Trump: Iran War Nearly Over Already; G7 Won't Use Reserves To Drop Oil Cost | NTD Newsroom (March 9)

President Trump is reported to have told CBS that the Iran war is nearly over, and that progress is far ahead of the initial four-to-five-week schedule. Trump noted that Iran have no navy, no communications, and no air force. Trump also said he had no message for the regime's new supreme leader, and that he has someone in mind to replace Khamenei, but did not elaborate. The president said ships are flowing through the Strait of Hormuz, and that he may consider taking it over. He ended the interview with a warning for Iran not to try anything, and that any further escalation would be met with strong retaliation. U.S. crude oil prices settled at around $95 a barrel today, up about 4.3% on the day, though that's well below the day's highest point. The crude price briefly surged above $119 a barrel this morning before pulling back sharply. The ongoing war with Iran has brought shipping through the critical Strait of Hormuz to a near-complete halt. The Group of Seven nations are holding off on releasing strategic oil reserves for now. The French finance minister says the group is not yet ready to tap those reserves. He made the comment after chairing a meeting of G7 finance ministers in Brussels. He said the G7 remains prepared to take coordinated steps if needed, which could include using strategic oil stockpiles to stabilize markets. Soaring oil prices triggered global market turmoil earlier today, but major stock indexes recovered into positive territory after President Trump's comments to CBS where he suggested the war could end soon, helping ease some investor fears. President Trump says higher oil prices are a very small price to pay for safety and peace as the war in Iran continues, the president adding, quote, only fools will think differently. Here's Energy Secretary Chris Wright addressing rising gas prices on Fox News. Yeah, the plan is to get oil and natural gas and fertilizer and all the products from the Gulf flowing through the Straits before too long. And I may break a little news here, but one large tanker has already gone through the Straits with no issues at all. So as the general just described, we're massively attriting their ability to strike with missiles and drones. And that that rate of attrition will increase in the coming days. So we'll be cautious, we'll be careful, but energy will flow soon. Wright says energy markets are massively well supplied. The energy secretary says the recent run up in prices has nothing to do with any shortage of oil or natural gas. He added that the culprit is fear and perception of the unknown, that the Iran war could be some long drawn out crisis. Meanwhile, Trump administration officials yesterday defended a decision to temporarily lift some sanctions on Russian oil. Officials say it's a 30 day pause to allow the millions of barrels of oil that are sitting on ships to go to Indian refineries. The Pentagon has identified the seventh US service member killed in Operation Epic Fury. The Pentagon announcing that 26 year old Sergeant Benjamin Pennington of Glendale, Kentucky died from his injuries on Saturday. He was stationed at an air base in Saudi Arabia when the Iranian regime attacked the base on the second day of the war. The attack is under investigation. Pennington was part of the US Army Space and Missile Defense Command. Six other US soldiers were killed by an Iranian drone attack in Kuwait also on March 1st. According to Fox News, citing a senior US official, eight other service members are seriously injured and still fighting for their lives. And the Iranian regime has a new leader. Iran's ruling clerical body naming the now deceased Ali Khamenei's own son to take his place. A signal that hardliners remain in charge. Here are the details on that. The Iranian regime announced the appointment of Mojtaba Khamenei shortly after midnight local time. Everyone was waiting to see who would be the next supreme leader. Now we know and we assume that he will be a continuation of what his father was, which is a very hardline ideological cleric. The 56 year old cleric is the son of Ali Khamenei who was killed when the US and Israel launched strikes against Iran late last month. The newly appointed regime leader has strong connections within Iran's revolutionary guard and religious leaders. President Trump said Iran's next leader could face serious consequences if Washington does not approve. The president telling ABC News, if he doesn't get approval, he's not going to last long. And Trump previously criticizing the younger Khamenei, calling him a lightweight. Last week, telling Axios that Iran is wasting its time with Khamenei's son, saying he would personally have to be involved with this election. The leadership change comes as the Iran war intensifies. Israeli forces launching a new wave of attacks over the weekend. Meanwhile, US forces announcing the death of a 7th service member. US Central Command saying the soldier died on Saturday after being seriously wounded during an attack on US troops in Saudi Arabia earlier this month. President Trump honoring the fallen troops during a ceremony in Delaware this weekend. In a post on X, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth paid tribute to the soldiers, calling them heroes forever. The White House also weighing in, saying the fallen soldiers represent the very best of America, giving everything in service to our country. Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered remarks today at the US hostage and wrongful detainee flag raising ceremony. Rubio had some strong words for the Iranian regime. They are trying to hold the world hostage. They are attacking their neighbors. They are attacking neighboring countries, their energy infrastructure, their civilian population. They're attacking embassies. This is a terrorist government. This is a terroristic regime. And we are seeing them conduct terrorism using nation-state elements, using weapons like missiles and one-way attack drones. And the objective of this mission is to destroy their ability to continue to do that. The United States is currently engaged in an operation targeting one of the world's leading hostage taker, the world's leading sponsor of terrorism, the regime in Iran. And first, I think we would all take a moment both to offer our thoughts, our prayers, and our condolences and to honor the families of those who have fallen, the seven Americans who have lost their lives in the initial hours of this operation. And we're here on the third US hostage and wrongful detainee day. And it's a day that exists because families and loved ones refuse — because families refuse to let their loved ones be forgotten. We have this day to celebrate those who returned, to honor those who perished in captivity, and commit to returning those who are still in detention and holding also the Rubio said the US has designated Iran a state sponsor of wrongful detention, warning that any country holding American citizens will face consequences. Rubio credited President Trump with making the return of detained Americans a priority, saying more than 100 have been brought home since his inauguration. Rubio says the Trump administration won't stop until every single unjustly detained American is returned home. The event also commemorated former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who also disappeared in Iran 19 years ago and is believed to have been died in captivity. The son of eliminated Iranian leader Ali Khamenei has been chosen to replace his father. Joining us now is Mike Sorelli, US Navy SEAL veteran and military and national security analyst. And we have David Wormser, Middle East affairs analyst at the Center for Security Policy and former senior advisor to US Vice President Cheney on the Middle East and strategic affairs. So good afternoon to you both. Mike, I'll start with you today. You know, President Trump says that Iran's new leader is not going to last long if he's not approved by the United States. And the president had already disapproved of Khamenei's son calling him a lightweight. So where do you see this going, then? Well, his son was probably already on the targeting list. He probably just sort of took a few leaps up and is at the top of the targeting list. Here's what I would caution. You know, whenever you remove the head of a snake, you've got to be careful about the one that's coming behind him. You know, Khamenei's son is younger. He's more fanatical. His hatred for the US and Israel is probably at a higher degree. So he wants to make some probably very aggressive moves early on in this war and strike against Israel and the US. So at the end of the day, we say the devil you know is better than the devil you don't. But he shouldn't last long, given the US and Israeli's record so far of taking out regime leadership. Okay, so David, let me go to you now. What do you think about this? And President Trump has said he needs to be personally involved in the selection process of a new leader. Well, yeah, first of all, I think what Mike said at the very end, that he probably will be replaced really soon is already an important observation. I might be more fanatic, or I'd say less refined than his father. I don't think more fanatic. And really, we are talking about a regime that most likely will choose an apocalyptic end rather than surrender. So who it is that rules it is probably important, does drive home the point that there is. Okay. All right, David, your internet is kind of iffy right now. So let me just talk to Mike while we get that fixed. So Mike, you made the point earlier that if you cut off the snake, the head of the snake, perhaps there's another person to follow in the leader's steps. So how do we know Iran won't go back to how it was before when we have a new government? How do we make sure history doesn't repeat itself here? Well, if you want to look at past examples, look at it this way. We took out Osama bin Laden. And usually when you hit cells like this or fanatical governments like this, they splinter, they mutate, and they often evolve worse. So it's not that this government is going to be different. President Trump knows that. Anyone elected by this regime is going to be rejected by President Trump. The only option, and he's calling for unconditional surrender, is somebody who's moderate that has the people of Iran at the top of their agenda. It's no one from the IRGC. It's totally unacceptable. We will continue sustained kill chain operations, removing regime leadership while degrading what military assets remain. So nothing changes. So why do you think President Trump says he prefers someone within Iran to govern, rather than, say, Reza Pahlavi? Mike. I think that's the ultimate goal, if the people of Iran can rise up. So look at the recent strikes on Iranian oil. That wasn't a primary target. It was a backup. It's what we call