the world leader when it comes to psychological operations. They're now using it, one might argue, not just against the global media, but their own population. I think it speaks to a tremendous fear on the part of the Israeli political class,

1:32:19about two things. One, that they're losing on their own terms at these. They're losing this war. They're not meeting the objectives that they set out with. And two, that they know that the mood and the rest of the world has completely changed towards them. Israel used to, you only sense the things if you're scared of the reality. That's not obvious, think to say, but it's true. Israel used to grandstand on its militarism, and it was a big, big part of its identity, and actually it was a big part of its popularity. When they were still the good guys, in the way that they were seen in the rest of the world, it's obvious I don't think they were ever the good guys, but you know what I mean? They were able to frame themselves as using their military justly to protect themselves, but also to protect Western interests, like you know, protecting the gates from the barbarians. And actually that's obviously completely shifted in the rest of the world now. So on the one hand, they're blacking out information to the rest of the world for that reason, but actually I think more telling and more interesting,

1:33:22because they haven't let journalists into Gaza for three years, or found very scantily before that. I think more telling is that they're trying to withhold information from their own public. The Israeli public is not squeamish about war. It lives in a perpetual state of war, and many of them support it. Just look at polling, it's not by prejudice speaking. Let them speak for themselves, you just have to look at the polling. So I could only assume, Aaron, that this is being done, because Israel knows that this war is not going in the way that it would have wanted. And I think overall what this is going to do this war is it's going to speed up the rate of decline. Well, actually it's going to expose and expand the fissures in these supposedly indestructible American-Israeli relationship. I think it's already doing that, because it's so absurd, and it's so extreme, and it's so unnecessary. And I also think that it's going to speed up the rate in which Israeli society begins to fracture, in which those antagonisms,

1:34:26contradictions in Israeli society, around this racism, around this necessary upholding of a partite and genocide, laterally, will be exposed to the contradictions that surround it. And I think that that's what this war is going to do, and I think the fact that they're censoring the information to their own public is evidence of that. And also they've been shutting down the media just for reporting things on the ground, which actually don't even contravene these expectations. We saw that I think we're the Turkish camera crew. There's been other ones as well. So these people say, well, Israel's democracy. No, no, they're not. It's an apartheid state. Well, they're freedom of press. Turns out they don't. All these lovely words we furnish on this country, actually, none of it's true. It turns out. Kiran, thanks for joining me tonight. Well, thanks for having me. What a, what a bumper show. It was bumper. I really enjoyed it. Yeah. Thank you so much for having me. I love our shows and choose there's now. Now we're both in the studio. It's changed everything. Thanks, of course, to the rest of my team here

1:35:29at Navarra Towers. And thanks everyone for tuning in tonight. Come back tomorrow for another live stream from 6pm. For now, you've been watching Navarra Media. Who else? Good night. This broadcast is brought to you by Navarra Media. Go to Navarramedia.com. Slash support.