Morning Joe - Iranian leader: Enemies’ security must be taken away

Episode Date: March 20, 2026

Iranian leader: Enemies’ security must be taken away To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

To be clear on the Mojtabha, the son, who has been named to replace him, it is unclear of his status or his involvement. He was injured very severely through one of the Israeli strikes. And so the decision-making is unclear about what's happening in the Iranian leadership. So we're less certain of the positions of Iranian leadership in their intentions than we were 60 days ago, correct? That's an accurate assessment. What does the intelligence community assess Israel's goals in this war to be? And are those goals aligned with the goals of the United States? I'm thinking carefully here about what can be said in this open setting versus a closed setting.

Are the goals aligned? The objectives that have been laid out by the president are different from the objectives that have been laid out by the Israeli government. And how do they differ? We can see through the operations that the Israeli government. government has been focused on disabling the Iranian leadership. Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, back on Capitol Hill yesterday, facing more questions about the war in Iraq. It comes as U.S. allies are signaling more support, but not necessarily in the way that President Trump wants. We'll explain that. Meanwhile,

the Trump administration is considering lifting sanctions on Iranian oil already at sea, as gas prices. continue to spike. Plus, we will fact-check claims from President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hexeth about U.S. aid to Ukraine and how it is factoring into this war. Also ahead, an update on Senator Mark Wayne Mullen's nomination

for DHS Secretary with the Republican receiving support from a colleague on the other side of the aisle will tell you who that is. And good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Friday. everybody, March 20th. Good to have you with us, also with us, the co-host of our 9-am-hour, staff writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire, co-host of the Rest is Politics podcast,

the BBC's Katty K, publisher of the newsletter, The Inc. on Substack, MS Now analyst, Anandiridharis, and contributing editor at the Financial Times, Kim Gattas, is with us this morning. Let's dive right in. Iran's new Supreme Leader is calling for the quote, security of his enemies to be taken away in the latest message to the public, now three weeks into the war. That coming, that warning coming in the form of a statement as the new leader has yet to be seen since assuming the post amid comments from American and Israeli officials that he may have been hurt in the fighting. Iranian state media also reporting this morning that the spokesperson for the country's revolutionary guard

was killed in an airstrike as Israel ramps up, attacks on leadership there. Meanwhile, Iran is continuing to target key energy sites across the Middle East. Kuwait says one of its three oil refineries came under attack by Iranian drones just hours ago, sparking a fire and shutting down the units affected by the attack. The same refinery had been hit just yesterday. This comes as the impact of the damage on energy sites is coming into focus. Qatar's energy minister says the Iranian strikes this week on the country's crucial gas facility reduced Qatar's export capacity by nearly 20 percent and will take three to five years to repair.

Israel, meanwhile, continues to hit back at Iran launching air strikes this morning toward Tehran as the country marks the Persian news. year. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday spoke out on the war saying that Israel acted alone in its strike on Iran's major gas field this week, adding that the country will hold off any further attacks on the key Iranian asset at the request of President Trump. Netanyahu also said, without providing any evidence, that Iran no longer has the ability to enrich uranium or make ballistic missiles. And the Israeli leader hinted at a possible ground component as the war drags on. That last line there, Joe. I'll let you take it away. Yeah, we have so many

things going right now, so many different directions and news coming in by the minute. Let's go to Kim Gattaz. Kim, um, several things happening right now. Um, several things happening right. now. The Wall Street Journal headline this morning is that, let's see, the U.S. warplanes and helicopters launch, battle to reopen the Straits, have that going. We have energy infrastructures being struck throughout the Middle East. We have Lebanon continuing be under bombardment from Israel. But also, one thing we did here yesterday, Gulf allies like the UAE and Saudi Arabia, actually telling the president both publicly and in private calls, finish what you started. Not so sure the American people feel the same. I'm curious.

