I believe if they reneged on this deal, action will be taken. But I can't square some of the things that are coming out of the administration from reliable sources. That's what I find so disturbing. When I heard it from the Iranians, Sean, I dismissed it. I said, well, that's the same nonsense we're always hearing.
But when I hear from administration sources some of the things that you have heard of what's in this deal, that makes no sense whatsoever. It's not defensible. I think what the president should do is just let's release it and let people see what's out there so we stop debating about something none of us has seen. Yeah, I got it read to me, and it is, you know, it's not great. And I just know this.
The best ally we have is Iran because they they'll go back on a bad deal for them and a good deal for them because they're not trustworthy. I mean, Vice President kept saying in various outlets yesterday in the four Fox shows he was on, If they don't behave, they don't get the money. When have they ever behaved? Ever. Ever In any way, they're not interested in doing that.
And we just wiped out I know people don't want to acknowledge it. We wiped out their leadership, killed the Ayatollah, injured their new supreme leader to the point where he's been defaced and defiled and deformed. And you think they're going to try to fi get themselves in line? No. Guy that knows this better than me is Vice Admiral Robert Horwood, who grew up in Iran, senior adviser with the Iran Policy Project and at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America.
Vice Admiral, welcome back. I mean, we're just speculating on this, I think, 16-point plan. It's about two pages. Bud, what's your take?
Well, let me give you the facts as I understand it. Right now, the President controls everything. He has all the cards, and his bargaining position has never been stronger. The Iranian regime has been never been weaker because of the strikes, but more importantly, and why the President is so strong, he controls all the money. The blockade is just strangling them economically.
But he's hearing the rest of the world and the world economy.
So he's willing to work as part of this deal to open up the Straits of Hormuz. But what he needs from the Iranians is a signed document. It's not clear who's speaking on behalf of Iran and if they have the authority, but an acknowledgement that the Straits of Hormuz are open for business. You disavow any claims. It's international water.
You're not going to charge surcharge.
So if he gets that, Then you get the world economy back on track, at least for short term, which allows those thousands of ships that have been trapped. Inside the Arabian Gulf or the Persian Gulf, depending on which nomenclature you want. To get out.
So when they get out, he's achieved one of his most important objectives. Number two is the nuclear program. They need the nuclear material surrendered to us, either by taking it on the ground or handing it over and avowing that they will never sign or pursue any nuclear program.
So if he can accomplish those two things, then he's got times on his hand to deal with all the other objectives. It's not clear to me, this document, if those are the caveats and that's what he's going to get from this arrangement. And that's what he needs and wants. All right.
So obviously, you don't have all the cards because if they go 60 days and they just say, okay, 60 days are up. We're going to start tolling because they say they're going to use it. They use the term fees with Oman. And then we find out that they're beginning to build ballistic missiles, which, by the way, there's no provision not to. And they're allowed to get some money in and get everything going.
And they start feeding that money to Houthis. Hamas and Hezbollah. And they know it's close to an election. And the president doesn't want to bring the economy down three months before an election.
So, maybe they're going to feel emboldened because August is going to be here 60 days later, and they feel as though the president doesn't want to risk the price of oil.
Well, Brian, of course, that's the risk. But again, I think the president is more focused on the objectives and getting long-term peace and stability in the region on behalf of the Arab nations, on behalf of us, and the world economy.
So I think he understands all that dynamics. And don't forget, at any day he chooses, if he thinks he's being played and this president moves very aggressively and quickly, he can shut it all down. And you talk about money. The only money they're going to get out of the current arrangement is the ability to sell their oil again. And that's going to take some time to get back on the market and work that.
So that timeline of them getting money from their own oil sale, freeing up their oil, aligned to this timeline, puts us in a position to be able to shut it down very quickly and really make that initial money they will be able to gain somewhat irrelevant because it's not on the scale they need to get their country Back on track.
So, again, that's a strategy you could assess from what we're seeing. That's their strategy. But it's not clear from the documents or what anyone's saying at the moment. What about the $300 billion? What does that look like to you?
Because I like to see some language that says it's an escrow account, that they have some control over it, that it can't be used for anything that doesn't involve infrastructure or something to that nature. Or do you just say, hey, we can't get everything we want, if they get $300 billion from Qatar, so be it? No, you're exactly right. That's the bargaining power by controlling the money.
So they don't get any of that money until everything else is accomplished. That, I believe, is the strategy, until they have acknowledged that the straits are international waterway. They have no control. They can't tax anyone. They're not going to threaten it.
Not until they hand over the nuclear material and vow they will not have a nuclear program should they get any money. But once those two are accomplished, then you can talk about how the money will be applied.
So you're right, that's not clear in the current situation, but I hope that's the strategy being applied here. I guess so. What are the reports inside Israel? They seem very disturbed. They were not brought into this negotiation yet.
They're told not to attack Hezbollah. And now the foreign minister came out a few hours ago and said basically the deal's off if Israel doesn't back out of Lebanon.
