Scott Horton Show - Just the Interviews - 3/14/25 Muhammad Sahimi on how Trump’s Return and Israel’s War are Affecting Iran

Episode Date: March 23, 2025

Scott brings Muhammad Sahimi back on the show to talk about recent developments in Iran. They discuss the Trump administration’s relationship with the Iranian regime, the political dynamic within Iran and much more.  Discussed on the show: “'Max pressure' 2.0 on Iran could trigger a nuclear crisis” (Responsible Statecraft) “How Iran quietly buttressed its pledge to not build nukes” (Responsible Statecraft) Muhammad Sahimi is a professor at the University of Southern California who analyzes Iran’s political developments, its nuclear program, and foreign policy. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Roberts and Robers Brokerage Incorporated; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom; Libertas Bella; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott. Get Scott’s interviews before anyone else! Subscribe to the Substack. Shop Libertarian Institute merch or donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal or Bitcoin: 1DZBZNJrxUhQhEzgDh7k8JXHXRjY Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All right, y'all, welcome to the Scott Horton Show. I'm the director of the Libertarian Institute, editorial director of anti-war.com, and author of Provote, how Washington started the new Cold War with Russia and the catastrophe in Ukraine. Sign up for the podcast feed at Scotthorton.org or Scott Horton Show.com. I've got more than 6,000 interviews in the archive. for you there going back to 2003 and follow me on all the video sites and x at scott horton show all right you guys introducing mohammed sahimi he is a professor of chemical engineering at usc go bruins and uh but he's a really great guy anyway and he's written for a bunch of great publications over the years

including antiwar dot com and responsible statecraft which is where he wrote his last one which Oops, I don't have in front of me anymore for some reason, but I'll pull it up here in a second. Welcome back to the show, Mohamed. How are you doing? I'm fine. It's great talking to you, someone that have admired for years. Well, that's very nice of you to say. It's great to have you back on the show here. There's so much going on, and I am so far behind on, well, just interviews in general, but particularly on Iran and their nuclear program, their politics, the new president and his relationship with the Ayatollah and now Donald Trump is in here and he's inherited the sanctions that Biden inherited from him and I don't know what's going to happen or what's going on. So I'll just phrase my opening question to

you as broad as that. Just catch us up about what is the state of the relationship between America and Iran right now, Mohamed. Well, Iranians elected the new president last August. The guy is a moderate and highly educated and had served in the Iranian parliament for many years. Right after he started his term, he announced that he would like to negotiate with the United States over nuclear problem and, if possible, other issues. Then he brought in a former foreign minister, Mahamad Jawad Zhaif, who was one of the architect of the JCPOA. the nuclear agreement that Iran had made with the United States and its Western allies in 2015, he brought him into his administration in order to lead the possible negotiations to the United States.

Both of them seem to have the support of the establishment, and in particular Ayatollah Khomeini, the supreme leader. And that was evidenced by the fact that Zaire published a long article in foreign and a peace in the Economist of London, in which he emphasized that Iran is ready to negotiate with the United States over several issues, including nuclear issues. Then he went to Davos in Switzerland to participate in the annual meeting there, and there he gave an interview to Paris, a carry-off, CNN, in which he again emphasized that he's ready to talk. At the same time, homily, in his speech last August, right after

after Pradeshkian started his term, said that there is no barrier to negotiations with the West, in particular the United States, which was quite surprising because how many had always had a sort of an hostile attitude towards the United States. Then when Trump started his term, he also seemed to want negotiations with Iran. And after he expressed that explicitly, Harmony again in his speech said that they should pursue the negotiations with the United States, but realized that this is the same Trump that took the United States out of JCPOA in 2018, so they have to be caused. But what happened was Trump signed his executive order, bringing back the maximum pressure policy by which he intends to talk.

heightened all their sanctions against Iran again and add to them. And in fact, since signing them, signing the executive order, he has added to the sanctions and he has gone after, for example, oil tankers that carry Iran's oil to East Asia. So after he signed that order, Harmony gave another speech in this he angrily denounced the negotiation saying that under these conditions, under pressure and under the conditions, that they threaten us with military attack, we won't negotiate. And that is basically where things stand. Today, Tehran and China and Russia had a long meeting over nuclear issue.