Take us around the region, if you will, Kim, and tell us where the war is this morning. Good morning, Joe and Mika. Good to be with you. It feels to me like 20 days, 21 days into this. It is spiraling out of control to some extent in the sense that we don't know what the different strategies are, American, Israeli. We don't see much in terms of effective diplomacy. I know we've spoken a lot about the tactical victories of the U.S. military, the Israeli military. We've heard President Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu talk about obliterating this, or we've destroyed 100% of Iran's capabilities. And somehow the 0% that remains seems to be able to still do quite a lot of economic damage across the region.

And that's because this is very much an asymmetrical war, where the Israeli and American military might is no match for, asymmetrical actions that is low cost, sometimes low tech, and that can inflict damage across the region. I think it is very likely indeed that Gulf officials are telling the United States, you cannot now that you've started this war, leave us with the job unfinished. I still think that they did not advocate for this war. I remain convinced that they did not, despite some of the reporting in the U.S. media at the time. But now that we are in this war is the catch 22, the longer it goes on, the higher the cost and the higher the damage to not just the Gulf, but also the Arab world and the world economy. But end it too soon without some kind of conclusive result which makes sure that Iran cannot go back to threatening the region in a month or six or one.

And then, you know, you have countries in the region that cannot, in a sustainable way, recover from this war. So this is a very difficult, tricky moment for the region. And I think this is important for audiences in the U.S. and in Europe to understand because you may not like President Trump, you may not like Benjamin Netanyahu. but it has become existential in many ways for countries in the region, for Gulf countries, for Lebanon, and for the Iranian people. Yeah, and Katty Kay, that certainly is the feeling I get when I'm talking to leaders throughout the region who the morning after the war began were in shock and were saying, They would have really liked to have been kept in the loop there.

But it does feel now, as Kim said, for these leaders, existential. You kicked the Hornets nest. You attacked our sworn enemy when we were trying to figure out the best way to live peacefully in the region with them. And now if you leave, we're the ones that are going to face the bull. brunt of a newly angered and even more radicalized Iran, because let's make no mistake of it, as we keep killing political leaders and clerics, the Revolutionary Guard has just gotten even stronger the most radicalized, militant, anti-American of a faction over in Iran. They've just got more

powerful within that country, the question is, can American forces do enough with their tactics to take out so many leaders that they're ready to negotiate? Well, so many leaders and so many of their weapons as well, and they do seem to have degraded both, but clearly the Iranians still have enough. And even if it's just these small, cheap drones that they can keep mass producing and seem to be able to keep launching with impunity. in the Gulf states. And the Gulf states are now in a position where they've suffered massive damage to what was effectively, what I was, what was called to me a security premium that those

Gulf states had, which made them such desirable places for foreigners to live in, for foreigners to invest in. And now they need to make sure they can get back that reputation of being a safe place in the Middle East. But Kim, one of the things that really struck me in that hearing, and we heard it just in that clip with the Director of National Intelligence told Sibabad. I mean, you could have taken a nap between the end of the question and the beginning of her answer. She took so long to answer that question about whether there was a divergence in war aims between Israel and the United States. How is that being perceived? Obviously, it's playing out in Lebanon, your home country, but it's playing out throughout the northern Gulf as well, where

the Israelis have been attacking these oil fields. And how does that impact how this all turns out? if those, this war is being fought by two allies at the moment, Israel and the United States, if they're not on the same page, how much does that impact how this ends? Absolutely, Katie. I mean, that testimony in Congress was just stunning to, to listen to, to have Tulsi Gabbard pause for this long, really brings home the divergence in the war goals of the United States and Israel. I don't want to ascribe too much strategy to the Trump administration,

but I think they would have liked to see a positive outcome. However you define that, you know, the fall of the regime, the, you know, Iranian people getting a better new leadership and then, you know, prosperity and building Trump hotels across the region. In contrast, it seems very much, and we've read it from many analysts,

Israeli analysts, who describe the Israeli strategy and who describe Netanyahu's thinking. In contrast, you have there a plan for what seems to be constant chaos. And I have to say that the Israeli and the Iranian vision for the region are starting to really look alike.

