All right, Alexander, let's talk about

the situation with the United States and

Iran. Theou is uh is crumbling or has

has disintegrated. It's is there anou?

The United States is actually saying now

as the markets are opening on Monday,

the US is saying that theou is is is

still holding. It's still still talks

are proceeding. All is good. um Friday

as the markets were closing and we know

from NBC News that the Trump

administration did not want to announce

strikes into Iran until after the

markets closed. But as the markets

closed, we got a whole lot of strikes

and then we got the Iran retaliations.

We have the the IRGC hitting tankers

that are taking the southern route

instead of their approved route. um a

weekend of of of strikes and counter

strikes and fighting between uh both

sides. What are your thoughts?

I think that there is an um a a a

powerful faction in Iran which concludes

I think rightly that Iran has been

played here in the sense that they

presented to the Americans this MLOU

which contained all of these enormous

apparent concessions by the Americans.

And um what the Iranians are now

starting to understand is that the

Americans signed theou with only one

purpose to get the straight of Hormuz

reopened and that they have no in

interest or intention of moving forward

with any other part of theou. They're

not going to repay any money to um Iran.

They're not going to freeze any assets.

They're not going to lift any sanctions.

they're not going to do any one of these

things. So um and of course the Israelis

continue their pressure on Hezbollah in

Lebanon and have just um come to an

agreement with the Lebanese government

which is Christian dominated and

therefore hostile to Hezbollah which um

basically um an agreement which

basically requires um Hezbollah to

disarm and um conceds Israeli control of

large parts of southern Lebanon. So I

think there are there is a faction

within the IRGC which has been looking

at all of this. They're saying this is

really we we we've given away our most

important piece of leverage. So they're

striking at um tankers that have been

trying to pass through the straight of

Hormuz. They're trying in other words to

create issues with the straight of

Hormuz. Again, they are probably trying

to lay minds or talking about laying

minds and the result is that theou

exactly as you say is starting to

crumble. There is still within Iran a

group probably Galibbuff maybe Iraqi too

who on the contrary are saying and

Peskan obviously who who are saying well

you know let's not give up on this yet

um we've got theou the Americans

conceded an awful lot let's see whether

we can take this thing forward let's see

whether the negotiations lead anywhere

and is

acting as a force for restraint. Um, as

it becomes increasingly clear that in

fact theou process is going to go

nowhere, I think you're going to see the

hardliners in Iran without

>> uh there there's a big military buildup

that has been taking place and continues

to take place

>> from the United States into into the

region.

>> Yeah. Um I I don't know what what uh

what that's going to to result in or

what the reason for for that is. Many

people suspect many analysts suspect

some sort of a a renewed largecale

operation.

>> Yeah.

>> Some analysts say ground ground forces.

I don't I don't I don't think so. But

>> you know a lot of the buildup is

happening in Iraq.

Um,

>> we had these Iraq uh Iraqi raids into

the green zone, the purging of of uh of

politicians and and officials.

>> Yes.

>> Who I believe now it has been cons

confirmed um were were working with

Iran, at least an oil minister

>> and uh and his team that that seemed to

have been working with Iran that the

Trump administration was not happy

about.

>> And so we had the raids into the green

zone. by the way a lot of people think

the green zone is why would why would

Iran aligned Iraqi politicians be in the

green zone I mean the green zone is is

not only US embassy it's it's a huge

area of land it has uh the US embassy

but also has all the politicians are

there the NOS's are living there I mean

it's it's basically where all of these

people are are living that's where they

are

>> um but um but I think that was an

interesting development it it shows that

the Trump administration

>> is using these 60 days and theou in my

opinion to to put a type of squeeze onto

Iran. So, so, so they're looking at Iraq

and they're saying, "Okay, let's try to

remove Iranian influence in Iraq. Let's

continue the military buildup. Let's

continue to to to restock on our weapons

and and whatever we had in the Middle

East. Let's let's pour weapons in there.

We might need them in after the 60

days." Um, let's look at point one of

theou, which is the Lebanon ceasefire.

Let's find a way to work around that.

Okay, let's get the deal between Lebanon

and Israel and tell uh Iran, here you

go. Uh, point number one, there has to

be a ceasefire in Lebanon. Well, the

Lebanese government and the Israeli

government, they've signed a framework

which says that Hezbollah needs to

disarm. So, we're throwing the ball back

at you, Iran. Yes. And then you have uh

what you said which was the the the ways

to work around

>> Hormuse

>> by by looking at the at the southern

route at the Oman route.

>> And then of course the price of oil

which has gone down.

>> Yes.

>> Considerably which does give the White

House time and space.

>> Exactly. I I think that is exact. I

think you've summed it up precisely. I

agree with you by the way about the

events in Iraq. They're clearly a purge

of pro-Iranian

um politicians in Iran. Of course, you

can always talk about corruption.

