The Daily Signal - #500: As Iran Inches Closer to Nuclear Weapon, What US Can Do

Episode Date: July 10, 2019

Iran is forging ahead with its nuclear program, and that’s creating more uncertainty in the Middle East. So what’s the best way to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons? Today Luke Coffey of The Heritage Foundation has some ideas. We also cover these stories:•Democrat leaders call for Labor Secretary Alex Acosta to resign over his 2008 deal with financier Jeffrey Epstein.•President Trump defends Acosta, but says White House is looking at deal.•BET founder Robert Johnson praises Trump on the economy, says Democrat party is becoming too extreme. The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, iTunes, SoundCloud, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at [e-mail]. Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's Canadian Tire's Black Friday sale. With the lowest prices of the year. Hello, can we go? Limbo again. Shop the Black Friday sale at Canadian Tire and save up to 60%. November 27th to December 7th. Conditions apply. Details online.

This is the Daily Signal podcast for Wednesday, July 10th. I'm Kate Trinco. And I'm Daniel Davis. Iran is forging ahead with its nuclear program, and that's creating more uncertainty in the Middle East. So what's the best way to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon? Today, we'll discuss that with Luke Coffey of the Heritage Foundation. Plus, white people nearly got charged twice as much as black people at a music festival, because privilege.

We'll discuss. By the way, if you're enjoying this podcast, please consider leaving a review or a five-star rating in iTunes to help us grow. Now, on to our top news. Well, top congressional Democrats are calling for Labor Secretary Alex Acosta to resign over his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case over a decade ago. Acosta prosecuted the multimillionaire for sex trafficking back in 2008 when he was a U.S. attorney. He reached a plea deal with Epstein that allowed him to admit to just two prostitution charges and serve only 13 months in prison. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called on Acosta to resign Tuesday, as did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a tweet, which said, quote, Secretary Acosta must step down.

As U.S. attorney, he engaged in an unconscionable agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, kept secret from courageous young victims preventing them from seeking justice. This was known by POTUS when he appointed him to the cabinet. Hashtag Acosta resign. President Donald Trump talked to the media about Acosta's role in the Epstein deal on Tuesday. I can tell you that for two and a half years he's been just an excellent secretary of labor. He's done a fantastic job. Now, part of it is our economy is so good.

our unemployment numbers are at record lows. You know, so many good things are happening. But the fact is, he's been a very good Secretary of Labor. What happened 12 or 15 years ago with respect to when he was a U.S. attorney, I think, in Miami, is it Miami? Yes. You know, if you go back and look at everybody else's decisions, whether it's a U.S. attorney or an assistant U.S. attorney or a judge,

you go back 12 or 15 years ago or 20 years ago to look at their past decisions, I would think you'd probably find that they would wish they maybe did it a different way. I do hear that there were a lot of people involved in that decision, not just him. I can only say this from what I know and what I do know is that he's been a great, really great secretary of labor. The rest of it will have to look at, we'll have to look at it very carefully. Acosta himself addressed the matter on Twitter Tuesday, writing, The crimes committed by Epstein are horrific, and I am pleased that New York, prosecutors are moving forward with a case based on new evidence. With the evidence available more

than a decade ago, federal prosecutors insisted that Epstein go to jail, register as a sex offender, and put the world on notice that he was a sexual predator. Now that new evidence and additional testimony is available, the New York prosecution offers an important opportunity to more fully bring him to justice. Well, President Trump took another blow in court, this time related to Twitter. The second U.S. Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that the president cannot block Twitter users from his official account. The court said Trump's Twitter account bears all the marks of an official government channel, and so blocking particular users would be discriminatory against people who have an equal right to access the president's official statements.

Trump had argued that he was blocking users only in his personal capacity. The ruling upheld a lower court ruling in favor of seven plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit after, being blocked by the president. Robert Johnson, who founded the Black Entertainment Television Network, is a long-time Democrat. But in a new CNBC interview, he indicated that he's concerned about the direction of his party. I've long time been a centrist in terms of democratic politics. The party, in my opinion, has moved for me, personally, too far to the left. Johnson, who is the first African-American billionaire, according to Forbes, also praised the economy.