Chaos forever. War, war, war, until victory, however you define that. But I think it's a, important to understand that the way this all started back in the 80s in Lebanon, in 1982, when Israel invaded Lebanon and collided with the Iranian revolution and propelled or ignited Iran's sort of regional architecture of proxy militias, etc. Israel often thinks it has attained a tactical victory or a strategic victory, but there is no diplomacy behind it. And then it creates

the next iteration of the threat. You know, it got rid of the Palestinians in Lebanon in 1982. We got Hezbollah. If Israel decides that this is, the chaos is the way forward and land grabs in Lebanon or in Syria on the Golan Heights are the way forward, you run the risk that you breathe life into groups like Hezbollah and others and create more of such threats to Israel, but also to the region's stability. So we really need to have, you know, Arab countries with Europe and, you know, cool heads in the United States come together and think about how do we bring this to some kind

of positive conclusion for the region, but especially for the Iranian people. When the, when the war began after October the 7th, David Ignatius and Tom Friedman, a lot of people asked, what's your plan for the day after the war? Yes, go to war, but what's your plan for the day after? And of course, we have found Benjamin Netanyahu has no plan for the day after the war, Jonathan Lemire, because as the New York Times and others have reported over the past year, Benjamin Netanyahu's plan is to stay at war. This is a guy, and it bears a He does not want to have to answer why he went begging the Qataris to continue funding Hamas, hundreds of millions of dollars, just weeks before Hamas launched their savage attacks on October 7th.

He doesn't want to explain why it took 12, 13, 14 hours for his government to protect the people of Israel while women were being beaten, beaten, brutalized rapes, parents were being killed in front of their children and children are being killed in front of their parents. We've asked the question time and time again. And the answer since then is, we'll give you the answer after the war. Well, there is no after the war now. Americans are waking up to images of Lebanon now being bombed night and day. And it continues. We had General Hurdling on the show earlier this week. And he said in the military, very early on, you were taught that great tactics, which the United States have, and poor strategy, is the slowest way to lose a war. Well, following up on what Kim said, you can say that about

Benjamin Netanyahu. Great tactics. They're able to inflict maximum damage among their enemies, but no long-term strategy, and that's why. Again, everything they do has tremendous blowback, and we'll have tremendous blowback this time as well. But we started talking yesterday about how Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump's end goals were different. Donald Trump, from everything your reporting is shown and mine and others, they wanted to grade Iran's military as much as possible. They want to guarantee that the straits are open and they want to come home. That's the opposite of Benjamin Netanyahu. And really over the past 24 hours, we've all seen that play out in front of the cameras. Yes, since the afternoon of October 7,

2023, Benjamin Netanyahu has taken his country to war and state at war, much to the frustration at times of Biden officials and, yes, Trump officials too. And we are seeing a real divergence in goals here, but right now, Israel's are winning. The United States, you know, we know Secretary of State Rubio got in a lot of trouble when he suggested, well, the U.S. was carried into war by Israel, and he's since walked away from that, but we are seeing the momentum of this conflict being dictated by Israel, it would appear, you're right, what the American goals were, and they were not clearly defined ahead of time, but they wanted to make a big impact on Iran, really set them back and then go. that is harder and harder to leave right now because the strait of whom it was being closed,

because of the attacks in the energy sector, because of the fears of what could be left behind, the U.S. finds itself embroiled in this war, potentially for a much longer time than the president might be comfortable with. And we have seen suddenly what they thought might have just been a few days, a couple weeks at most. Suddenly there's a $200 billion ask from the Pentagon heading its way to Congress and more and more troops heading to the region, to give the president options to deploy ground forces if he wants. And there's a growing sense they may be needed. And I keep going back to the idea.

I was on the campaign trail each and every day in 2016 with then candidate Trump. And such a popular part of his message was, we're going to end these forever wars. We're coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not going to involve you in any more significant conflicts. In his first term, he largely adhered to that. That guy is gone. and it is a very different style now.

