The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Is The Iran War Over If The Fighting Is Over?

Episode Date: April 27, 2026

The Iran War enters its ninth week, but the fighting has been over for a while. Does that mean the war is over? Dr. Janice Stein is with us as she always is on Mondays and that's the topic today as the two sides, the United States and Iran, try to find ways to meet and negotiate. And Janice also has news about Gaza, a glimmer of hope that a new era may be coming for the people of Gaza. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You're just moments away from the latest episode of the bridge. It's Monday. Dr. Janice Stein is here. Is the fighting, the actual war in Iran? Is that over? And if it is, what happens now? That's coming up right after this.

And hello there. So, Peter, you're going to talk about another crazy weekend in the United States? That's right, Saturday night. More gun violence. Or attempts at the heart of the U.S. government? Was it against cabinet secretaries? Was it against the president again? What is this the third time in a year and a half?

That Donald Trump has been president? Well, actually, you know, we're not going to talk about it. I've heard enough about it already. I've got a feeling it's one of those stories that's going to pass fairly quickly. because there are bigger things happening on the impact on all sorts of things around the world as a result of Donald Trump's war in Iran is still being felt.

But is the war the actual fighting of the war? Is that over? It may well be. That's going to be the discussion with Dr. Janice Stein from the Monk School to the University of Toronto in just a moment. But we do, as we do, as we do, always have on Monday a few housekeeping notes take care of, and one of them is the topic for this Thursday on your turn. This is the last week of April. Can you believe it? We're already at the last week of April.

May is just around the corner. It's just a couple of days away. And May means actually summer's close. It's hard to believe sometimes. I was in Calgary on Friday for a few hours. It's out of speech there. and it was like freezing. It had been snowing. But that's Calgary. You know what Calgary's like. One minute it can be snowing. The next minute it can be like you're in the Caribbean.

Well, it sure wasn't like the Caribbean on Friday. I'll tell you that. Okay. Last week of the month means, ask me anything. It's an AMA week for your turn. And when I say, ask me anything,

Ask me anything. Usually it's related in some fashion to this program, but it's wide open. Ask me anything. I'll try to answer it. The normal rules apply. 75 words or fewer. Have your questions in by Wednesday at 6 p.m. Eastern Time.

Include your name, the location you're writing from, and you write to the Mansbridge podcast at gmail.com. The Mansbridge podcast at gmail.com. Now, we always get lots of letters on AMA weeks. And we still have lots of letters left over from the last couple of times we've done this. So if you wrote a letter, didn't hear it, doesn't mean you're going to hear it, but you could very well hear it. So you don't need to write another one or you don't need to repeat the one you already wrote.

It's already in the mix. But we're happy to hear from new writers for Ask Meant. thing for this week. So get your letters in. You've got, you know, you've got about 48 hours to do that. Now, there's one other thing that's a row, it relates to last Thursdays, your turn. I screwed up. I got some of the letters mixed up, too in particular, and I want to give credit to where they were. I read one from, the, was supposed to be from Alexander Black in Ottawa, but somehow I got things mixed up, but I never heard Alexander Black's letter on the program. Here it is. It's short. And remember, the question last week was, what do you worry about? So Alexander wrote,

as a father of a daughter with another on the way, I worry most about raising them in a world where misogyny and violence against women are resurgent, highlighted by the online rape academy exposed by CNN. It calls for daily action by everyone, model respect, challenged toxic norms and behaviors and demand better for men and boys. And I think we can all echo that. Now, the letter I read instead of Alexander's, but said it was for Alexander and it wasn't, was actually from Janet Whitney in Toronto. And it was this one.

I'm worried about the proliferation of the fake or skewed news sites and role of Instagram and other social media on people's understanding of the real issues. once people hear or watch false stories, they lock in and don't seem to question the accuracy. I have this issue with family members when you combine with the sophistication of AI, how can future elections ever be judged and voted upon in reality? All right, I hope I've cleared that up.

All right, we're going to get to Dr. Janice Stein now. This is, as they always are, is another fascinating conversation. And we're focusing for the good chunk of this program, not entirely, but for the first part of the program, on the Iran War and where we are in this moment. So without further ado, let's get to our conversation this week with Dr. Janice Stein at the Monk School of the University of Toronto. So here we are, week nine. It feels like it's been at least a couple of months that the war in Iran has been going on.