And at the end, they issued a statement emphasizing that negotiations should go forward. And at this point, it should be also restricted to Iran's nuclear program. nuclear program. Because Trump and his cabinet have been emphasizing that the nuclear issue is not the only issue. And they want to talk to Iran about its influence in the Middle East, its missile program, its drone program, and so on, which basically means that they want to ask Iran to cut back on its defenses and issues of that, that type, which Iran will surely reject, because those are the main weapon that Iran has to defend itself. So that's where we stand right now. I'm hoping that in direct negotiations at this

we start, the foreign minister of Oman, which in the past has mediated negotiations between Iran and the United States, expressed willingness to step in. Qatar, another Arab nation on the Persian Gulf, has also volunteered. And Russia also also, of course, has or seemed to have a good relationship with Trump and his administration. And therefore, they can also mediate between Tehran and Washington. But we'll have to wait to see what we have. Man, so, that's so disappointing. You know, Trump is so hot and cold on everything.

He takes all sides of every issue. And there was even a headline, Muhammad, a couple of weeks ago in my email box from Trita Parsi. saying, hey, look, everybody, Trump actually said that he thinks that some of the leaders, I forgot exactly how he phrased it, but really implying the real leader, the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini, they don't really want nukes. They're not trying to get them. And then, so, wow, what a huge step that he would even just say that. In other words, it ought to be pretty easy to achieve a deal with him.

And I guess I could see in his mind that like, well, re-applying the extreme sanctions is the way to force them to the table. But not when they're already basically pulling the chair out to sit at the table. At that point, you should just go to the table. After all, it was Trump that tore up the deal in 2018 based on Benjamin Netanyahu's ridiculous lies. Not them that broke the deal. and so we ought to be able to get back into it with some modifications or whatever and then everybody goes home

and instead I guess he's just listening to the advice of the hawks but then again you know I remember reading about when the Ayatollah Khomeini would denounce Israel and threaten to destroy them and stuff it was really because he was receiving

a giant shipment of missiles from them that day and so sometimes when I hear these guys talk tough makes me a little bit hopeful that they're actually secretly negotiating behind the scenes if not selling weapons to each other. You know what I mean? Yes. As we said in the article that I published a few days ago, and you guys country also gave a leak on anti-war. Iran was completely prepared to negotiate. And in fact, when Pedishian brought Zayev into his cabinet, he was against the strong opposition by Iran's

radicals who don't want to negotiate the United States. But the sole purpose of bringing him into the cabinet was to prepare for negotiations and lead the negotiations if they do happen. But you can ask a nation to negotiate when you put a gun to his head and say, either capitulate or we will pull the trigger. And of course, Iran given its history, culture and everything, will not do that. This, of course, is damaging to Iran and Iranian people. Just the other day, there was a report that nearly 1,400 Iranian children have died of this disease

because of lack of medication that they have been able to import from the West due to sanctions. But that's just one example of what's happening in Iran and what the sanctions are doing to Iranian people. Treat of policy was of course right, because I was also happy that Trump said that, because this goes against all the propaganda that Israel has had since at least 1984. They have been saying for the past 40 years that Iran is seeking nuclear bombs, Iran is seeking nuclear bomb. And every prediction had turned out to be false.

Iran hasn't started to make nuclear bomb. There is no evidence that Iran is doing work to make nuclear bomb. And although Iran has enriched uranium to 60%, which is much closer to 90% for making nuclear bomb, not only it hasn't crossed that threshold, But also has said repeatedly that if agreement is reached, the 60% uranium can be diluted again and go back to 3.5% to 5% level that have been agreed by nuclear agreement. And the rest of it will be shipped out to Russia according to the agreement. So that should not pose any threat to anybody.

Because as much as I oppose and hate coming, because his regime have been even harassing my family back in Iran, my friend in Iran, and even my former students in Iran, he's right about this point that you cannot put a gun to a nation's head and ask to capitulate and negotiate based on these steps. So what Trump can do if he's really serious about negotiations, if it's really serious about reaching the agreement, is to at least defend his executive order not implemented, start negotiating. And if the negotiations fail, which I believe they will not fail, because Iran is really

really and ready to reach an agreement, then he can think of what he wants to do next. But at this point, you cannot just threaten Iran with military attacks and then at the same time talk about reaching an agreement and wishing Iran good things and so on, which is what Trump has been doing. Like you said, Trump is so hot and cold on various issues that one never knows what he wants to do and one never knows what his intentions are. But for sure, Iranians are ready to negotiate and i hope they will negotiate because uh the alternative scenarios and alternative possibilities are really uh terrible and and really scared people like me yeah well um okay so if i'm devil's advocate well first of all i'll just be my own advocate

i think as you're saying here when the iatola not only you know lets or you know encourages or approves of the more moderate candidate winning in the presidential election. Hell lets him run in the first place, that kind of thing. But then he puts Zarif back in there. Javad Zarif, the guy that negotiated the deal with John Kerry in 2015, that obviously that's a signal that they just want a deal. And as you're saying, and as everybody knows, they're in the position of weakness here versus the superpower.