a branch or a contingency plan that we weren't seeing the degradation of the regime and the people of Iran rise up. So now we're robbing them of their oil, which also indirectly robs China. So people want results in such a quick manner. We need sustained operations for a few more weeks to continue to degrade and put the psychological pressure on this regime before there's any chance of the people of Iran trying to revolt and overthrow this government in order to reach free, democratic, and clear elections. And if that were to happen, Pahlavi is probably an answer that would come in for that interim government. So David, same question to you. Why do you think President Trump says he prefers someone within Iran to govern? Well, Reza Pahlavi is a very good guy, and he's a good symbol of unity and continuity and even a more secular-oriented Iran. But at the end of the day, he's been out of the country for 47 years. And Iran is a very complex, difficult country to understand, very many pieces, and it's changed over 45 years. So those on the ground are, first of all, paying the price for their freedom with blood. They're aware of the ground truth in Iran. They understand Iranian politics. I'm talking about a leadership we can't see yet among the opposition in Iran. It's inside the country. And they're the ones who are really going to run the show afterwards. So while the Shah can be a nice symbol, he can be a transitional figure that people can focus on and provide a sense of unity. He's not really going to be the operational leader that will take over Iran and run the country for the next five years. Okay, Mike, can we get your comments on what Iran's strategy here is? Because over the weekend, Gulf states reported more damage to infrastructure. What is Iran doing? Why is it pulling in so many countries? Well, Iran cannot take Israel in the U.S. combined through direct action. They know that. And right now, you have to understand, the regime leadership is a bunch of molts. They're hiding underground through their mosaic of underground tunnels and bunkers. The best chance they have, and people think it was a foolish notion, was to hit the infrastructure, data centers, oil refineries of their partnering nations in order to put economic pressure on the globe and control the information campaign and make this campaign less popular for the world, predominantly the U.S. and Israel, and force pressure on them that way, not through direct combat. So that is the indirect approach. And the only approach they have at this time is to affect the energy market and raising prices. David, is Iran putting pressure on the world? What are your thoughts on its strategic objectives? Well, I agree with what Mike said. And they are putting pressure. I mean, the oil price is going up briefly to $119 a barrel is certainly a concerning element. But again, it came back down. And I think there's enough solidity in the oil markets that we're talking about a fairly temporary bubble. As far as the strategic objectives go, I think Mike outlined most of them. I'd add two more. One is they know that there are certain sensitivities in Iran that can cause even an opposition that hates them to recoil and retrench. And one of them is this idea that there may be an all-out Pan Sunni attack against the nation of Iran, a Persian Shiite nation, from whether it's Turkey, Pakistan, etc. So they in many ways want to provoke a Sunni hostility toward Iran. And the second thing is that a breakup of Iran, they know that's a very great sensitivity in Iran. So they're the ones who are putting out a lot of this stuff about the Kurds are coming in, the Azeris are coming in, the Baloch are coming in, the Arabs are coming in. They're going to partition our country and they're going to set us off against each other in civil war. So a lot of the attacks also are trying to provoke that and provoke the image of that so that they can change the narrative of this war in a way that terrifies the Iranian people and maybe causes them to hunker down behind. Now, Mike, President Trump says the decision on when to end the war with Iran will be a mutual one with Israel a little bit, he says, and it's going to take everything into account. That decision will take everything into account. What specifically, in your view, might the administration consider when it comes to ending this war? Well, I think it goes to the objectives from the beginning, which was to strike regime leadership to degrade their regional strike capability, which they have done. The last figures I saw were 80% of air defenses have been destroyed and something around 60% of munitions or strike capability has been destroyed. So they have achieved that objective in limiting or degrading Iran's ability to conduct regional war or regional strikes. But there's also another element to this that adds to the timeline, and that is Congress. So right now he moved forward with the War Powers Resolution, which gives him a 60-day window to conduct these operations. And then additionally, he does have a 30-day withdrawal window on top of that. So I think that time calculus is going to be weighed in on their decision alongside Israel of when they cease direct sustained operations against Iran. So, David, let me get your thoughts on this. Ships in the Gulf are actually disguising themselves as Chinese ships, according to reports, to avoid attacks amid this conflict. It's very interesting. Can I get your thoughts on this? Yeah. This is