It's certainly a lot longer than Donald Trump thought it was going to take because I think that part of him was still thinking this was going to somehow be like Venezuela. But as much as we warned it wouldn't be, he didn't listen. Anyway, I saw an interview with him the other day where he said, I feel no pressure. There's no pressure on me to end this now. Really?

No pressure. Why does he say? That's completely untrue. It is because he does feel pressure. He's feeling pressure from his base a lot. This war is split his own base wide apart. That can't be a good thing for him. He's feeling pressure from some of the people around him,

especially the people in his cabin who have the economic portfolios, because this is a massive, massive economic shock that we really haven't begun to feel yet, Peter. And so I think it's precisely, and so the stories all over the press were Trump will tackle, Trump will chicken out again, and he reacted to those stories. Of course he feels pressure. So if you have to assess who has the advantage right now between the United States and Iran, who has the advantage?

Let me start the answer to that one, Peter, with how punishing this blockade is to Iran be, just because we don't talk about it enough. you know, it cannot export its oil. And what happens when you can't move your oil through the, you know, but you can't pull it out of the ground, it's in the pipes. It can actually cause serious, serious damage to the infrastructure by which Iran exports, and it takes months, if not a year to repair that damage. people vary in their estimates three more weeks of this, eight more weeks of this, but not long. And I only say this because, yes, Donald Trump is under a great deal of pressure, but so is Iran.

It is both of them are under pressure. So the question becomes, who can bear the pain better? another way of asking who's more disciplined. Donald Trump, well, I probably answer my own question here, or the Iranian leadership. Iran is the leadership is more disciplined. They've, you know, they've been under sanction for years and years and years. They're very good at finding workarounds. But both of them are losing.

war. That's really, I think, the important point to this. And neither of them want to go back to fight. So where are we in a very unstable, dangerous stalemate that is hurting both of them? And they can't find a way out. That's where we are. Maybe that is the word. It's a stalemate. Yep. And a stalemate with no obvious way out in this moment. That's right. So, because neither of them can afford to back down. We do know a little bit, and let me say the rumors are flying, and it's supposed to be so careful, you know, to dig for the facts here.

But it appears as if Ghaly Buff, this speaker of their Speaker of Parliament, has withdrawn from the negotiation or been forced out one way or the other. by the more hardline elements, which suggests that there's internal division inside, and they are rebalancing. And Vahidi, who is the new commander of the Revolutionary Guards, the IGRC, is an really well-known hardliner that Western analysts have known for years and years as a hardliner.

So it's very likely that, the Iranians are locking themselves in to a tougher position. So how do you find a way out then, Peter? There has to be outsiders who intervene and help both of them safe face. So who are these? It looks like what we were seeing in the last few days. Saudi Arabia, interestingly enough, Pakistan, which we know about. Oman, the foreign minister of Iran, is there after he left Islamabad and Turkey.

And these four countries are working together now to craft a solution which they will take back to both parties. Because they can't do it themselves. Well, that's a really interesting group of four. And, you know, let's think that through. who's there like do they favor one side or the other or are they simply there

because they believe we have to end this because it's our you know we're in trouble ourselves as a result of the mess this has caused well Pakistan let's talk with Pakistan has extremely good relationships with this White House

their chief of their defense staff Munir bonded with President Trump He's been to the White House twice. So I think the Pakistanis are functioning as mediators, really functioning as mediators here trying to craft a solution. Pakistan also has extremely good relationships with Saudi Arabia

because before this all started, and the Saudis were increasingly doubtful that the United States would actually come to their assistance, in the event of any military crisis, they signed a mutual defense treaty with Pakistan, which obligates both countries to come to the assistance of the other. That, in a sense, is a geopolitical game changer in the region. It links the Gulf to South Asia.