And they would like to put this pass them if they can get a reasonable deal. They've already got one. until Trump ruined it, you know? But then, okay, so now I'll be a hawk and say, no, that's not right. All it is is, the I had told is just playing good cop, bad cop. And the real thing is, is he wants the end of the world

and to kill all the Israelis no matter what and to build a nuclear bomb and we got to stop them. So at least address that because as silly as it sounds to somebody like you and me already knows it all about this stuff going back for years and whatever, that is what people are told all the time. I mean, they might wonder how come Iran hasn't started launching their A-bomb assault on Israel yet,

but I don't know if they wonder that, but they're told that it's imminent always, you know? I totally agree. But the only thing that Iran can do at this point is not only emphasizing that the goal of its program is not making a nuclear bomb, But they should also cooperate with International Atomic Energy Agency. They have, to some extent, but they haven't been as completely forthcoming as they should be. And because of that, the International Atomic Energy Agency director, Rafael Garousi, has been complaining about Iran not responding and not answering several questions. Some of those questions for somebody like me who has been writing about Iran's nuclear program

for years are actually legitimate questions. Iran should provide reasonable answer to those questions regarding, for example, one site that hadn't been declared to the agency in the past. It is not active anymore, it has been closed for years, but that site had been active in in the far past. And the agency has asked Iran regarding the activities on that side. It's called Awba Day in southern Iran. And Iran hasn't been completely forthcoming about what was doing there.

So that's one step, for example, that Iran can take to address issues that are legitimately concerning. But we also know at the same time, according to several national intelligence estimate in the past. And even as recently as last spring, I believe, when Bill Burns, who was CIA director at that time, said that there is no evidence that Iran is moving towards making the bomb. And we also know, according to national intelligence estimate several of them in the past that if Iran was trying to make the nuclear bomb, it stopped its program back in 2003. So these are issues that happened way in the past. They are legitimate to be asked about, but there shouldn't be any impediment to any new agreement,

because after all, Iran did reach an agreement between the United States in 2015. And Iran did deliver its obligation and even after from the united states all of the agreement in may 2018 iran decided to follow what they call strategic patience meaning that for may from may 2018 to may 2019 while the united states walk who had left the nuclear agreement iran decided for one year to still delivering on its obligation and never reaching and reaching above 5%. So after it became clear that Mike Pompeo and John Bolton and people like them will not allow Trump to go back to JCPOA, despite Iran's insistence that they are ready to negotiate, and if the United States goes back to Trump, then Iran decided.

Iran decided to distance itself from the agreement. But all of the steps that Iran has taken that has caused consent, for example, in Western Europe, are reversible steps. Because the most important thing that Iran has done has been increasing enrichment level to 60 percent. And of course, that's concerning, because at this point, at least Iran doesn't have any used for 60% enriched uranium. But obviously, in my view, at least,

that's just sort of a weapon for them to try to extract concessions. Because as you said, and I also agree with you, Iran is in a weakened position. Maybe Iran was in a stronger position last year, but because of what has happened in the Middle East, particularly Iran allies such as Hezbollah, in Lebanon, Iran's position has been weakened. But at the same time,

Peaschkyon, for example, has warned and has said that Iran should be cautious. And I believe if Presbyn wasn't president, Iran may have attacked Israel for the third time. After Israel attacked Iran twice and Iran responded. So because of Presidgian and Zaire and other moderates, Iran be told a third wave of attacks. And that should be taken seriously because it indicates that Iranians do want to negotiate, because aside from anything else, the economy in Iran is in table shape. This is the conflict that is rich not only with oil and gas, but with all sorts of other resources and minerals. And yet sanctions and also internal corruption has paradise,

Iran's economy. And on this, Iran's doors are open to the West, you know, in view of our agreement, so that at least some of the sanctions can be lifted and Iran's access to international banks and financial institutions is open again. The economy is going to get worse and worse, and Iranian people will suffer more and more. So those like myself, who advocate negotiations are precisely advocating because of what's happening in Iran. And of course, at the same time, we want peace and we want progress towards peace. And for somebody like me who has lived in the United States 47, and basically has two countries, one the motherland country and one the adopted country, I want peace between the two countries.