And I think he fell in love with the idea of the one and done strike that we saw in Venezuela. This is turning into something more. I know you've been thinking about what the new Trump doctrine might be. I would add to that element three others. So he promised no more in a forever wars and these kind of stupid wars. He promised safety, like just basic safety. He promised crackdown on refugees and the border issue. And he promised costs.

would come down. By doing this war, I wouldn't even call this a war of choice. It's like a war of whim. And maybe a war of like following your friend off a cliff. He is on all four of those issues, betraying not me and you or anybody else, but his core base, those four promises.

No more stupid wars. I'll deal with costs. Because, you know, refugees and safety, because Iran is a terror state. It may not be able to win on this battlefield that we're seeing on our screen. But for the next 20 years to come, we're going to all have to live with the threat of terrorism

that has been re-ignited by this kind of treatment. There are going to be refugee flows when all of this, you know, the Israelis apparently want state collapse. That's one of their goals. I read the New York Times this morning. Well, that state collapse is going to mean refugees on a giant scale. It's one of the more populous countries in the world.

costs are going through the roof. And I think it's really worth asking as Americans, Donald Trump has demoted himself to being sort of BB's VP, right? Like, it's a very strange, we fund Israel's weapons. Like Israel is economically and militarily viable because of American support. So Donald Trump talks a lot about leverage. And he, as you know, is obsessed with the notion of if I'm giving you something, I want to be able to dictate terms.

And his whole policy is now, and every personal and economic elsewhere is about that. But in this relationship, he seems to be willing to follow his friend off a cliff. And very interesting, David Sanger reporting in the Times today about the Israelis having goals that are totally different from American goals, and yet the Americans are just, you know, along for the ride. So I'm curious why someone who is so sensitive to his own humiliation

is willing to be BB's VP. So interesting. And still ahead on morning, Joe, defense secretary Pete Hegeseth says families of service members killed in Iran have urged the administration to finish the job. But at least one father recalls his exchange with Hegsef differently. We're going to get into that reporting. Plus, President Trump compares the strikes on Iran to the Pearl Harbor attack in a meeting with Japan's prime minister. We'll show you how that moment planned out. And I love. love what we're doing next. It brings me back to my local roots. I love tossing to Bernie, because when I did Channel 3-I-Witness News daybreak at 5 a.m., that's exactly what I did. So I'm about to go to Bernie, right, Joe? No, not fair, not fair. You always go to Bernie. I'm going to go to Bernie today. And let me see if I could have worked in West Hartford. You have to have a little, like, sweet glint in your eye. Okay?

We'll be back. I'll tell you what. We have. It's the morning. Okay. You're happy. You're parking. Hey, everybody. Do it. Okay.

Hey, I hope everybody's having a great morning and hope you have a wonderful Friday. And we've got a lot of stuff going on through the week and make sure to check out our community calendar on our website. And later, a squirrel riding water skis. But first, a quick look at the Traveler's forecast this morning from Accuethers, Bernie Rayno. It's between the guys this morning, Bernie. What's going on? Wait, he's got it. Joe, fast-moving storm will push across the northeast today.

Some rain this afternoon, Buffalo thunderstorm in Pittsburgh. Rain in Albany, some snow northern New York state in the northern New England. Rain doesn't reach the east coast until tonight. Look at the temperature difference. New York City 53, ACUther says 70 in Washington, D.C. And your exclusive ACWather forecast for the South, spring is sprung. Travel delays shouldn't be many today. again, that rain doesn't reach the East Coast until tonight.