It made the Indians very, very nervous, as you can understand. And so, and the Saudis and the Pakistanis, I think, and we're really, really well together here because the Saudis, there's no love lost for the Iranians for years and years and years. They certainly changed their position over the last three years, but there's deep suspicion and worry about Iran. So those two are balanced. Oman, Iran has had very good relationships. They are, you know, they're at the top of the Gulf. One of the things that the Iranians proposed before the United States imposed the blockade, so they would work together with Oman to manage the Straits-Ophormuz when they first took over the straits.

So I think the Omanis certainly would be predisposed toward Iran. But the real heavy way here is Turkey, is President Edwain, who clearly, clearly would be far more sympathetic to Iran than he would be to the United States. You know, he is among, and he leads a powerful country with its own chokehold. And he is one of a handful of leaders who have been talking now for several. several years about rebalancing, about a more multipolar world, about no longer being reliant on the United States. So I would say this is a coalition that wants a resolution. None of these, none of these countries want the war to go on.

They're being hammered by it, Peter. They really are, they are. But would tend, two of the four would certainly tend to be more sympathetic to Iran. Interesting, though, with Turkey, because it's in NATO. That's right. It's a NATO. It's a NATO country. But it is a glimpse of the new world.

You know, who's doing this work? It's not Moscow. It's not London. It's not Paris. It's not, you know, 10 years ago, 12 years ago, you would have had Europeans who would have stepped up. That's not who it is now. It's Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. It's Turkey.

We've mentioned a number of times the Iranian leadership at this moment. Is it any clearer as to what's really happening there yet? It's really hard to tell. It's really hard to tell. And the only reason we know anything other than rumor, Because, you know, Iran has very active social media, but there's an internet blackout in Iran right now. 58 days of internet blackout. And to get around that blackout, you have to be on the approved list or you have to be willing to run the risk of using a VPN, a virtual private network.

some of our listeners will know you plug it into your computer and you connect. So that is a small proportion of Iranians, but that's what we're seeing. That's the social media we're seeing. And that social media reflects the divisions between those who are very supportive of the regime, those who want to see an end to the regime. So it's really hard to discern, but we do know that the foreign minister went to, to his plumbat alone without Ghaly Buf. And that is consistent with stories inside Iran

that he has either resigned because he is so annoyed by the hardline pressure that's coming from the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, Bahidi, or he's been asked to resign. That we do not. Well, one of the things Trump keeps saying is that there's chaos inside the Iranian leadership

because it's fragmented and they lost many of them on the opening night of the war that were killed by bombs and that's one of the reasons Trump claims the chaos is one of the reasons why they can't make a deal. He's not wrong

but it's a disingenuous argument right because he was part of the plan to take out these senior leaders, you know, 40 in that first strike and then repeatedly over the next few days. So when you take, I mean, allegedly 168 of the senior leadership have been killed. Now, if you assume roughly by looking at the number of positions, you know, on the civilian side and the military side, 200, 250 leadership positions, that is a very large number, 50 or 60% of the leaders changed. Well, of course, everybody's going to be jockeying for power and people can't meet in person.

They're having trouble communicating. They won't use phones because they're still not because they're so worried. Most of a many, the son of the new Supreme Leader, the son of the former Supreme leader, communicating by courier. staged courier, hand it off to one, who hands it off to a second, who hands it off to a third, so that no courier can be traced. You remember, without some of him in Latin? Sure.

It was his courier that gave away his location. So communication is difficult. New people in the roles and politics, which there's everywhere. You know, there's jockeying for position who's going to come, who's going to be able to consolidate power? So it's not surprising, frankly. So the description is accurate, but it's indiscentious because, in fact, the Israeli and American strikes produce this. You know, the other thing that Trump keeps harping back on, when he's not saying that the only reason he's doing any of this is because it's to keep nuclear weapons away from Iran, which is not why he started the war. And he didn't use that as the opening, you know, reasoning behind what he was doing.

But that is what he says now. But the other thing that he says, and I heard an interesting theory about this over the weekend. I mean, you know, one of the Sunday shows on what was happening on Iran, one of the things Trump keeps talking about is how we have, he loves the word obliterated, obliterated the Iranian military, you know, taken out their Navy, although they seem to have hundreds of small boats available to them. Yes, they, but, you know, he says, we've taken out the Navy. We've destroyed all their aircraft.