Well, I think the economy is doing absolutely great, and it's particularly reaching into populations they're here to four have had very bad problems in terms of jobs, unemployment, and the opportunities that come with full employment. So African-American unemployment is at its lowest level, Hispanic unemployment, women. So I give President Trump, and I've said this before on Squawk Box, I give President a lot of credit for moving the economy in a positive direction that's benefiting a large number of Americans. I think the tax cuts clearly helped stimulate the economy. I think business people have a little bit more confident in the way the economy is going. And I think it's beginning to have some impact globally. Ross Perot, the self-made billionaire and two-time presidential candidate, passed away on Tuesday.

after battling leukemia for several months. He was 89 years old. Perrault was considered the Bill Gates of the 60s, a pioneer of the computer systems industry and a generous philanthropist. He famously ran for president in 1992, winning 19% of the vote in the year that Bill Clinton unseated President George H.W. Bush. He also ran unsuccessfully in 1996. The National Education Association, which has 3 million members and is a powerhouse union is now backing abortion. National Review's Alexandra DeSanctis reports that during its gathering this weekend, the Teachers Union adopted a business item stating, the NEA vigorously opposes all attacks on the right to choose

and stands on the fundamental right to abortion under Roe v. Wade. Well, up next, we'll talk to Luke Coffee about Iran's nuclear program. Tired of high taxes, fewer health care choices, and bigger government, become a part of the Heritage Foundation. We're fighting the rising tide of homegrown socialism while developing conservative solutions that make families more free and more prosperous. Find out more at heritage.org. Well, Iran continues to ramp up its uranium enrichment despite warnings from the U.S. and Europe. Joining us now to unpack where Iran's nuke program is going is Luke Coffey, director of the Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies here at the Heritage Foundation. Luke, thanks for being back on.

Yeah, it's great to be back. Thank you. So, Luke, Iran has been quite open in recent weeks about ramping up its uranium enrichment, kind of on the path toward a nuclear weapon. And they've done that past the point that was agreed to in the 2015 nuclear deal. should we be worried about a possible uranium nuke in the coming years or even months? Well, certainly in the coming years, without a doubt. So I wouldn't say in the coming months. Under the JCPOA, which is the fancy acronym for the Iran deal, the joint comprehensive. Planet Action.

Exactly. Everyone calls it JCPOAs. In your circles, maybe. Exactly, yeah. They're allowed to enrich uranium at, I think, it's just under 4%. It's 3.67%. And now they're saying they're going to enrich to 5%. To have enough enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon, it needs to be at 90%.

So we're pretty far off from that. But as they increase the level of enrichment, it becomes faster as it gets higher. So that's one reason to be concerned. But what I think they're doing, why I think they're doing this is for two reasons. I think, firstly, they want to use them. this as a way to put more pressure on the Europeans to then put pressure on the U.S. administration. And secondly, they're doing this at what is still relatively a low level of enrichment.

So they probably have something that they can give up when or if they do have negotiations again with President Trump. So is that basically their calculus here that they're just doing this to try to strike a new deal to get rid of sanctions? Well, President Trump is very clear. once a new nuclear deal because the deal that was agreed under the Obama administration has some fatal flaws in it, namely the sunset clauses, which actually allow certain restrictions on uranium enrichment, for example, to end only after 10 or 15 years. The 24-7 international inspection

regime that's in place ends after just 25 years. Now, 25 years to us might seem like a long time, but in the Iranian, the Persian mindset has thousands of years of rich history and culture, 25 years as a blink of the eye for them. So these are some of the main flaws with the Iran deal, and President Trump has made this very clear from the beginning, even as a candidate. And he wants to do what he can to get the Iranians back to the negotiating table to get a deal that he feels like, well, better serve not only the U.S., but the region and the international community.

So Israel is particularly concerned about this. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned Iran. He is saying that Israeli F-35s can reach anywhere in the Middle East. So how does Israel play into this? And are they potentially going to take action unilaterally? Well, this is a very serious matter for not only Netanyahu, but for Israel. They take this matter very seriously. And they have shown a willingness in the past. past to do things that many people never thought they could do or would do. That being said, we should not think that ending Iran's nuclear program is a simple matter of a night of airstrikes. It would probably require a sustained air campaign lasting weeks to fully destroy it. And even that probably wouldn't be able to get the job done. It would certainly set it back without a doubt.

But I think what Netanyahu is trying to do is support President Trump in pursuing this maximum pressure campaign against Iran, increasing economic sanctions, isolating Iran in the region even more, while still keeping the threat of military force present. And without a doubt, the Israeli military is very capable, the most capable in the region. by far. But I don't think we're quite to that point where the Israelis would take preemptive military action, especially when it looks like there's going to be another election very soon in Israel because Netanyahu was unable to form a coalition. So President Trump has also issued veiled threats, you know, saying Iran better be careful with their enrichment of uranium. But some people might wonder, you know, what reason does Iran have? to not do that. The U.S. is no longer party to the deal, so, you know, why does Iran, why should