I don't want anything happened between Iran and the United States. So that's where we stand right now. Unfortunately, people like Mark Rubio, who is influenced by, in my view, by neocons are strong enemies of Iran or strongly oppose any agreement with Iran. So whether Trump actually takes control of this issue, because up to now it seems to me the control of this issue was not in his hand, but rather in the hands of people like Rubio. But if he takes the issue, which he seems to have taken it, because he said that he has sent this letter to Tehran, and Tehran confirmed on Wednesday that they have received the letter

and they are studying it to decide how to respond. If he takes direct control of the issue and if he delivers on what he says that he wants an agreement with Iran, then there may be hope for the future. Yeah. Well, look, I mean, and this has always been the case with Trump, although he was completely crippled by the phony Russia Gate hoax in his first term and his absolutely horrific choices for staff essentially the whole time. He's got, you know, pretty much all Iran Hawks here, but they're all at least much more loyal to him and his whims than being there to contain him. like most of his staff was last time, you know.

Yes. And, you know, everybody knows the saying, but I think this really, maybe we all need to start talking about just this important facet all the time that only Nixon can go to China, which means you got to be a tough guy right winger to go and make peace.

Otherwise, they'll call you a wimp. But if you're a tough guy right winger, then you can do it, especially if you're tough enough. Same for Ronald Reagan and Gorbachev and Bush and Bush scene. and Gorbachev and Yeltsin, and, well, I can't cite anybody Bush ever made peace with. Well, sort of Libya, although that was a twisted public relations stunt. So we'll put that aside.

I mean, kind of, though. He was like, see, I made peace. But really, he was saying, oh, well, they bowed down to him. That's not a very good example. Bush sucks. But Trump definitely could. I say he could get on a plane and he could go to Tehran and then Moscow and then Beijing and then Pyongyang and then come home and be Trump the great. and they could cry about it in the New York Times, but then that would be it.

He'd be putting every last conflict to bed and one big trip around the world. It ought to be easy enough to do. And there's no reason in the world that we should have to have this Cold War against Iran after all these years. More than 40 years, right? 45 years of this. It's just completely crazy. And Israel is the only reason why and everybody knows it.

So I'll let you address that since I went ahead and made the assertion you don't have to agree at all if you don't want whatever you have to say about that but i also wanted to ask you about you know we're talking about the nuclear program and i think because maybe people don't get to hear this very often that what you're saying to make it very clear they have a nuclear program they have mastered the fuel cycle they can enrich uranium but they just don't enrich it to weapons grade so they have a latent deterrent which is the same as japan everybody knows japan could make nukes and that they actually even have the facilities and the radioactive material to make nukes, but they don't have that bad of a conflict with anyone right now. And so don't make them

load that gun. It's the same kind of thing here where the Ayatoll is saying, listen, I won't make nukes unless you bomb me. So don't bomb me and I won't make nukes. And then they're saying, well, don't make nukes or we'll bomb you. So that's the standoff. And so, and I know he's said that it's haram to make nukes but i think he could change his mind about that uh you know a theocrat is a head of state after all and so um he could change his mind if things got too bad so um i guess you know it's clear though as you say though that they've stayed mostly within the deal they've kept their deal with the rest of the u.n security council they've but it even says in the deal that it's okay for them to disregard certain parts of it if America breaks our side of it. So that could just

be revived. It doesn't seem unattainable at all. But I also wanted to ask you about their conventional deterrent because, you know, if we go back to when you and I first started talking, we had a hundred-something thousand troops in Iraq and they were all essentially hostage to Iran's missiles. And so the idea was, Boy, oh, and not only that, but they were leading Shiite forces in the field against the Sunnis at the time. So they could have all been completely, you know, iced, shot in the back like Order 66. In a situation like that, we had, you know, at that time, I don't know, 50,000 guys in Afghanistan as well. But we still have, I guess, low tens of thousands or 50,000 or something in Kuwait. And I don't know how many people, but I know it's the Centcom headquarters at the Al Ulid Air Base in Qatar.

And then there's the Fifth Fleet's naval base in Bahrain and then one zillion dollars worth of economic targets all up and down the eastern side of the Persian Gulf there. And I guess it has gone without saying for a very long time that all of those things, all of those people, all that material, all that everything is at risk in the event of a real war with Iran, that we won't be able to shoot all those missiles down. But then I wonder if we still know that that's true. And especially after their recent volleys toward Israel, what was proven there as far as Israel's missile defense or as far as America and our other allies' ability to shoot those missiles down? And do you think that that changes the equation, particularly like in the thinking of the Pentagon about how easy it might be or might not be? Because sorry for the very long question here, but because like if you go back to 2007, the Pentagon told W. Bush, we don't want to do it. You know, the Air Force might think it's fun, but everybody's got to actually do the dying on the ground is not looking forward to this thing. And so Bush back down.