something we also saw in the Straits of the Bab-el-Mandeb earlier with the Houthis when they closed the Straits, that they sort of came to an agreement with the Chinese to allow them through and tried to create, China actually tried to use that to create an alternative shipping model that froze out countries that weren't sympathetic to China. So it was really a grand geopolitical power play to try to undermine the power of the U.S. and its Navy and establish essentially blackmail power over nations to give in to China. And then they would get free passage. We're not there yet with the Straits of Hormuz. This is more ships themselves re-identifying as China for the moment, because Iran is not hitting Chinese ships as much. We're not hitting them at all. So this could be a potential second route where China sees an opportunity to establish a maritime blackmail component over global shipping that they can leverage for political clout elsewhere. But at the moment right now, it's simply ships protecting themselves ad hoc. But I would watch that very carefully. Okay, so Mike, let me just end the conversation with this question to you. A service member, a seventh one, has died after being hurt during the operation. We understand this is war and this is possible, that there will be casualties and there could be more in the future. But just talk to us about how you weigh this. In a conflict, what is the dynamic between risks of human life and achieving objectives? And how do we honor those that have made sacrifices? Well, it's a great point, and I'm sure David would agree with me. You can't decouple those. You can't decouple military operations with the loss of life. We used to go with three rules in the military. Rule number one, at war, young men die. Rule number two, you can't change rule number one. And then rule number three, somebody must always walk point. Young men die at war. And that is the cost that never sits with me well as a 20-year military veteran who deployed multiple, multiple times during the global war on terror. The only thing I can say is, this is the best trained military. This is the most lethal military. My prayers and thoughts are with the service members that are downrange doing what they're asked to do. And our thoughts and prayers are with the families of these lost soldiers. Nothing we can say will sage their pain, but hopefully time will bring a sense of pride that their young men and women stepped up for freedom and were willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice so that we can live the way we live in America. And that just takes time, but my prayers and thoughts are with them. Yeah, you're right, Mike. Nothing we can do can bring these service members back, but Secretary of War Pete Hexhut said those service members will for sure be avenged. Okay, let's leave it there for today. Pleasure speaking to the both of you. Thank you so much. Thank you. In a press conference this morning, New York City Mayor Zoran Mamdani and his police commissioner Jessica Tish said that they're treating a Saturday incident involving explosive devices as an act of ISIS-inspired terrorism. NTD's Arlene Richards has more. New York City will never tolerate violence. An attack outside the New York City mayor's residence is being treated as an act of terrorism. I can confirm this morning that this is being investigated as an act of ISIS-inspired terrorism. The alleged act of terrorism happened Saturday during an anti-Islam protest. There is video of these two individuals throwing two devices towards the protest. The police department has determined that these were improvised explosive devices made to injure, maim, or worse. Amir Balat and Ibrahim Kayyumi, the two suspects in custody, allegedly traveled from Pennsylvania to the protest in New York. The devices that were tossed into the crowd were packed with nuts, bolts, and screws and contained a chemical substance inside a taped canister fitted with a fuse. Preliminary test results determined that these were not hoax devices nor smoke bombs. The FBI has joined the New York Police Department in testing the devices as well as in conducting a terrorism investigation. Thank you for staying with us. The Trump administration obtaining 2020 election records from Arizona's Maricopa County, the largest county in the state. This comes as the FBI continues investigations into the 2020 election in key swing states. Arizona Senate President Warren Peterson said today that he received and complied with the federal grand jury subpoena for the records. They relate to the Arizona Senate's 2020 audit of Maricopa County. Peterson says the FBI has already obtained the records. A spokesperson for Maricopa County says they have not yet received a subpoena but would cooperate. The investigation into Arizona comes weeks after the FBI raided an election office in Fulton County, Georgia, and obtained their 2020 election records. President Trump earlier commented on the developments in Arizona, writing, quote, great. The U.S. military says they carried out another deadly strike against suspected drug traffickers in the eastern Pacific Ocean. Officials say the vessel was operating along known drug trafficking routes. The military says six suspected traffickers were killed yesterday and no American troops were injured. The attack brought the death toll to over 150 in the Trump administration's campaign against narco terror at sea. U.S. forces have carried out more than 40 strikes in the