they feel bound to it? Was withdrawing from that deal from the U.S. perspective still a wise move? Yeah, absolutely. It was a terrible deal, and there's no reason why the U.S. should remain wedded to a deal that did not serve U.S. interests or the interests of our allies in the region. Elections have consequences, and we saw with the election of President Trump that things can and have changed. And if you live by the executive order, you die by the executive order. And if President Obama was serious about this Iran deal, he should have submitted it to the U.S. Senate as a treaty, and then it would have had more force. But he didn't. And now we are where we are. And I think on balance, President Trump was right to leave the deal. Now, without a doubt, there are good

arguments on both sides of this debate. But when you look at the bigger picture, when you look at the flaws of the Iran deal, when you look at the Iran deal, when you look at the Iran deal, when you look at the economic situation in Iran and the opportunity the U.S. has to put the maximum pressure on the economy to try to bring the Iranians back to the negotiating table, I think it was certainly the right thing. So in a speech Tuesday at the Christians United for Israel Summit, Senator Ted Cruz said, quote, I think we need to revoke every single one of the civilian nuclear waivers. Could you please explain what those are and whether you agree that they should be revoked or not? Well, Iran is a party to the non-proliferation.

Treaty. And under the nonproliferation treaty, countries have a right to civilian nuclear power. They don't have a right to a nuclear weapon, but they have a right to civilian use of nuclear power. So because of Iran being part of NPT, non-proliferation treaty, they are getting certain waivers on their civilian nuclear program. And it's a very complex issue. It involves Russia and some other countries. but nevertheless they get these waivers and I know that it wasn't just at that speech where Senator Cruz has said this. He also co-authored a letter, I think,

with Senator Cotton and Rubio to President Trump outlining a number of measures that they think the U.S. administration should take and this was one of them. And I think this is being discussed in the administration, but I think they also realize that this is a process and not an event. And if they overnight throw the kitchen sink at Iran and do everything, then they're left ultimately with one final option, and that's the military option.

So I think the Trump administration is being very deliberate and responsible as how they're approaching this situation, and they're doing it in an orderly fashion through phases, gradually increasing the pressure on Iran. But it does sound like from what you're saying, and from that letter you mentioned last week, that there are ways beyond sanctions that they could make life for Iran hard. Yes, and we just saw that actually last week

when an oil tanker was en route to Syria from Iran. It couldn't go through the Suez Canal, so it went all the way around Africa, like 18th century. style before the canal was there, all the way around Cape of Good Hope, back up the western coast of Africa through the Strait of Gibralcher, and as it just barely creeped into Gibraltarorial waters, which are British territorial waters, British Royal Marines commandeered the ship because it was en route to Syria.

So that is another, without a doubt there was coordination with the U.S. on that, and that's another way that the U.S. can act against Iran's influence in the region. Well, European nations are still party to that 2015 nuclear deal. And recently foreign ministers of the UK, France, and Germany, plus a high-ranking EU foreign affairs official, issued a statement saying, quote, these compliance issues must be addressed within the framework of the JCPOA and a joint commission should be convened urgently, end quote. What chance do you think the European Union and European nations have in really raining in Iran's uranium enrichment without U.S. involvement? Well, with Europe, they view their relations with Iran through an economic lens and an energy lens. So especially Germany and

France, where trade with Iran since the JCPOA was agreed has dramatically increased. However, that being said, in the past year, it has slightly decreased because the fear of the fear of the reach of U.S. sanctions. People still want to do business in the U.S. companies want to do business in the U.S., and they're not going to choose Iran over doing business in the U.S., right? But with Europe, I think we need to wait and see what happens in the coming months, because as you might have known, well, in May, they had European Union elections across Europe, and those European elections voted in a new European Union Parliament, and then that new European Union Parliament will be involved in appointing a new European Union Commission.

And then that new European Union Commission will have someone appointed called the High Representative, which is essentially the EU's foreign minister. So the current High Representative, she is intimately linked, almost emotionally attached to the current deal. So she will keep it on life support at all costs. When the new EU commission is appointed and when the new high representative gets his or her job, then you might have a different mentality. It could offer the EU an opportunity to maybe align slightly more with the U.S.

But I don't think they're going to ever align fully with the U.S. on this. Now, one wild card to keep an eye on is the U.K. When the U.K. actually formally leaves the European Union, they'll be freer to take more of an independent stance. suspect that if it's Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and that's how it's looking. When they leave the EU, we'll see Britain align more with the U.S. position on Iran. Because right now, the debate inside the U.K. about Iran is linked to their negotiations with the EU on leaving because of Brexit. So you were recently at the, I don't know, scene of the crime is probably not the right word.