So, but I wonder if that's the same kind of advice the chiefs would give the president right now or if they would tell them we can do it. Well, first of all, over the past several months in a couple of articles and many interviews, I have emphasized a very good point. that you raised that Trump has an Iran movement like Richard Nixon at China. Only Trump, in my view, at this point, can make peace with Iran, given his credibility with the right wing of the United States or those who oppose Iran at any cost. So that's a very important thing. Now, regarding Iran's deterrence, well, it's true that when Israel attacked Iran the second time, it attacked Iran's air defense systems, and various reports indicated that at least some of them were damaged. But I would still not underestimate what Iranians can do if a war starts.

The other day, Qatari foreign ministers said that if Israel attacks Iran, they would not be even one gallon of drinking water left in the region. Because if Israel and the United States attack the nuclear facilities, all the nuclear material will spread throughout the region and will poison everything. So that already is a danger that threatens everybody, not just Iranian people, but all Iran's neighbors and throughout the Middle East. And remember, nuclear experts always say that a nuclear accident anywhere is a nuclear accident everywhere.

In this case, it won't be, of course, an accident, but the next result of it was that nuclear material will be spread throughout the region and will damage everybody. At the same time, Iran has kept its offensive capability in defense of the country, namely its drone program and missile program. Because that's the only legitimate defense, or that's the only, I should say, effective defense that Iran has at this point against attacks by Israel. So while Iran may be weakened in the region, but it can still inflict very significant damage, not only on U.S. U.S. military bases in the region, but also U.S. allies.

Iran has always said that if any attack takes place in Iran, the takes place in Iran by the United States. Given that United States has military bases throughout the Middle East, those countries will also be legitimate targets for Iran retaliation because they allowed their sword to be used by the United States in attacks. says in attacks against Iran. So that capability is still there, I believe. And therefore, Iran can actually inflict considerable damage

if a war starts. But of course, this will not be in anyone's interest. When Iran attacked Israel for the second time, not the first time. The first time, I think it was basically for demonstrate that they cannot attack, even though it wasn't really effective. But the second time they attack, they used ballistic missiles, and all sorts of report indicated

that Israeli defense system wasn't that effective against Iran's ballistic missile. So that capability is still there, and Iran can retaliate. I don't wish that to happen, but Iran's capability is there. Again, I emphasize, it's true, Iran has been weakened due to what has happened to Hezbollah and other allies, but it is not without any options. Iran still has options, but they don't want that at this point because they want to tend to their problems at home. And we have to remember, as long as Iranian people are under economic pressure, they will not rise against the Islamic Republic and demand a more representative and more democratic government. Because they think of their own

survival at this moment. But once the economy gets better, as in the past, for example, when Muhammad Khatani was Iran's president, and we had the Green Movement, which was basically a movement by by the middle class and lower class in Iran because the economy has improved to the point that they started thinking about their social and political rights and demand a better more representative government. So once Iran's economy improves, if the sanctions of lift and Iran's door open to the outside board, the political benefit of it for both Iranian people and the rest of the world, including the Middle East, would be that the civil society movement in Iran

would become a stronger and would demand a more representative government. And people like Pasekian and people like him can continue to reach presidency and do good things for Iran. And hopefully that would make the necessary background for reforming the Constitution in Iran and move it towards a better demographic country. But they will not happen as long as this tension

between Iran and the United States exists. They will not happen as long as Israel constantly threatens Iran with attacks and has attacked. Both Iran and, for example, Iran's embassy in Syria which to get two states of attacks for Iran and Israel. So as long as those exist, these things will not happen. But if these sanctions are lifted, and if at least the tension has reduced, I don't foresee establishing direct diplomatic relations between Iran and the United States in the near future. But tension can be reduced, agreement can be reached, and sanctions, at least some of them, the more important one, can be lifted or at least suspended.

If those things happen, then there is hope for future. If not, then you are moving towards another war, which I hope will not happen. Yeah. Hang on just one second for me here. You guys, I'm so proud to announce the publication of the Libertarian Institute's 14th book. It's Israel, winner of the 2003 Iraq Oil War, Undue Influence, Deceptions, and the Neocon Energy Agenda by Gary Vogler, former senior oil consultant and deputy senior oil advisor for U.S. forces. during Iraq War II.

Remember how I wrote in enough already about how Ahmed Chalabi sold the neo-conservatives on a plan to rebuild the old British oil pipeline from Mosul and Kierkuk Iraq to Haifa Israel if they would only get the United States to overthrow Saddam Hussein for him? And how they bought

it because they are as dumb as they are corrupt? Well, Gary was there. As senior civilian consultant to the DoD and Iraqi oil ministry, he had a unique window and experience witnessing the Pentagon neocons and their machinations on behalf of Israel before and during that war. And it turns out that even though they did not get their pipeline, as Vogler demonstrates, the neocons and their Lekudnik bosses figured out an effective plan B anyway.