eastern Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea so far. And President Trump welcoming Latin American leaders to Florida over the weekend and announcing a new coalition against drug cartels. The initiative is set to give Trump a chance to project strength closer to home and to pull Latin America closer to Washington. Here's that story. President Donald Trump hosted Latin American leaders in Florida on Saturday to announce the formation of a military coalition against drug cartels. The heart of our agreement is a commitment to using lethal military force to destroy the sinister cartels and terrorist networks once and for all. We'll get rid of them. At least a dozen leaders from Central America, South America and the Caribbean joined what was called the Shield of America Summit convened by Trump, who signed a proclamation launching the coalition. In the last year as Secretary of Homeland Security, we have focused on securing our border. We have transformed our country from one that was being invaded by enemies, millions of them that were coming in unvetted, that we didn't know who was there and who wished to harm us. We've secured that border. We focused on removing public safety threats. It's a top priority for us. And while there are clearly a focus on the security of the hemisphere, as you can see from the representation in our cabinet, from trade to commerce, to energy, to treasury, and there is also a focus very strongly on the opportunities we have to work together economically. But you can't have economic progress without security. Trump has cited drug cartels as a primary reason for ramping up his administration's involvement in Latin America, pressuring Venezuela over the past several months and seizing its president, Nicolas Maduro, in January. The Trump administration has also deepened direct involvement in the region by tightening enforcement of the decades-long U.S. embargo on Cuba. On Saturday, Trump said Cuba wants to make a deal with the U.S. and is negotiating with him and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. As we achieve a historic transformation in Venezuela, we're also looking forward to the great change that will soon be coming to Cuba. Cuba's at the end of the line. Next, we're bringing in Marcos Xotkes, editor-in-chief of Epoch Times Brazil and Latin America correspondent for Epoch Times USA. So, Marcos, thank you so much for joining us today. And I just wanted to start with, President Trump saying the Cuban government is negotiating a deal with him and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. I brought the clip here, Marcos. Let's just take a quick look at President Trump speaking about this. Cuba is in its last moments of life, as it was. It'll have a great new life, but it's in its last moments of life the way it is. But our focus right now is on Iran, and we'll do that. So, Marcos, what do you expect to take place with Cuba after the Iran operation comes to an end? I mean, it's hard to tell, as there are a lot of strategic objectives apparently being tackled all at once by the Trump administration. What we can say based on reports that we have access to at the moment is that there's a lot of speculation that the U.S. might be negotiating a deal similar to what has happened in Venezuela, where the current regime would be allowed to keep in place with restricted powers and seizing a lot of its authoritarian habits, and then gradually that could transition to economic prosperity and eventually transition in governance. Some reports, including by Axios, have hinted that this could be in the works. One way or another, the pressure is tremendous that a deal in this form or in another form is made. Cuba right now faces an energy shortage after Venezuelan oil exports have been blocked. Venezuela was responsible for about a quarter of the total energy imports of Cuba, which culminated in blackouts going to about 7 million people. We're talking about 20-hour blackouts to about 7 million Cubans. So the pressure is huge right now, and when you add in the military component of that pressure, then you have the situation getting really dire for a regime that's responsible for the death of at least 100,000 people, the most murderous one in Latin America's history. And you said that Cuba has authoritarian habits. It has been referred to as a strategic hub of the Chinese Communist Party as well. So let me ask you this, how is the CCP influencing Cuba? How much influence does it hold? So that's very interesting, and I've discussed that with a number of experts in the past. Cuba has traditionally been supported by the Soviet Union in the past century, including an incident in 1962 when World War III nearly broke out, the Cuban Missile Crisis. By the 90s, Cuba really started shifting that focus to having the Chinese Communist Party as its major partner, its senior partner, instead of the crumbling Soviet Union. And from there to this point, we've seen increasing aid, including in military, including in security, including economically, especially when we talk about U.S. national security, that's very relevant. So to give you an example, we can talk about radars, space detection equipment, and other assets being deployed by the Chinese Communist Party to Cuba. This hub of influence is not only a security threat to the United States, but Cuba has been broadly engaged with repression, not only inside its own borders, but also historically going throughout Latin America by