Not yet. Thank you. The Straits of Hormuz. And tell us about why that matters to the region. and the politics there, but also what you saw there firsthand. Yeah, it was a fascinating visit. It was actually a long-plan visit that the timing just coincided to work really well, considering the news cycle. I visited Oman, which is an important U.S. ally that doesn't get much attention or focus in the U.S. But funnily enough, it was the first Arab country to recognize America's independence.

First Arab country we had a trade deal with in 1833. It was the first Gulf state to allow a U.S. military base there in 1980. So it's a country that we have very close relations with, but very quiet relations. And, yeah, the country, the Oman sets on the Strait of Hormuz across from Iran. So I visited the very tip of the peninsula next to the strait and went out in a Dow, a local ship, a boat, not even ship a boat, out into the strait and had a very, you know, when you see it firsthand, it brings it all, Well, it's a lot clearer on why it's very important. I mean, you can look at it on a map and see, but seeing the first hand, seeing the oil tankers go through, you get a newfound understanding of the importance of this region. And Oman, of course, is very concerned by this because they're one of the two countries that are on either side of the strait, of course, the other being Iran.

They're concerned by any threat of war or hostility. Is this game with Iran really ever going to be over in terms of their nuclear program? Are these negotiations ever going to be over without ultimately seeing a kind of regime change? A new regime that doesn't want to act maliciously on the world stage? Well, the official U.S. position is not one of regime change. It's one of change in behavior of the regime, which could happen, but it would take a very long time. And the important thing is it would have to come from within. In America, we view our engagement with Iran with the starting point of 1979.

When the Islamic Revolution happened, they took our diplomats hostage in the U.S. Embassy. This is kind of where history starts for most policymakers today, and it's unfortunate because the U.S. in Iran has had a very rich and long relationship in history going back many decades. And it was before 1979, Iran was one of America's top allies in the Middle East. I mean, culturally, we have far more in common as a country with Persians, with Iranians, than we do with other countries in the region. But it was when the Islamic Revolution hijacked the society and made it what it is today. The U.S. and Iran just cannot work together. Nothing since 1979 has shown that Iran can be a credible or trustworthy partner for the U.S. So it is in the long-term interest that there is change in Iran.

I think someday Iran could give up its ambitions to get a nuclear weapon, or at least they can be enticed to do so. But I think that it's a long road between now and then, and the Iranian regime will allow a lot of suffering to take place between now and then and it'll be a bumpy road. Well, on that cheerful note, thanks for joining us, Luke. Thank you very much.

Do you own an Amazon Echo? You can now get the Daily Signal podcast every day as part of your daily Alexa Flash briefing. It's easy to do. Just open your Amazon Alexa app, go to settings, and select Flash Briefing. From there, you can search for the Daily Signal podcast and add it to your Flash briefing

so you can stay up to date with the top news of the day that the liberal media isn't covering. A music festival in Detroit has backed down on charging $10 for people of color and $20 for white people, yes, for the same tickets, after an uproar, as the Daily Wire reports. The Afra Future Youth tweeted, quote, for the safety of our community, family, elders who receive threats from white supremacists and youth who were subjected to seeing racist comments on our Instagram page, Afro Future Fest has changed our ticketing model to. $20 general admission and suggested donation for non-people of color. A rapper, who goes by the name Tiny Jag, told the Detroit Metro Times that she had withdrawn from the festival because of the segregated pricing. She said, quote, I was immediately enraged just because I am biracial.

And I have family members that would have, under those circumstances, been subjected to something that I would not ever want them to be in. She also added, a lot of the songs that I perform are from my first project called Polly. That is my grandmother's name. How do you want me to come to a performance and perform those songs off a mixtape that is titled after this white woman that you would have charged double to get in here? So, Daniel, what do you think about all this? It kind of reminds me of affirmative action bake sales. I don't know if you've heard about this. Sometimes conservative groups on campus will have an affirmative action bake sale

in order to kind of really grossly illustrate kind of the absurdity of treating people differently based on their race. But the point of that is to be hyperbole. It's supposed to be absurd. Like, you know, you're charging people different prices for bake sale based on their race. And this is exactly the same thing but in real life and it's supposed to be serious. I think the concerning thing about it is that it's, It's based on, you know, the idea that of identity politics, basically,

that, you know, anyone who's of a different race is inherently and irreversibly kind of stuck in this, in this status of being treated differently their whole life. And so you have to compensate for that through reparative policy and through stuff like this, you know, making people pay different prices. The thing about it is, like this is relatively, affirmative action is not new, But this kind of thing is new on the left because it's just so obviously treats people differently in day-to-day interaction. And it's kind of shocked by it because it's really different from even the kind of stuff I was taught from liberal teachers growing up. You know, we were taught against prejudice.