You are going to love Israel, winner of the 2003 Iraq Oil War by Gary Vogler, available everywhere. Check it out, along with our other great books, at Libertarian Institute.org slash books. Hey, y'all, let me tell you about Roberts & Roberts, Brokerage, Inc. Nobody trusts the U.S. dollar anymore. Foreign governments are stocking up on gold instead of $100 bills. One, they know they need to, and two, that means you need to too. Interest rates are up, but for some reason, not much for savings accounts. Park your money there and watch Uncle Joe Biden just counterfeit its value away.

You can see how the Fed is afraid to raise rates to beat inflation for fear of popping the current bubbles. at least before the election. So more inflation it will continue to be. Gold is your shield against monetary and price inflation, just like it always has been. Now Tim Fry and the guys over at Roberts and Roberts are recommending gold over silver since the world's almost 200 governments

are putting their own pressure on the price, which should help everyone else who make similar calls on their own. Of course, Roberts and Roberts can help you with platinum, palladium, and silver as well as gold. Don't let the Fed and the war party inflate all your savings away. Look up Roberts and Roberts at rrbi.co.

That's rrbi.c.o. Hey, so how old is the Ayatollah now and is there an obvious successor or maybe a cholera to that would be how radical is the group of mullos beneath him who do the choosing of the next guy? He's 85. He was born in 19,

And he's been Supreme Leader since 89, right? Pardon me? He's been the Ayatollah in charge since 89, right? Correct, yes. He has been the Supreme Leader since 89, and he's 85. And the debate and the process for the next Supreme Leader has actually started in Iran. Unlike what they say, especially the monarchist opposition in exile, not what they say, Iran's political space has actually opened up considerate

ever since Presidium was elected in last August. And there is a strong debate about what's going to happen in the post-communy era. And that debate has been raging, has been continued. And all evidence indicates that Harmony himself wants that debate to continue so that we actually enter the post-Harmine area. Now, there are all sorts of guesses and speculations and rumored about who will succeed him. Some people think that his son, one of his son, most of our hominy, about whom I wrote an article long time ago, published by Tehran Bureau, will succeed him. But Omni himself has expressed

opposition to this idea and has said that Iran is not a monarchy that, you know, somebody dies and then his son takes over. But this all depends on the balance of of various factions, balance of force between values, factions within Iran. Certainly, the hardliners are strong. But at the same time, the moderates and the reformists and those who want to basically make a transition from present political structure

to a more representative political structure also have their supporters. At the same time, the civil society in Iran is strongly behind. the moderates and the reformists. And in fact, Peaschkian was, one of the reasons Peishkong got the vote from the Iranian people was because Iranian people were afraid of the alternative,

who was Saeed Jalidi, former nuclear negotiator, who was an ultra hard run there, and has always talked about the possibility of war with the United States. And people went to vote to get position elected. So the process of debate and discussions and so on for the post-Harmony era in Iran has already started. It is also possible that Harmony himself, he has expressed this publicly several times, as recently as a few months ago, that he opposes anybody who is related to him to substitute him after he's gone.

and therefore it is quite possible that he himself opposes it, but if he passes away without any preparation, then the poverty struggle after him may take Iran into any direction, including getting his son most of the next Supreme Leader. But as I said, this precisely and exactly depends on the balance of forces between various factors. It also depends to a great extent where the IRGC stands. We know that after demonstrations in Iran started in 2022, in September of 2022, over the death of Iranian woman Masa Amini, a group of senior IRC officers presented a plan to Harmony for a very significant reform of the political structure and opening up the political space and granting many rights that people have been struggling for.

And at that time, it was said that it was reported that Khomey had said that the conditions are not right. But if that report is correct and it's true, which seems to be. true because a lot of different people have confirmed it. What it means is that if Coney leads the scene, the same group of officers who wanted to undertake a good plan of reform will step forward and try to implement through their political allies implement the same program. So again, that all depends on what happens before and after how many leaves the scene, and the balance of forces between various factions. All right.

Now, so maybe this should have been at the beginning, Muhammad, but what do you think is Benjamin Netanyahu's real strategy towards Iran? I mean, clearly they needed to break Syria. They needed to get rid of the Alawite Shiite alliance in Damascus, and they've succeeded in that, and they have beat the hell out of Hezbollah, killed their least. and Pager attacked a bunch of them and their children and bombed the hell out of them and occupied parts of southern Lebanon. I mean, things are not going their way at all.