Corruption there is everybody in Iraq is

corrupt to a certain degree. Anybody in

public life is corrupt. But ultimately,

this is just the um this is just the you

know the rationale given for what is

really a political purge. But you're

absolutely right. That's exactly what's

going on. and the American buildup is

taking place and um

the US never really planned

never really intended to implement theou

and

the original supreme leader Ayatah Ali

Ham the one who was killed by the

Israelis

um on the first day of the of the 40-day

war he he warned about this. He said,

you know, we must never ever concede

temporary ceasefires to the Americans.

They will never implement the terms.

They will always take advantage. It will

just mean that we are prolonging the

conflict and that won't play out to our

advantage. Now, he was killed. there's

been this unstable political situation

in Iran itself because the new supreme

leader is um untested. He's probably

been badly wounded. He doesn't have the

authority of his father. There's been

very heavy pressure from China to get

the Straight of Hormuz reopened. The

Chinese do not like the idea of straits

and international waterways being closed

because they worry that will create a

precedent that the United States might

one day use against them. So instead of

sticking to the policy of the the

assassinated supreme leader, the

Iranians got theou which was as we know

essentially set out set out their

shopping list of demands. But of course

what they've discovered is that the

Americans sign a document but they're

not really interested in implementing

its terms. They're doing exactly what

you said. They're they're coming up with

workarounds and they're conducting

buildups and they're purging the friends

of Iran in Iraq. So that's exactly

what's happening. I think you've

described it exactly correctly. The the

question is this. Will the Iranians

continue to be uh strung along in this

way? Or alternatively,

will the hardliners win the people in

the IRGC? I think that in Iran the IRGC

the hardliners have been greatly

strengthened by what has happened over

the last um few months.

They after all can argue that it was

they who fought the Americans to a

standstill and in the end I think they

will prevail and at some point over the

next few weeks we'll probably see the

straight of Hormuse essentially closed

again and we might quite easily be

drifting back into a war but um that's a

guess there obviously people in Iran

Pezan Galibbath Arashi others who

probably take another approach. And of

course, there's still the issue of China

and what it wants.

>> Yeah. China. Uh this time around,

wouldn't Iran have a difficult uh time

um explaining the the closing of Hormus?

>> I mean, what is Iran going to say this

this time around? They have theou. They

signed up to it. Yeah,

>> they're going to say we're closing

Hormoose because Oman is allowing ships

to pass through their um territorial

control of of the strait. I mean, how do

they justify that? And then you have the

pressure of the Chinese who are going

to, as you said, who are who are going

to tell Iran, look, just just try to to

work through theou because we don't want

waterways closed because if if this

precedent is set, then they're going to

to close our waterways, the US, or they

might. I mean you know let me just

reveal to China they will close your

waterways with whatever happens in Horus

or not.

>> So I mean you know I don't understand

the Chinese rationale there. They might

it might be used as a precedent to

possibly close. No they are going to

close the waterways around China doesn't

matter what happens in in Iran

>> but um but but how does yeah how does

Iran u rationalize this? How do they

convince the international community

this time? Or the first time around it

was pretty straightforward. We were

attacked.

>> We have to defend ourselves. One of the

ways we defend ourselves, we close

Horamoose. Whether you like it or not,

Oman or the Gulf countries. But what are

they going to say this time if they

decide to close Hormus?

>> It's going to be very very difficult

indeed. And um I I I I think that they

are um politically, diplomatically in a

much weaker position than the one they

were in. um if um you thought the policy

of the original supreme leader had been

followed and they you know held out for

uh you know a complete withdrawal from

the U by the US and had said you know

we're not prepared to um agree temporary

ceasefires

um and instead stick to the policy that

there must be a final agreement which

the United States must honor and

basically withdraw from the Middle East

or the that that part of the Middle

East, it's going to be much much more

difficult. I think that the IRGC

their approach is

we don't care. We don't care what China

is saying. We don't care what the uh

Persian Arab Gulf States are saying. We

don't really believe that the Persian

Arab Gulf States are interested in the

security architecture that they're

stringing us along with. So we just do

that which is going to work for us and

what these other countries do, what

policies they follow, uh what complaints

they make, that really isn't our

concern. We're here to defend Iran.

We're not here to keep the Chinese, the

Russians, the Saudis, the Kuwaitis, the

Qataris, all of those pe the even happy.

And I think probably that view will

eventually prevail. Now about China, um

we come back here to the way that the

Iranians

have in the past treated their friends

and I think that the Chinese would have

been much more sympathetic to Iran if

Iran had been more cooperative with them

in the past. Um I we've discussed in

these programs the fact that the

Iranians did not fulfill it was the

Iranians who always walked back uh or or

resisted offers of military help from

Russia and that it the reason that Iran

didn't acquire the Suhoy 35s before or

didn't acquire the air defense system

before that the Russians offered was

because various factions in Iran Iran

didn't want them. Um, which seemed

strange to me, but it does seem that

that was the true reason. And it turns

out, it's been the same story with China

as well. Um, apparently, in fact, we I'm

sure you both remember that a few years

back, there was a massive agreement

signed between China and Iran. Um, a

strategic partnership deal. uh China was

going to invest hundreds of billions of

dollars in the Iranian economy. It would

have transformed the Iranian economy.