We were taught against treating people differently based on the color of his skin. We studied Martin Luther King, you know, dreaming that, you know, white and black kids could grow up, you know, in the future. and be friends, you know, without any difference. And this just totally rejects that. And I think it's really sad. Yeah. So one, I love the idea of the college conservative group and the college liberal group, both holding the same bake sale to make the same point with the same pricing model now.

But obviously, their audience is interpreting it very differently. But, yeah, two, I think it's a very, I mean, obviously it's a problematic model. The answer to racial discrimination is not racial discrimination. just differently engineered. It also ignores the fact that, you know, earlier on the show, we played a clip from Robert Johnson, who at least once was a billionaire. He's African-American. Shouldn't he pay the higher rate?

I mean, I think, I don't know how a music festival would do pricing based on income, how on earth they would verify that or what that would be. But, I mean, something like that, I think is arguably, I mean, that would be fair. And I think people would be okay with it. But I think, you know, yeah, just race alone does. not necessarily denote, for lack of a less woke term, your privilege. Yeah, I just think, you know, it's a real break from classical liberalism, which a lot of liberals, you know, used to hold to. It's really illiberal. And I think it kind of, there's a

politics of vengeance going on, you know, where there's really no path toward reconciliation. There's no path toward actually being treated equally. And so I think people are seeing more of a dissonance on the left. They use the language of equality and all the time. You know, that's just equality equality all the time. And yet in practice, there is this identity politics thing happening where you're treated differently based on your race. Yeah. And I think, you know, I thought something positive that came out was recently Disney announced that an African-American singer whose name is escaping me is going to play Ariel in the live action version. Some people online, surprise, surprise, have not been happy about that.

But I think that is, you know, when you talk about, like, promoting good race relations, like, I think that's a positive step. There's nothing about Ariel that made her particularly white. I mean, I think the original fairy tale was set in Denmark, but it has, I mean, Disney already took so many liberties with the original fairy tale, which I want to say it's something really dark, like the little mermaid, like having legs made out of spikes or I can't remember exactly. But anyway, Disney's version was not Hans Christian Andersen's. And, you know, I do think it was kind of a shame that Disney didn't have an African-American main female character until The Princess and the Frog, which was in the 2000s.

And I think this was a nice step. But it wasn't something that came at the expense of hitting races against each other, I guess. Yeah, the aerial thing, I just don't really see it as a problem because, like you said, the original character, like the racial trait was not inherent to the character. I mean, she's a mermaid. Right, right. But I will say some characters, like, their race or some other trait is intrinsic to the character. And so you have to preserve that in order to preserve the character. Absolutely.

You know, like you wouldn't, if you had to kill a mockingbird and you had, you know, Atticus Finch, you know, was also black or Tom Robinson was white. Like that would just ruin the story because that's not what it's supposed to be. But I think there's also this trend nowadays, which is a bit different that you've seen it like, with LGBT movies where, like, if there's a gay character, people in the LGBT community are saying, well, the actor has to be gay. And that I just find a bit ridiculous because it's not an outward characteristic that's,

that, you know, you can act that, but you can't act a different ethnicity, you know, which would, I guess, kind of ruin Tom Hanks' role in Philadelphia, if you ever saw that movie, already played a gay man with AIDS. It was back in the, I think, late 80s, early 90s. I haven't seen that one.

But I mean, obviously there's a long history. But there's also a long history of LGBT people playing straight people. I mean, I think Rock Hudson obviously died of AIDS and played many of straight roles. So, I mean, I think the latest thing in the LGBT community is who's allowed to play transgender characters. Which feels like a very fraught fight on the left.

I think it's that if you're less, privileged, you're allowed to play the more privileged person. But if you're not privileged, then you're allowed to play, then you're not allowed to play the privilege. It's a hard Olympics to figure out. It's very, it's very tricky. And now I just confuse myself. I'll see how this can ever work. Well, thanks for listening to The Daily Signal podcast today, brought to you from the Robert H. Bruce Radio Studio at the Heritage Foundation. Please be sure to subscribe on iTunes, Google Play, or SoundCloud. And please leave us a review or a rating on iTunes to give us feedback. We'll see you again tomorrow.

The Daily Signal podcast is executive produced by Kate Trinko and Daniel Davis. Sound designed by Lauren Evans and Thalia Rampersad. For more information, visit DailySignal.com. You've been listening to The Daily Signal podcast, executive produced by Kate Trinko and Daniel Davis. Sound design by Michael Gooden, Lauren Evans, and Thalia Rampersad. For more information, visitdailySignal.com.