We've obliterated their army. And somebody said on the weekend, I forget who it was, one of the experts who pops up on American television a lot, said, compared this to what happened in Vietnam in the 1960 in a war that went on for years, what, 16 or 17 years, was that what the Americans used to say or put forward to show that they were winning was the death totals.

Remember? Yes. Body counts. Body counts. Every week there'd be a new body count on Viet Cong who had been killed. Some of those numbers were inflated, but the whole theory behind it kind of didn't work anyway because the Americans were not winning the war, and they wouldn't win the war.

Correct. And so here you have, at least this expert was theorizing, you tell me whether you buy into it or not, that the Americans are saying, we've destroyed the Iranian military. So we're winning. We've won. It's just a matter of cleaning up the,

you know, the negotiation side of things. I think it's exactly right, Peter, only it's worse, right? Because, you know, in Vietnam, it was General West Moran who would come to the White House and tell LBJ.

The body count the numbers, and he would tell him he was winning the war. And this went on for years, literally two or three years, before somebody said, is this the right metric? Let's look at the ones that Donald Trump is using. We've obliterated their Air Force. Well, they never really had much of an Air Force. That's why they had missiles.

So saying you obliterated their Air Force tells you almost nothing. All right? We obliterated their Navy. Yes. They had naval ships, which are at the bottom of the Straits of Pomewes, but you just mentioned, they have what's called mosquitoes, these fast boats that will approach an American ship and, you know, literally fire drones that can damage the hull of American ships.

So, yeah, the big ships are at the bottom, but what about all these fast little boats? The Army, what's the Army? The Army, let's divide into two. different parts. The regular Iranian military, the estimates are between 600,000, something like that, and the Revolutionary Guards. Yes, the top leadership of the Revolutionary Guards was taken out, and the besiege, which is that militia, which you see on bicycles. They are always on the streets during protest and it's a besiege who shoots the protesters.

But we're talking about a million men. A million men. That's the size of the army, the Revolutionary Guards and the besiege. They're not obliterate. They're just not. And let's understand why we have revolutionary guards and besiege in Iran. It's because Chamini didn't trust, which is not. not an uncommon story among dictators.

He didn't trust that the regular army, Khomey didn't, and then Khomey even more so, that they wouldn't take him out in a coup. So we divided power and had a competing military organization. There's no way, there's no way that the army has been obliterated. Their command and control may have been. taken out, but that's all. And Hamini left his

will. Let's come back to that. He literally left the will. You go one level down. If he's killed, you go one level down. And if that one's killed, so the people in command right now in Iran were all appointed by

Chamini after his death. In a way, and I guess this was the point that was being made, is it almost it's almost irrelevant now whether the military is being obliterated or not. Yes. Because it's all about the Strait of Hormuz. That's the power.

That's the power. So Iran, I really say this in all seriousness. Iran discovered a weapon that is more effective than any nuclear bomb that it could build, right? It shuts off 20% of the oil. It causes, it's the biggest energy shock we've had, frankly, since we moved into an oil economy. It's bigger than the ones we had in 73 and 79. The inflation is going to be really significant, which hurts any government in power, whether elections.

Farmers are missing their planting season in the South because they meet fertilizer. and there are components in liquid national gas, you know, natural gas, which you need to make fertilizer. This is the closure of the Strait of Pormuz is having a global impact. So, of course. So that's why we're at a stalemate, because they will not open the straits before they get the guarantees that they want. and it's going to be very, very difficult for the United States to back down and lift the blockade before they open the streets. You know, there's a well-known American Admiral who's written books about leadership, Admiral Raven. Sure.

And he's, you know, he's a very sophisticated guy. Isn't he the guy who ran the operation on Osama bin Laden, the zero dark 30 or whatever the real code was? Yeah. And he's a very, very sophisticated thinker and a good writer. And he said, look, Donald Trump, ultimately, how are we going to break out? Somebody has to get Donald Trump to say, if you lift your blockade, I'll lift my blockade so that the negotiations can start again. And he's not wrong. I don't think Donald Trump's anywhere near that yet. So what I suspect that I only suspect because I don't know, there are a lot of back channel negotiations going on right now. Okay, that's the last thing I want to talk about in terms of the Iran story this week. And that's the negotiations. So I was watching Wendy Sherman.