But what's, is Netanyahu, I mean, it sort of goes without saying a lot of times. I'm not sure it's really right that he's just always chomping at the bit to get America to launch a full-scale war against Iran, somehow achieve a regime change from the air or something. But it seems like maybe he really likes having them there because he can use them to scare all the Sunni kings into being his friend and sell out the Palestinians, which has been working. So, I don't know. What do you think Netanyahu are even more broadly the Israeli defense establishment? What is their overall strategy towards Iran now? I think Nathanielo at this point is under the illusion that by bombing Iran, Iranian people will be right up and overthrow

the regime in terror. But that's pure illusion. He has also put all of his eggs in the basket of Iranian monarchies. Iranian monarchists now as strong he support Israel, wave Israel flags along with the imperial flag, the flag before Iranians. Iranian revolution and constantly encourage Israel to attack you. They say that if Israel attacks Iran, people will rise up, overthrow. And then they also are under the illusion that even if that happens, even if Israel attacks and Iranian people rise up and overtro the regime, they will bring back the monarchies. But the chances of having a, you know, head freezing.

is higher than monarch is going back to cover. But unfortunately, Netanyahu seems to be under that illusion. The son of the last Shah of Iran, Reza Pallavi, traveled to Israel, and he was greeted like a head of a state and he was referred to as his majesty and his imperial majesty and his wife was, you know, her imperial majesty and so on. And the Israel lobby has also been always a place for Rezaa Ali to give a speech, and he also supports attack, military attack on Iran. So all of these have created this illusion, in my belief, for Netanyahu that this is actually doable. In other words, it can overthrow the regime

through bombing and the regime that will succeed if Iranian people rise up and over through the regime will be of the type that he likes, monarchy type, or any other type that would be friendly towards Israel. Certainly the big majority of Iranian people do not have any particular hostility towards Israel, as long as Israel stays away from Iranian effects. There is sympathy among a large portion of Iranian society for the plight of Palestinians. But that doesn't translate necessarily into hostility for destroying Israel and all of that, because at this point in history, Iranian people want to improve their own country. I certainly don't have any hostility towards Israel as long as it stays away from Iranian affairs. But the idea that you can attack Iran

and overthrow the regime by bombing it, and the regime will be totally friendly towards Israel, the next regime, is a pure illusion. There is no basis for it. In fact, I have two of my sisters that just arrived here after struggling for years to get them here, to see them because I haven't been back to Iran for 18 years. Oh, really? That's great. Yes. Yes. I mean, this has been a very happy occasion in my life, because I haven't seen my sister for a long time. What they tell me is that as much as Iranian people hate the regime, at least a large portion of them, they also equally hate the monarchies because they believe

that monarchies are encouraging Israel to attack Iran. And they also believe that monarchies provoke young Iranian people to go on a street to demonstrate and create friction with the security forces to the extent that they start shooting. While there is no alternative and there is no plan to, you know, get significant concessions from the regime to move towards the very government. So there is a lot of opposition to it. And of course, this is not talked about here.

They pretend that all Iranian people are just ready with open arms to take these guys back, which they will not. I mean, as I said, the chances of health raising over is higher than they go back to Iran to Iran to power. Even if Israel is very active. I mean, and I've got to say, I've met a few of these monarchists. And even if the Iranian people wanted them back, they're too certifiably insane to run an apple cart.

So I couldn't imagine they'd be able to take over a thing. They're completely bananas type of people. They are completely nuts. I mean, if you go to social networks and their website and so on, these people are nuts. They don't have any credible figure. They don't have anybody of any value that is willing to work with them. Because they have been totally discredited.

And they discredited themselves. Maybe at least a small portion of the population did look at them as an alternative. But because of what has happened over the past few years, particularly taking inside the Israel, when Israel was attacking Iran, constantly threatening Iran to attack, that has totally discredited them. And the amazing thing is that they don't see this. They don't see it that, you know, a nation with 7,000 written, 7,000 years of written history will not look kindly on people who advocate attacked on the other land or a native land.

With the argument that, yes, we attack them, we overthrow them, we go back to power, and then we rebuild Iran. These are just simple fantasy and illusion that they have. But unfortunately, going back to your question, I think Netanyahu has this illusion about Iran. And there are Iranian people who walk in Israel lobby, who actually advocate for this. This guy, Saeed Osseminijad, who works for foundation for defense of democracy, or Behanem, who also works for the same, you know, foundation for defense of democracy.