training and providing other forms of support to communist guerrillas. So despite this being a mostly historic tie, it's also symbolic of the crumbling influence of the Chinese Communist Party and of really hard left politics in the continent that the regime seems to be in its last breath. So Marcos, you briefly mentioned U.S. national security. I'm wondering if you could expand on that a little bit further. How does this foreign influence in the Western hemisphere really translate to risks to U.S. national security? Can you explain? Sure. So if you go back to the 80s, to the pronouncements of men like a military man named Major Florentino Aspillaga, and other confessions by Cuban dissidents, you're really talking about the network of infiltration through the southern border. When we talk about cartels, when we talk about terrorist organizations, Cuba was really a precursor in a way, was really the forefather of this kind of dynamic. When we talk about the Venezuelan regime, which has obviously been a security threat to the United States in its near abroad, that was propped up by the Cuban regime throughout the 90s and then throughout the 2000s, with Hugo Chavez being so close to Fidel Castro as to be, in a way, his protege. The security threat has been historically built up from Cuba. And just when you talk about national security in purely a geopolitical sense, in purely a geographical sense, I mean, this is less than 200 miles from Florida, where we have major military installations, headquarters of major military branches of the United States. The ability of the Chinese Communist Party, for instance, to have surveillance equipment so close to the U.S. homeland in itself should be of concern besides all that I just mentioned prior. So to the point of national security, President Trump also talked about this through the perspective of cartels. And I'd like just to have us watch that for a moment right now. These brutal criminal organizations pose an unacceptable threat to national security, and they provide a dangerous gateway for foreign adversaries in our region. And we don't want them near our country either. We don't want them to come in. They're cancer, you know, they're cancer, and we don't want it spreading. So, Marcos, specifically here, President Trump calls cartels a gateway for foreign adversaries. What is your perspective on this? Talk to us about that. Right, so that's very interesting. And I've been discussing that with Arlene here on NTD as well recently. When you talk about cartels, a lot of the cartels in Latin America, especially I'd like to highlight Colombia's National Liberation Army or the ELN, Colombia's FARC, a lot of those cartels are really originated as communist guerrillas, which gradually intermingled their activities with drug trafficking, kidnappings, and other sorts of hardcore criminal activities. This does not apply to every single cartel in the region. But the point is that throughout some of those cartels, we have seen ties being established with hard left administrations, hard left regimes throughout the world, which really has a ripple effect in which crime in the region intermingles with the interests of foreign adversaries. So I'll just give you like a chain of events so you can picture how that plays out in practice. Hezbollah, which is one of the world's leading terrorist organizations, which is backed, funded, trained by Iran, has been trading in arms and drugs according to multiple investigations and reports for at least one decade, maybe two decades throughout Latin America, including the tri-border area between Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay. This organization essentially can only be funded by Iran because Iran is selling sanctioned oil to China. So quickly you see how this network of US adversaries can have those cartels do their bidding when they undermine US national security at the southern border, when they work with the Chinese Communist Party to flood the United States with fentanyl, a deadly drug that has been one of the main causes of death of US civilians in recent years. When we talk about surveillance, all of that seems to be part of the same scheme of events that in a way favors US adversaries. That is very fascinating, Marcos. You never fail to impress in your analysis. Let's leave it there for today. Thank you for speaking with us. Thank you so much. More concerns over spying by China in the UK as the husband of a British lawmaker is arrested over allegations of espionage. The man and two others were arrested under the country's National Security Act last week. Human rights activist Benedict Rogers joins us now. He is the co-founder and chair of Hong Kong Watch, senior director at Fortify Rights, and author of the book The China Nexus. Ben, welcome. Thank you for joining us here again. Just to start off, what is your reaction to this latest incident of potential spying for the Chinese regime in Britain? And I just wanted to emphasize that this is a British lawmaker's husband who has been arrested. That's correct. It is on one level really shocking. It involves the husband of a sitting British Member of Parliament. It also involves the husband of a former Member of Parliament and other individuals who have at various times in the past held senior positions as advisors in the Labour Party. It's the latest example of China's spying. We had a case last year which of course the prosecution then collapsed. And now we have this case. And there's