You know Wendy Sherman. I do. You dealt with Wendy Sherman in some of the meetings you go to. Super capable. Right. She was one of the key people who negotiated the Obama deal with Iran, whatever year that was, 2014 or somewhere. Right.

That then Trump canceled. But she was making the same argument that you do, but I want to just take it a little further. She was saying, you know, Whitkoff and Kushner, you know, they're all very interesting and they clearly have contacts, but they're not negotiators. They have no history of that. The closest they've come is cutting real estate deals.

And they don't know how to make this happen and a negotiation successful. And her strong feeling was you could negotiate your way out of this now. Now, maybe closer to what the Obama deal was and what Trump wants, but he just wants out. Yeah. But when she says that and when you say that, what do you ask? actually mean? What are these skilled, you know, career diplomats? What do they bring to the table? Are there in a sense of history? And in some cases, they know some of these people because they've dealt with them before. But one's got to assume that Kushner and Whitkoff, no matter what their past is,

have been at negotiations now for a few years in some of the highest level negotiations. whether it's Russia, Ukraine, whether it was, you know, Israel, Gaza, Hamas, all that stuff, and now this. What could skilled career diplomats bring to the table that's not happening at the table now? So, well, look, I agree with her, all right? I don't think that Kushner and Wickev have the skills. So what do they bring to the table? The skills wants. First of all, they had longstanding relationships.

And that is just very, very, very valuable because you actually, you know, one of the big issues, Peter, in these kinds of negotiations, you risk being captured by the other side. You become friends. And that's a big problem that sometimes you become the advocate because you want an agreement. And you have to go back home and argue fiercely with your own principle to persuade. the principal to take the risk of a deal. They're always more hard line at home than the people at the table. Why is that? Because they get to know each other.

So that's a big one. Number two, these people and Wendy Sherman and others like her, they're trained listeners. They're very patient. You listen so hard and you're looking for that one opening. Well, when you said that, did you mean that we might be able to do this? And that's a skill that you develop over the years. Thirdly, you learn to work very, very closely with technical experts. Because if we're talking as is inevitable, we're going to be about Iran's nuclear program.

This is a really, really technical issue, frankly. And when Wendy Sherman was working on it, along with her, for months was the U.S. Secretary of Energy. Mnuz and his technical people. And so you really work seamlessly with the technical people and the and the Iranians bring their technical people to the table. They went to Islamabad two weeks ago with 80 people. Most of them, right, they were prepared. They would stay there for weeks and haggle about each word

and about the technical meaning of a term. we sent Jady Mans, you know, Wickew and Kushner and a small group of technical people. That's not how a deal will get done. So what has to, and that's why I think there will be a division of labor among these four countries. One of the countries will take one file, another country will take another file. They'll have technical people. they'll be shuddling without it looking like shuttling. The Saudis will talk to the Iranians and then they'll talk to their friends in the White House.

They'll talk to the Pakistanis. And I think that's what's going to go on for the next several weeks. I don't think either Donald Trump or the Iranians can hold out more than eight weeks because the punishment is just so big for each of them. So that's an advantage the negotiators had that Wendy Sherman didn't have. You kind of hinted there at how long this could take. This is not something that's over in a few hours. No, definitely not.

This could literally last weeks or longer. Even Trump was starting to suggest that this is going to take a long time. Yeah. Look, the deal, the Kerry deal, it was John Kerry. who led that delegation, Wendy Sherman was number two. I think it was 18 months. And it was just a nuclear issue. It wasn't the straight before moves.

It wasn't the missiles. Well, they may reduce the negotiating list down. Yes. To find common ground on a big issue and then, you know, call it a day. Two big tricks, okay, here? Yeah. In all these things. One is what you just said.

