Trump: ‘Time to Look for New Leadership in Iran’

Protests in Iran appear to have died down for now. Iran International has reported that 12,000 have been killed already, but NTD can't verify that number. Iran's leader has confirmed that thousands have been killed. After giving thanks to the regime for canceling the execution of some 800 protesters, President Trump is now telling Politico that it's time to look for new leadership in Iran. Joining us now is retired U.S. Navy Captain Armin Kurdian. He's also a foreign national and national security analyst. Thank you for joining us, Armin. Hi, Arlene. Thanks for having me. Now, what is your reaction to President Trump's message today? Well, there's a couple of things. He's not words that I would have used in terms of the word thank you, but Donald Trump understands human behavior so much better than we tend to believe. Oftentimes, not all the time, but oftentimes, he says something that seems a little off the wall. Why would he say that? But it is actually very calculated and very thoughtful in the sense of he understands the impact that his words actually have. Now, more broadly, perhaps it's a sort of a psychological thing to put Iran at ease before he does something else, whether it's kinetic or non-kinetic mean. So, I mean, you saw how he was very vocal, very open about removing troops out of these bases, removing forces in the area. He was very public about it. And the Iranian regime backed down from a lot of these activities. So, there is a method to his efforts and the way he actually speaks. So, we'll have to see what decisions he actually makes because ultimately, he is not satisfied with the status quo, much like a lot of previous things that happened. Well, what benefit would taking down the regime be for Trump's foreign policy goals? Frankly, it would be a benefit for the entire planet. Basically, the Islamic Revolution of 1978, 79 is the greatest foreign policy failure in this country in the post-World War II era. Iran is a thorn in the side, not only of the United States and the West and Israel, but most Islamic nations in the world in terms of what it has exported, in terms of its support for regimes. I mean, look, they are providing drones and military equipment to Russia in exchange for other technologies. They're selling oil to China at a discount. So, it is definitely in the U.S.'s interest that there be a new regime, but a stable one. They don't necessarily have to be very pro-Western. Neutrality is fine, but this religious theocracy, which has exploited terrorism and their revolution to other parts of the world, is simply not congruent with a world order of peace and civility. So, in that sense, it does serve the U.S. interest to have a new regime. It is much harder said than done. Now, as you know, the world is watching, and free nations around the world are rooting for the Iranian people, and they want to see if President Trump will help them. But recently, he's commended Iran. So, let's watch this clip. As you know, Iran canceled the hanging of over 800 people. They were going to hang over 800 people yesterday, and I greatly respect the fact that they canceled that. Now, despite showing some respect there, Trump has said he'd take serious action if the protesters were killed, and they have been. But right now, it looks like he's backed off. So, what does the president have to consider before carrying out military intervention in Iran? Remember the president's comments, that he's encouraging protesters, we're with you, we're going to help you. And that really encouraged a lot of Iranian protesters to get in the street. We didn't see that in the previous administration. So, he puts himself in a position where there's an expectation of help. You remember when George H.W. Bush showed support for the revolution in Iraq post-Desert Storm. Everybody came out, but we didn't actually do anything, and then eventually that revolution was crushed. I would hope that he has recognized this lesson from history. Having said that, you don't necessarily need military strikes. In fact, most of the options in terms of military strikes against Iran, I do not believe would have the kind of impact that he wants. So, a lot more needs to be done on non-critical means, whether it's cyber attacks, whether it's psychological operations, information warfare, whether perhaps a singular strike against a particular leader to influence kind of behavior. We've seen that that has been able to have an impact around the world without necessarily igniting another conflict there in the Middle East. The rest of the Arab League, even Israel, says, you know, maybe don't strike Iran militarily. We think that might have a negative impact. But he's going to have to make some decisions. He is going to have to take some kind of action here because he's basically put himself in a position where he has to. If he doesn't, then that could really hurt his international reputation around the world. Well, as we know, President Trump is a planner. If we look at the last strikes that he's conducted. So, what exactly do you think it would take for the U.S. to bring the regime down? What would that involve? It has to be almost 90 to 95 percent in total. You can't simply take out this religiocracy through military strikes because it is metastasized. It is a cancer that has permeated the entire country, every aspect of life. So, you know, you could assassinate Khamenei right now and, you know, another cleric would take his place. In fact, it would, like, embolden the actual regime. So, the instability has to happen from within. Perhaps if we cultivate individuals within the Iranian government who perhaps are feeding this information or asking to help, you know, foment some kind of support, allowing the protests to continue, and then in some kind of method, just this popular uprising, which, you know, might still be violent, but it would be an internal revolution. That has a much greater chance of success and greater could be a relative term, but it's still relatively small as compared to trying to compel externally. Now, the U.S. can still apply a lot of the pressures that we have been in the past. Plus, you've seen that Donald Trump has now taken the extended action of taking a lot of these Shadow Fleet tankers off the ocean. You know, there's about 29 or 30 of these ships left, which are not really safe to operate. They're uninsured. They're stateless. You start taking more and more of those off the water. That's fewer and fewer ships that Iran has to sell and exploit illicitly. And the volume of oil it needs to sell in order to keep itself afloat, you can't really do that over land, not in any way, shape, or form, but a lot of these that are being done. So that is another way. And continued economic pressure, economic hardships could be enough to put the rest of the people over the edge and de-stabilize the regime from within and perhaps start something new. And at that point, say, hey, with a new government, we're willing to help support back to the glory days that it had pre-Revolution 1979. Well, if the administration is successful in implementing serious change in the Iranian leadership, would that negatively impact other adversarial countries like China? It certainly would. We've seen already a negative impact in Cuba by the actions we took against Maduro and perhaps stopping the oil flow from Venezuela to Cuba, which is almost fully dependent on Venezuela for its oil. If China were to be able to get oil, probably from Russia or somewhere else, perhaps even the United States, maybe even we might sell oil to China if it does their good will and make some money off of it. But the sale of oil by Iran to its adversaries, number one, first and foremost, helps Iran. Secondarily, it does help some of its adversarial countries like North Korea or perhaps other countries such as, you know, I think India, they might have been buying oil from Russia as well at a discount. Oil is already very cheap to begin with, so they're having to sell it at like a 5% to 10% discount at like $55 a barrel in 1972 than it is right now in order to get these kinds of deals. So it does have an impact on the American adversaries. They don't have their own organic source of energy. And that is probably the United States' greatest strength and it hasn't been leveraged in such a, I don't necessarily want to say a weapon, but as a force that can actually change the behavior around the world in the way that Donald Trump intends to wield it by improving, expanding natural energy production, but also by expanding nuclear power. By expanding nuclear power, we will have more and thicker natural gas and oil to actually export to some friendly nations so they don't have to buy it from people we don't necessarily like. So one step leads to another, leads to another. He's got another three years in office to try to effect change, and he's going to use every one of those days to try to make as much of a difference on the world stage as he can. Well, as we know, President Trump doesn't like to show his hand, so I'm sure a lot of people around the world are watching closely to see what his next move is going to be. Armin Kurdian, foreign policy national security analyst. Thank you so much for joining us. Thanks, Armin.