another case currently on trial. So it shows that we have a very serious problem of espionage from the Chinese Communist Party in the UK. So what happens next then? What does this mean? Talk to us about the overall situation regarding espionage in Britain. I think these cases are probably just the tip of the iceberg. A few years ago, I think it was three years ago, the Intelligence Committee of the UK Parliament published a report saying that China represented the biggest threat to the UK in terms of espionage. It said that China was carrying out what it called a whole-of-state approach and had penetrated every sector of our economy and society, whether that's across different business sectors or across universities and of course in Parliament. And that report is being proven now to have been only too true. Sadly, not enough attention was given to that report and its recommendations at the time, and we're seeing the consequences. I think you're well aware that the British lawmaker's husband was reported that he was invited for an all-expense-paid trip along with a British reporter around three years ago. Should we be concerned about essentially any lawmaker and influential people being invited by the Chinese regime? Is this sort of a one-size-fits-all situation or is it something different? I think it is something different, but certainly we should be alert and cautious about this kind of thing. I wouldn't want to say that no lawmaker should go to China because there are occasions where we may need to talk to China, and I've never been one to say we shouldn't talk to China. The question is on what terms and with what purpose. So certainly there should be more scrutiny of visits, there should be a more awareness of the kind of influence that Chinese Communist Party will try to exert, and we should be much more rigorous in upholding security in Parliament and beyond. Okay, so beyond espionage, is there any other influence tactics by China or infiltration by the CCP into the UK that perhaps people should be aware of? Yes, I think there are very extensive efforts by China to influence and to infiltrate in ways that may not amount to espionage but nevertheless are deeply concerning. For example, the extensive influence of China in our university campuses because of the number of Chinese students who come to the UK to study here, and also because of funding by Chinese institutions for academic programs in the UK. And whilst I would never want to say that Chinese students shouldn't be welcomed in the UK, I think we do need to do much more to protect and uphold academic freedom. We've had at least two cases of academics, one at Sheffield Hallam University and one at University College London, facing pressure and being made to stop some of their teaching and research programs because of pressure from China. So that's just one example is the threats to academic freedom, but we see threats across the economy, across different sectors of the economy. And it's something we should take much, much more seriously. Ben, what is your opinion of the Chinese mega embassy approved in central London in terms of whether this could aggravate the problem of spying and infiltration? Well, I think it could. Opinion is divided and the government will use the argument that by having Chinese diplomats in one building rather than as they are currently across, I think at least seven different sites across London, they will argue it will make it easier for our security agencies to monitor what they're up to if they're all in one building. I think that's a misleading argument because they don't operate just from the building. Even if they're based in one building, they will continue to infiltrate across the country. And I think this mega embassy poses a serious challenge in terms of espionage and in terms of transnational repression. It is actually currently now under judicial review because the residents who live in the building that will be the Chinese embassy, if it goes ahead, have launched a judicial review. So it's now with the courts and that will delay and potentially end the plans for the embassy, depending on how the courts rule. But if it goes ahead, I think it will be a serious challenge for espionage and for transnational repression. Okay, Ben, maybe just one final question. And of course, it is very concerning, these actions by the CCP. But can you just lay it out for us very simply, very frankly, what's at stake here? Why does it matter to the average British citizen? Well, I think what is at stake, and of course, I should say, we don't know what kind of information the alleged spies are accused of handing over. And it is also a police investigation. So I can't comment on that case in detail. But what is at stake, if the allegations are true, is our national security. Both in this case and in the alleged spy case last year, they are accused of handing to a hostile state, China, information that presumably benefits China and harms the UK. So without knowing the details, I can't say more than that. But I think it's something that we should be deeply concerned about. And we should not be passing information to China that gives them an advantage and potentially threatens our security. Yeah, you're absolutely right. No matter which country, we shouldn't be giving the CCP information about this country in which then they can use against said country. Ben, thank you for speaking with us today. Really appreciate your time. Thank you very much.