You pick one issue. issue. You think you can resolve that one issue. You work really hard. You get the agreement, and that builds momentum and confidence. So that's one of the obvious ones. So if a trained person smells, there's a possibility here, they go all in on that. That's one way. If you don't see that, one of the ways you could sometimes get a deal is you put two issues on the table. And one issue is more important to one side, another issue is more important to the other. So the one you really care about, I'm going to give you something, and you know that I really care about the other one, and you're going to move a little bit on that. So you create the trade-off, and that's how you get a

deal. Do you think, last question before we take our break, do you think the war, as we know, war is over? I'm absolutely convinced that I have been since the ceasefire, Peter, that neither of that, want to go back to war. I don't think the Iranians do, and I don't think the United States does. I did say unstable ceasefire because I'm going to use polite English, stuff happens, right? You get a drone fired at a ship.

You get an American naval vessel that's damaged. There's always these unpredictable elements, because there's no agreement about anything right now, and there's a standoff. The Iranians control the straits. The Americans are just behind outside. Meanwhile, the Americans have thousands of troops there and aircraft. And, you know, stationed all around.

Exactly, the expense. I mean, they're racking up bills of, you know, it keeps changing what the, you know, what they say this is costing, but it's definitely in the tens of billions, if not hundreds of billions of dollars. It's hundreds of billions. Well, and you can't keep that many men and women in uniform on ships or on the ground in some cases

than, you know, at little expense. This is doing nothing is costing a fortune in terms of the military. It's not sustainable. And it's not the money, although you're absolutely right about it. how much it costs. People have to be rotated in and out, right? Number one. So you have to be able.

Secondly, the United States has no capacity right now. It's absolutely astonishing, no capacity to defend in any other theater or anything to happen. Either in Asia or in Europe, all the assets, all the deployable assets virtually are concentrated in this one place. That's just not sustainable now. How does that work, Peter? So it puts pressure on both sides. It puts pressure on the United States for the obvious reason we just talked about it.

But the Iranians know that there's a limited time. The Americans are going to keep that kind of force there and then you either use it or you go home. What does Trump do? Does he use it or does he go home? They can't predict. Well, we should be keeping an eye on that. This is the highest stakes poker, what we're saying in the straits right now. In the straits and just outside it.

Okay. Time for our break. We come back something totally different. It's something that a lot of people have been waiting for, hoping for. A slight glimmer of hope on the Gaza situation. We'll talk about that right after this. And welcome back. You're listening to the Monday episode of The Bridge. That means Dr. Janice Stein from the Monk School to University of Toronto.

She's with us. You're listening on Sirius XM, Channel 167 Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform. Glad to have you with us. All right. Gaza, what's happening? We had, believe it or not, Peter, an election. The first election in Gaza since 2006, 20 years. Now, it's in one village, one village, that's all.

And it was the Palestinian Authority that insisted that this election be held in this one village. It's, it's Dear Al-Bala. It was relatively speaking undamaged during the war. And it was very, very important to the Palestinian Authority to have that election in Gaza because it was a way for a Palestinian leadership in the West Bank to assert that Gaza is part of Palestine, all together part of Palestine. So there was no formal Hamas party running in the election, but Hamas controlled police. patrol and did not interfere with the voting, which was, the turnout was not high.

There were 15 seats, but this is, you know, the only barometer we have. So there were 15 seats. The group that was most sympathetic to Hamas of all the candidates that were running, two of the 15 seats, that's all. two. The Palestinian Authority, six. So that's eight out of 50. The other seven was divided two ways between groups that are not affiliated either with Hamas or with the Palestine Authority. But nevertheless, anybody in that village who could vote, voted. We've seen this, you know, in other countries, where this happens for people who have been deprived of the right to vote, you know, line up. That's what went on on Saturday in this village. Anybody who could vote voted.

And it's got to be a sobering, very sobering result for Hamas, no matter what. Second piece of good news, and this one is more fragile. but the chief executive officer of the Board of Peace and very experienced Russian diplomat took a proposal to Hamas for disarmament because that's why that is what is holding up right now because until Hamas agrees some form of disarmament, major reconstruction can't start. So that's the stumbling walk right now for the first. first time, and he negotiated, you know, he's negotiating with what we call the hotel guys. And what do I mean by the hotel guys?