To help you make the best decisions and be more in the know, download the Akiweather app today. Enjoy your Friday. End of view. Why didn't you tell U.S. allies on Europe and Asia, like Japan, about the war before attacking Iran? So we are very confused about Japanese citizens. Well, one thing you don't want to signal too much. You know, when we go in, we went in very hard,

And we didn't tell anybody about it because we wanted surprise. Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Okay? Why didn't you tell me about Pearl Harbor? Okay? Right? You know, he said,

S could be, do you believe in surprise, I think much more so than us? And we had a surprise, and we did. And because of that surprise, we knocked out, the first two days, we probably knocked out 50% of what we were,

And much more than we anticipated doing. So if I go and tell everybody about it, there's no longer a surprise, right? Yeah. Yeah, that's something you wouldn't see from any other president because usually presidents are trying to be nice to allies. I have a feeling that's going to show up. You know the AI baby thing, capital babies or whatever they do. Yeah, that one's going to show up.

And you, yeah, exactly. That one's going to show up. That was like, I mean, I almost felt like I was watching S&L or something. Like, no. Well, you know, you almost felt like you were, yeah, you were watching a follow-up of him. He did not. Going on and on insulting France's leader a month or so earlier. So it's interesting, you know, this is really the time when we want allies on our side.

I'm not talking about that quip just by itself. I'm just saying you look what's happened over the last month or two. And this president is doing the exact opposite of what... Definitely not normal. Presidents in the past have done as far as bringing the allies in a little bit closer. But the fights continue. And, you know, Mika, that's a lot of people who say that's why they voted for them. and, well, you asked for it.

You got it. That's one way of putting it. President Trump, I'm like, I'm embarrassed. I didn't know he was such a history buff. I'm embarrassed for the country. I don't think. I mean, to Joe's word, allies, I think you have to actually understand at a gut level

what an ally is, even in your personal life. This is a man who only understands transactions in every walk of his life. and it's manifesting on the biggest stage. That was something. Meanwhile, President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hagseth yesterday both blamed the Biden administration's military aid for Ukraine for depleting U.S. weapons stockpiles, not the case, FYI,

as they sought to defend the Pentagon's $200 billion budget request for the Iran War. Here's what they both had to say. Again, not the case. Take a look. We're also still dealing with the environment that Joe Biden created, which was depleting those stockholds and not sending them to our own military, but to Ukraine, which is when every time we reach back and look at any sort of a challenge we have, it goes back to, well, send it to Ukraine. Ultimately, we think this should be these, these munitions are better spent in our own interests

at this point. And this kind of funding bill is going to ensure that we're properly funded going forward. We want to have vast amounts of ammunition, which we have right now. We have a lot of ammunition, but it was taken down by giving so much to Ukraine. They gave so much, you know, Biden gave $350 billion worth of cash and military equipment to Ukraine. And he didn't rebuild anything. Where did we begin? Former Congressman in Combat veteran Adam Kinsinger points out that the United States gave

Ukraine the materials it was replacing, which in turn actually encouraged the U.S. to increase production, all for less than the current $200 billion request for Iran. According to a U.S. Inspector General report, Congress has approved roughly $188 billion in spending for the war in Ukraine. While a fact sheet last year from the Department of Defense, states that the U.S. has committed about $66 billion in direct security assistance to Ukraine since the start of Russia's invasion. Joe. Yeah. And again, again, it's just, again, for some reason, they're so factually challenged on many things, but especially on Ukraine. As I've been saying, the administration's been

saying on and off the record for a year now. Oh, Ukraine's about to lose. Russia is so powerful. They're about to take over the Dunbos. They'll have the Dunbos in two weeks. Oh, they'll have the done. And of course, the Ukrainians had the best month, the last month that they've had since 2003.

So, I mean, it's, they continue, it just continues just constantly propping up Russia. They've now taken sanctions off of Russian oil at the absolute worst time in that conflict. And Katty is breaking.

news for everybody at the White House and every Republican on Capitol Hill that hates Ukraine, you're once again on the wrong side of the American people. I mean, you look at a poll. Here's a poll that was taken. End of December. And I think it's the last one we could find. 49% of Americans support increasing aid are maintaining the same aid. 30% of, want to decrease our stop aid. So that's that's that's one point shy of half of America and only 30 percent, less than one third, have the president and the administration's position on this story, where of course if you look at the actual war in Iran right now, a Reuters ipso's poll at the end of February had that number at 27 percent. Forty-three percent said no as we were going into that war.