Well, that's why this is all so nebulous and tentative. And Israel can't back out of Lebanon. They've had this problem for decades. And I'm in and out of Israel a lot. And you could watch every time I visited how deeper the defensive, how deeper the offensive was on their border and that territory right onto their border.
So they needed to take that ground just to ensure their security.
So that's going to be a tough pill for them to swallow. And I don't think they're going to go there. But again, one of the very tenuous Components of this deal that make it very difficult to bring to fruition at the end of the day. Yeah, I just can't see it happening. And Netanyahu is not going to, he's never not hit back when Hezbollah has hit them.
And that's just not his policy. When the president said, I'll have Syria take care of Hezbollah, are you kidding? Syria? They don't have an army. They don't have missile defense.
Hezbollah's got the missiles, I'm sure everyone knows. And Brent, you're exactly right, but you've hit the point. Time. Every time this doesn't get passed, every day the Iranians do not get relief from the blockade, they continue to be strangled.
So if it's not going to get signed this week, we have to wait. That's more pain, more leverage we have against the Iranians.
So the president's always said he's not going to sign a bad deal. And if we can't solve certain components of this, such as the Lebanon and the Hezbollah component, it doesn't get done.
So again, we're going to have to watch and see. And like it's been for the last 120 days, this is going to be high adventure. Admiral, do you believe that Qatar and Pakistan are double dealing? No, I believe they're looking after their own national security interests. And both of them are close and near to Iran and have significant strategic threats at hand.
So I think they're being fair and honest brokers. But again, at the end of the day, that's somewhat irrelevant. We've got to do what we need to do. And that's the president's decision.
So they can be accommodators. They can be commitzers, you know, give their two cents. But at the end of the day, we need to do what's in our own best interest as they are. Right. And getting that price of oil down, the market's up significantly, over $52,000.
It's up 160, 70 points. And we know, I think when I started this show, oil was $74 a barrel. When it gets down to 65, that's the break point where oil and gas producers don't want to go any lower than that.
So then we're going to feel it at the pump. And I know you're in military speak, but the president will lose considerable power. If he doesn't hold on to both chambers of Congress, so he has to look long-term, Admiral, right? Without a doubt. If you solve this problem for decades to come and you bring that.
Iranian market back onto the game for everyone, not just China, you changed the whole dynamic.
So that's why we have to have the long-term approach to this. A government in Iran who renounces nuclear weapons, who renounces any threats to the Straits of Hamut, who renounces funding Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and others. That's the end state that is, and we have to be focused on the objectives that get us to that long-term stability by meeting those objectives. Yeah, I just think that we have to have also a program, probably led by the CIA, that begins to arm the people. And I think it it would help because this current government is presenting a problem to the entire region.
Brian, I hope that's been going on for the last hundred and some days since we started this invasion. I think that, and again, Iran has been fighting us asymmetrically. They never attacked us directly. They were killing our people in Iraq, killing our people in Afghanistan, attacking us through their surrogates, going after our internet, after our institutions with cyber activity. We've got to play the same game against them.
We've got to fund people. We've got to communicate. We've got to do everything we can to undermine this regime unless they acknowledge and move to those objectives. Admiral, we know you have contacts in Iran. I know the internet's back up for the most part.
What's that contact been like? It's always good. He's very, very well. Several of them are very brave to communicate, but they're very hopeful. They're concerned about this agreement.
And they know very well you've got 70 million people who are pulling for the end state we've just talked about. They want a government that's going to use their resources to take care of them and not murder them. And they're hopeful we will achieve that as the end state. And look, we are where we are now because of the president's aggressive manner. He took Venezuela.
He went into Iran. We wouldn't be where we are today. And I don't think he's the type of president that's going to be satisfied with anything but ensuring his legacy. That he brought long-term peace and stability to the region that has been lacking for over five decades.
So the military always tells me: we don't go to war alone. We go to war with the State Department. Because diplomacy matters in war.
So having said that, do you believe we should get a different team to work on Ukraine and maybe Gaza and now this? We have the same two guys doing everything who are very talented, very successful, but now deeped in diplomatic relations. And I'm just or nuclear energy or nuclear weapons. Would you like to see more teams involved in this? Capacity is always an issue, and that's one of our strengths against other nations.
We have such deep benches and such professionals who know how to do this.
So yeah, if you look at what's happened with the National Security Council from Trump's both administration, it's been shrunk considerably at a time when they probably could have the biggest impact. Where you have staffs coordinating with the whole agency, State Department, Treasury, Justice, the Intel community, OSD, and others to get the best policies and programs.
So I think the shrinking of that organization and placing it all at either State Department or Department of War has been a shortfall. We could strengthen that organization, have capacity at a time where it really matters to get your best strategies from the policies you have.
So I think there is work to be done in that lane.
So Admiral, it's been great talking to you through this. And now we've got 60 days to go over this. And the President's going to be having a press conference very soon. We'll be carrying a lot of that. I can't thank you enough for all your insight.
Appreciate it. Always good to see you, Brian.