These are the leaders of us who stay in luxury hotels in Qatar or Istanbul. And I'm telling you, these are nice hotels where they stay. And they have to reach back inside Gaza to the leadership. but for the first time, Hamas agreed that there would be some process of disarmament. Now, the devil will be in the details. What are they going to give up? But both of these, I think, are the most optimistic signs

that we've had since all this started on October the 7th. There's an interesting sign, too, in Israel, because, and correct me if I'm wrong here, but the way I seem to interpret it is this. Netanyahu's got this trial hanging over his head. It's basically a corruption trial. It is a corruption trial. It is a corruption trial.

And he was trying to get out of it and looking for, I don't think it pardons the right word, but trying to get the thing canceled. In the last week, the president of Israel decides, no, you're not going to get that deal. you've got to go to trial. Despite Donald Trump telling him

that he should do it. Yes, I'm putting tremendous amount of pressure on the president, Herzog of Israel to give the, and you can see what Donald Trump would get very invested in that one. And Herttahsson said absolutely no

if, first of all, the trials are not concluded. And Netanyahu showed up and he comes into court and he said, I can't spend the day here because I have grave national security issues. So this trial, there are three, have been going on for years, frankly, and they're still not concluded. And what the president said, I am not going to give you a pardon. First of all, you haven't been convicted of anything.

It's very difficult to pardon somebody who hasn't been convicted. And Netanyahu has refused to plead guilty to any charge. he said go to there's a process of mediation which you can engage in with the court go there now he's running out of time we are at the end of april the latest israel can hold an election is the end of october so he's running out of time and is he he's running out of time on that but is he also running out of time and i don't mean his health i mean he's got a health issues he had cancer that has become prostate cancer, which he claims that he's dealt with.

But is he running out of time? The other thing was announced this last weekend was an alliance between the two most senior opposition leaders, Bennett, Nafthali Bennett, and Yerlipid, who are going to run on a single list. And again, the public opinion polls in Israel, they have the most representative system of government in the world. That's why they have all the problems that they do in governance, because small factions, you only have to get 5% of the vote to have a part, your party

represented in the parliament. Again, it looks like there was, if the election were held, based on the polls results of last week Nathaniel and his coalition partners could not form a government. So he is running out of time. And this ambiguous result from the war is hardly helpful.

Exactly. All right. Well, we will follow that too. As we've said many times on this program, That in Yahoo's been counted out before. Yes. Hasn't happened. They say he has nine lives.

I think we're on the 10th. Oh, yeah. I'd say that. Okay. Let's call it a day for today. We've certainly covered a lot of ground, and it's been as it always is fascinating. Thanks, Janice.

We've talked to you in seven days. See you next week. Dr. Janice Stein from the Muck School at the University of Toronto. And other, you know, these conversations, we should package these. You know, as I've said before, it's kind of like getting a course in international affairs, in foreign policy, in foreign affairs, in diplomacy, in negotiation, and conflict resolution. Every time you listen to Dr. Stein, I think of something new.

and as we've always said, you may not agree with it. And every once in a while I get letters to people saying, I don't agree with Dr. Stein on that point. And good for you that you're into it so much and into the conversation so much that you take a different path. She encourages that. She encourages their students to do that at U of T and at the Monk School.

So there we go. Another week with Dr. Stein. reminder and you can just dial back. It's an Ask Me Anything week for your turn. So if you've got a question for me, go for it. Send it in to the Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com with all the conditions that we have.

Length under 75 words, have it in by 6 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday. Include your name, include your location you're writing from. Please don't forget. a lot of you do. And if you forget, you're out of it. And it's, did I say, The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com.

That's where you write. So look forward to seeing what you have to say. Some of you, you know, from last month, your letters are still here. You don't have to rewrite them if they didn't make the program. They may make it this week. We'll see. But we're always looking for new questions.

and you're great at asking them, so don't be shy. All right, that will do it for this week. Tomorrow, it's a more about the conversation. Wednesday will be an N-Bits special. He seemed to like those. Thursday, your turn and the random rancher on Friday, of course, is good talk with Chantelle and Bruce. That's our week's lineup.

We like it. And so apparently to you, another week where we landed in the top spot on the Apple political rankings for Canadian political podcasts. We like that. That's it for this day. I'm Peter Mansbridge. We'll thank you for listening and look forward to talking with you again in less than 24 hours time. Bye for now.