And it's not really gotten that much better. We're, you know, some supports in the 30s, even up to the low 40s. But the Iran war remains very unpopular, whereas supporting Ukraine is something that half of Americans seem to still believe is in the best. interest of America's safety, that we don't have an invading Vladimir Putin and Russia, sweeping not only across Ukraine, but going to Poland and the Baltic states next. Yeah, and by the way, many of those members of Republican members of Congress, who you just referred to, Joe, they are the same members of the Republican Party who were giving Vladimir Zelensky standing ovations when the war began four years ago.

And in the Senate, certainly, you know that a lot of those Republicans still support the idea of America actually giving military support to Ukraine. It's not at the moment, another red herring that's out there. It's only the Europeans that are giving the Ukrainians' weapons that they have bought from the United States. But those Republicans who do support Ukraine are actually in step with many people in the Republican base and in the MAGA base as well.

I think it was Ian Brzezinski, Mika's brother, who pointed me to a poll a couple of months ago, showing that even amongst MAGA, there is support for continuing the effort to help Ukraine. And as you say, Ukraine's managed to survive a brutal winter in which their energy sources were being attacked. They've been freezing cold, and yet they've made gains militarily. And now, who are the allies that are actually helping the United States in its war effort against Iran and trying to protect those Gulf states from Iran? It is the Ukrainians who are there.

We saw in the papers yesterday, several hundred Ukrainians. have now gone to the Gulf to try and show them how they can defend themselves against the drones. It turns out that Vladimir Zelensky does have some cards to play. Yeah, and as Ukraine, of course, helping the United States, we have Russia actively working against the United States, report after report about how they're supplying Iran with intelligence and targeting data on the U.S. and its allies. Kim, back to you.

You know, as amid this discussion about U.S. supplies, there is active consideration right now about ground troops. Axios has reporting this morning, the president actively considering ascending a force to Karg Island, thinking that if they seize that, that that would perhaps force Iran to open up the Strait of Hormuz. That would be an extraordinary escalation in this conflict. And just if you will, we know the Iranian military has been degraded to be sure, but the regime, the I told his fate in question, but the regime clearly still in place, you know, what would be that fight like? Do you have any sense if that, if this were to occur, if this next step were to be broached? Would there be any sort of uprising in the region,

or is there, or is the Iran, the brilliant people still too afraid to act? I shudder at the thought of a land grab or a marine, you know, operation, U.S. Marines operation to seize Khark Island. I have just terrible flashbacks. to Beirut, 1983, and the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut, which, you know, the Marines came to Lebanon because Israel had invaded Lebanon. So this is all, you know, a lot of layers of trauma for people in the region and surely for the Marines whose memories, you know, remember 1983. I think, again, it is worth repeating that it is Iran at the moment that is building leverage, even if we are seeing military tactical successes.

And to Annan's point about why is Donald Trump going along with Netanyahu and why might he consider also therefore troops on the ground, it is because it looks more spectacular, or he hoped it would be more spectacular and certainly quicker than any long, drawn-out, technical negotiation for a nuclear deal, which at the end of the day is just a piece of paper. And I think that was the lure that Netanyahu presented to President Trump, said, look, we can do this, we can do it quickly. It'll look great. It looks spectacular.

We can reshape the Middle East. But instead, we're now 21 days into a war. And, you know, if President Trump did not understand what he was getting into, I wish he dread my piece in the Financial Times in February where I said this regime is not going to capitulate. I'm not saying it will not implode. I'm not saying that at some point, if given some breathing space, the Iranian people will not take to the street. But I don't see this regime capitulating. There is no quick military victory here. There's never going to be three days and victory.