And then as soon as that deal is signed,

Iran takes the deal, leverages it and

uses it to sign a whole set of deals

with with Western companies. And not a

single Chinese company apparently landed

a deal directly after this agreement was

signed. The Chinese were apparently

furious about this and felt very

offended and this soured

badly their relationship with Iran and

um it meant that the Chinese then pulled

back on their offers for aid to Iran.

Iran has not treated those who would be

its friends well. If Iran in the past

had moved forward

and worked with China to build up strong

economic links with China, if there had

already been hundreds of billions of

dollars of Chinese investment aid in

Iran, probably the Iranian economy would

be much more stable. Perhaps the attack

on Iran would not have happened because

China was there. And certainly China's

stance towards Iran would be different

from the one we have seen. The Iranians

have repeatedly made this mistake and uh

you know

it begs the question why but you know

this thing with China

which I read about by the way first read

about in the Guardian I've asked around.

It turns out it's true and it tells you

an awful lot about the way in which Iran

has not handled its diplomacy very well.

>> Well, it's it's complicated. Um, yeah,

because China is supporting or did

support Iran and continues to support

Iran in in a way to a certain extent

with regards to the conflict with the

United States and China

>> needs Iran to uh

>> to survive.

>> Yes.

>> For its own well-being.

>> Yes.

>> For its own interest. It it needs Iran

to survive and and of course you have

you do have the the uh the energy trade

w with Iran which is important to to

China as well as the the shipping lanes

and and the waterways.

>> Absolutely. Absolutely. But there's a

there's a huge difference between

China making pragmatic decisions to

support Iran in its own self-interest

and um China supporting Iran because it

likes Iran and feels a certain degree of

affinity for the country. um I in

relations between people and it's also

true in relations between states actual

friendship that goes beyond merely

self-interest

can actually affect behavior um in the

relationship between China and Russia

has also been very complicated. the

Chinese weren't in happy about the SMO

from a Chinese point of view. Um, an

operation that seeks to redraw

recognized international borders is

something that the Chinese find very

difficult. But the Russians have gone

out of their way to make friends with

China. They've opened up Russia to

Chinese investment. They've worked very

hard with China. Putin meets with

Cinping regularly. So the Chinese have

gradually been one round. Iran did not

has not done that to anything like the

same degree.

>> Uh final uh final question we turn to to

Trump. Uh we said it was the a good deal

theou.

>> Yeah.

>> Uh very good that Trump signed it. Very

good that he accepted it. Yes. the

United States uh did did take a loss in

the in the 60-day uh war with Iran, but

at the end of the day, it was a smart

thing to do to sign theou. And it did

provide the Trump administration with a

way to to get out of this mess,

>> to walk away from this and get out of

this mess.

>> Now, the Trump administration, it looks

like they're they're not walking away

from this mess and they're using theou

>> correctly. They signed it. It would have

given them a way out.

But now they're using theou to get back

in and to turn a loss into a win. Yes. I

it it's a classic example of how to be

cunning and not to be wise.

Uh signing a an agreement that you have

no intention of honoring in order to

trick the other side into making

concessions is can be cunning. It can be

clever. Um, it can be devious, but it's

not really wisdom. And it's certainly

not wisdom in this case. I I I I think

we can reiterate what we said in our

previous program. Theou the terms of

theou were for the United States a

deliverance an escape from these

entanglements in the Middle East which

have just drained away American power

and have been tying the United States

into a region where it doesn't have any

real long-term interests or even

business to be. So get out of the Middle

East. That's what most people in the US

want. That's most pe what most people

who serve in the US military, it seems

to me, also want. It was one of the

things that enabled Trump to win the

election in 2024 that he said to people

who had been in the military and who'

been involved in all the regime change

wars, I'm not going to do this. I'm

getting America out of this region.

Instead,

he's used

a

agreement, which is what theou in a

sense is, which could have been a

pathway to achieving precisely that

objective,

as something completely different, as a

trick to get deeper into the Middle East

and to reverse this defeat that the

Iranians have inflicted on him. That's

cunning, but it's absolutely not wise.

We have in Greek a word cutoos.

Very difficult to translate into

English, but I think you know exactly

what it means. It means to be cunning

and clever but stupid at the same time.

>> Yeah.

>> All right, we will end the video there.

The duran.locals.com. We're on xron

rumble. We're on Telegram. We are also

on Substack. Go to the ranch shop, pick

up some merch. All those links are

description box down below.