And there are a strong advocates of attacking Iran. And in fact, Osseminashad was instrumental to take Reza Khad Ali to Israel and after this, you know, turn towards Israel, and suddenly Rizhouper Ali, because, became a big fan and advocate of whatever Israel does, and he has directly and indirectly over the past year or so advocated Israel attacking Iran, the United States is attacking Iran. He always says, well, the United States should do more than economic sanction. Well, what is beyond economic sanction? Beyond economic sanction, the only thing that is left is military attack.

But that's what he wants. And of course, no saying Iranian who lives in Iran wants attack on their country, regardless of how much hatred they may have for the regime. Because after all, they leave in that land and they want to at least be secure against any sort of war. So that's the real stand. And I think Netanya has this illusion, unfortunately. All right.

Well, let me ask you. because you brought this up and this is something we've talked about before but it's the relative ancient past now mohammed um what is really the relationship between the monarchists and the israelis at this point and for that matter go ahead and tell me give me an update on the uh mujahideen e kalk cooks they still hiding out in albania or what's up with that the majority also have uh their own lobbies uh in congress and other places uh just a couple A few weeks ago there was a resolution in the House, of course, non-Bidening resolution, signed by a lot of people supporting the democratic alternative in Iran, which was meant to be the MECA, the Mujahid. So they do have, they do have their own lobby, and they do have their own supporters among far right in Iran.

Mike Kampo, for example, and John Bolton, for example, both support Mujah. And in fact, both of them visited their camp in Albania over the past few years. And of course, they also are paid very handsomely by him. But if there is one group in Iran that is hated universally without any exception among Iranian people, that's Mujah, because they have been collaborating with anybody who is Iran's enemy over the past 40 years since 1981, 1982. They collaborated with Iraq, during Iran-Ira-War. Their leader, Masoudra Devi, after the war, set in a speech with so much honor that we succeeded to kill 65, 67,000 Iranian soldiers at the front. I mean, you can just imagine how the Iranian people

would feel when one of them says we honor and we delight that we succeeded to kill 67,000 Iranian soldiers at the front of war from Iraq. And presumably this 67,000 or whatever the real number, they are just concrete and they're just ordinary soldiers. They just go and do their military their military service, defend their nation, and then go back to whatever life they had. They're not political or one way or another. But he was, you know, he was bragging about this. He was, and then once the, and before the United States invaded you up, they were a strong anti-American. In fact, when the September 11th, 2001 attack happened, gradually the leader of MECA gave a furious speech in their camera in Iraq saying that, you know, the attack in September of Iran, that was only the beginning,

and more is going to follow. But after the United States invaded Iraq and occupied Iraq, they made a 180 degree turn, and they decided that from now on they want to be poor west. So they collaborated with Iraq, with Israel, regarding Iran's nuclear program, they have been propagating all sorts of false narrative in Washington tried to provoke the United States to attack Iran, and they have opposed any sort of lifting of sanctions. So they do have their own advocates and their own lobby. But Israel lobby, by and large, at this point, is focused on the monarchies. So the monarchy's main, based of support within U.S. United States and political establishment is very

not. Right-wing Israeli think that, like Hudson Institute, for example, in New York, or Washington Institute for near his policy, they have always been a place where there's off al-Avi and monarchist go and give a speech and advocate sanctions and advocate wars and so on. there as none of the for example liberal or objective think times in the united states has ever invited rizop alavi to go and and talk about europe so their main base of support is very love in the united states and as i said uh um if rizof alibi went to israel and was treated of a king And all sorts of exchanges are happening between the monarchies and Israel.

When there was demonstrations against what Israel was doing in Gaza, Iranian monarchy participated in poor Israeli demonstrations, waving Israel's flag. And Razor Pahlavi also spoke about his support for what is and things of that sort have been happening over the past two, three years, which just shows that one of these hope right now, the only hope that they have right now is Israel bombs Iran, Iranians could rise up, overthrow the regime, and invite them back to Iran to go to power, to go back to power, and take over again, which is in my with pure illusion will never happen, but in the process, Iranian people will be heard greatly. The economy would be shattered more.

The daily lives will be shattered more and so on and so forth. All right. Well, thank you so much for your time, and I kept you way over time without asking, but I really appreciate you coming on the show and talking about all this great stuff with us. Terrible stuff. It is talking to you, Scott. All right, everybody. That is Mohamed Sahimi.

he is, again, a professor at USC, and he writes for responsible state craft. Thanks for listening to Scott Horton Show, which can be heard on APS Radio News at Scott Horton.org, Scott Horton Show.com, and the Libertarian Institute at libertarian institute.org.