So I just want to ask you, Kim. As a reporter, as someone who lives in Lebanon, also on a personal level, we understand in America pretty clearly the war with Iran, even if we oppose it. We understand, you know, since 1979, what's going on there. We understand the attacks against the Gulf states that Iran thinks are too well. Westernized, too secular, too close to the United States. What a lot of Americans don't understand are the pictures of your country being blown up every night, every morning. Tragic pictures of mothers holding pictures of their sons, their dead sons, crying, talking to representatives of the Vatican who are there trying to comfort them. Explain the impact this is having on Lebanon, because we know, the Saudis, the Emirates,

they're telling the president continue this to the end. We can't have a wounded, angry Iran. What about Lebanon? Your country, once again, being devastated, and I'll be honest, I mean, most Americans just don't understand why Benjamin Netanyahu is focusing so much on attacking your country. Listen, I understand about Hezbollah. I get it. But I don't understand why these attacks are so widespread.

What can you tell us? And what's the attitude of the people of Lebanon through this? The people of Lebanon feel very much stuck between the military campaign of Benjamin Netanyahu and that has been constant. since, you know, last since November 2024, with potential land grabs, you know, on the horizon in southern Lebanon, a terrible idea for Israel to occupy southern Lebanon again. It has done that before. It did not work out well for Israel. Depopulating the border along the border with Israel as well.

you know, devastating consequences for the Lebanese. But Lebanese, as I said, feel very much stuck between Israel's military campaign and Hezbollah's devotion to the Iranian revolution. And they feel betrayed by everyone. They feel like their country is being taken hostage, battleground for other people's wars, for everybody's wars on their territory. there is real anger in Lebanon at Hezbollah today for having dragged the country into this regional war by launching the first rocket attacks against Israel to avenge the death of the supreme leader Ali Khamenei.

Hezbollah's argument is that Israel was going to attack anyway, but Lebanon would have had a much better diplomatic political position had it not provoked Israel. What Israel is now trying to do, I believe, is in its perspective, and I'm not justifying, I'm just explaining, is to degrade Hezbollah as much as possible, depopulate southern Lebanon, create a buffer zone that joins into the southern Bekha Valley of Lebanon, Mount Hermon, which Israel already occupies, and join that with a buffer zone that it has created extending outside of the Syrian Golan Heights. I'm sorry, we don't have a map right now, but it turns into a sort of a border area, a buffer zone that they would like to probably keep depopulated and then joins up with the West Bank. Those are the military goals. And again, I repeat, it's a terrible idea because you will create the next Hezbollah. And just a final point, the Lebanese government is trying to take the diplomatic initiative to offer negotiations with Israel, which is a historic first. So far, President Trump and Israel,

have, you know, not given much attention to that. And I think they are absolutely wrong. Because if you want a diplomatic victory somewhere that you can build on, Lebanon right now is the easier place to start. And what Netanyahu is offering is not going to bring security, neither for Israel nor for the region. Contributing editor at the Financial Times, Kim Gattas, thank you very much for your insights this morning. And up next, we'll dig into Anand's ongoing series about the Epstein class. We're back in just a moment. Annand, you've been digging into the Epstein files in a new series for The Inc.

It's called The Epstein Class. And for the latest chapter, you take a look at some of the wealthy and powerful people with ties to the late sex offender. What did you learn? And are people getting distracted from this story? They are. I mean, I don't know if Donald Trump launched his war of whim to change the subject, but he has certainly changed the subject. But I think we're going to, you know, as important as the war is, it felt very important to us to continue looking into these files.

And I think one of the things that becomes very clear in these files is the operating system of power that went far beyond Jeffrey Epstein, that went into our financial institutions, our educational institutions, our governing class. So, you know, we have three chapters so far. It's sort of like that 19th century idea of serialized books. So we're doing like a chapter every week or so. The first one was about how, why no one spoke out. This guy met and interacted with hundreds, maybe thousands of people, some of whom knew a lot, some of whom maybe knew less. But there was almost no speaking out.

There was almost no one at Harvard saying, we shouldn't actually be taking money from this guy. There was no one at these fancy New York dinner saying, you know what, this guy actually shouldn't be at this dinner. So I wrote about, you know, courage. What happens in an age of networks? So everybody wants to stay in the network. Everybody wants to keep all their options open. And no one's willing to speak out.

The second piece was actually, I'm thinking of your conference, Mika. It was about how there are, for all the women and girls in all these photos, I went through the whole photo archive. Women and girls everywhere, obviously, it's a sex crimes investigation. However, whenever there was a, there was one genre of photo where there's no women. and girls. Whenever there's a table and there's food and drink on the table and there's intense conversation, suddenly the women and girls are gone. And it occurred to me that these guys in this Epstein class, they don't eat with women. Women are for pool time. Women are for the massage room. Women are for frolicing. But when you're having like real conversation, real talk, it's dinner,

it's like intellectual exchange. The women and girls were always removed. So the second chapter was about why they are so allergic. They're kind of nightmare in this. group of people is like a 40-year-old woman with thoughts. Like that would be just their their biggest fear. And then the third chapter you showed, Rich Brain, it was about the friendship of Leon Black, a big private equity titan that was that managed, Epstein managed his money. And these emails that Epstein sent him in their exchanges were very striking because it shows what a lot of these folks think about all day. These were not emails to deputy.

These were emails to an actual billionaire. And it was like, how do you set up an LLC to acquire a painting to get this tax deduction? And so many of our debates in this country is like, we can't tax billionaires because they're spending all their time thinking up these incredibly important ideas that are going to make the world a better place for all of us. And it actually turns out they're thinking about, as these files show, how to set up LLCs for the purchase of their paintings. So let's dive into this a little bit more because I do think one of it was so revealing about this massive trove of emails is how the rich, but also sort of the elite that Epstein would have in his circle talked about and thought about the rest of the country, like very looking down upon people. And we saw Senator Ossoff of Georgia use the phrase Epstein class in a speech a few weeks ago that I think,

really resonated with folks, sort of that idea, that they're elite who care about themselves, they care about their money, they don't care about you. Now, the irony here, of course, is that Donald Trump in 2016 ran against that class. That's what he said, even though, of course, he's very much part of it. And in fact, part of Epstein's Circle even. But as a political argument, do you think that's one that's going to really sort of, that could resonate with people going forward? Yes, because what it does is it gives people an upstream explanation that they were lacking for a downstream experience that they've been having. People have been having the experience of life feeling hard, life feeling unavoidable, seemingly solvable problems just not getting

solved. Your health care sucks. It doesn't get fixed. Your kids' education is cuts, cuts, cuts, cuts, doesn't get fixed. People live every day and have for a year in 2008. Like, you don't get help, but big banks, too. People know that. I think what the files have exposed is the inner working, inner conversation, as you say, the inner attitudes, which is much harder to come by normally, right? As reporters, we spend all day, you have that notebook trying to ferret out little scraps of how are people actually thinking in the kingdom, in the palace, in the corridors. This is a glimpse of maybe why your health care is like that. Maybe why your kids' education is like that. Maybe why your bank got a bailout and you didn't get any help with your home in 2008 or 2009.

This is kind of peeling back the onion on the people, the attitudes, the values that you already have experienced in your life through the effects. And one thing that threads through this group, which includes a small number of people who are committing actual depraved sex crimes and a much larger group of people who were not committing. sex crimes, presumably, but who were in this network, who didn't have a problem with him, who must have known different things. What connects them all is a kind of indifference. And we've talked about it before, an indifference to those crimes at the very, you know, at the very heart of it, but also an indifference to all manner of pain. So part of what we're trying to do in the series is say, this is, there's some very powerful people who would love this to just be a story of something six guys did in a massage room. What the evidence suggests looking at these

is there's a there's that and as these survivors have have urged people to say there is a whole structure of power and a culture that is that is worth studying here so all we're keeping it free and open to all so sign up at the ink and uh and read along with us the epstein class is available online now on gerard artists thank you very much and again sign up for the ink to be able to read it if you haven't already