The Duran Podcast - IRAN WAR time pressure, TRUMP desperate for victory

Episode Date: March 26, 2026

IRAN WAR time pressure, TRUMP desperate for victory

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the situation with the war in Iran. We have this report about video briefs given to Trump. And these video briefs are meant to present the picture of the war where the United States is crushing Iran and obliterating everything. And this was run by NBC News. They're the ones that are reporting this. may explain Trump's rhetoric to a certain extent, but the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Trump is looking for a quick exit out of this war. A four to six week timeline was what he had in mind when this war started, and we're coming up to the fifth week, I believe the fourth-fifth week,

is what we're coming up to. So we have that news. And then we have Axios saying that the Trump White House is looking for a decisive final blow to Iran, a big strike that will be fast and quick and decisive and will lead to the end of the war and victory for Trump. What do you make of all of this news? Well, we have an awful lot of pieces of information that are flying around. We've had talks about negotiations, talks about ceasefires, talks about 15. And we have negotiations too. 15-point plans, which may or may not exist. The Iranians say they haven't received it. And Catherine Levitt said, you know,

you mustn't believe all that you hear apparently about 15-point plans. We've had deployments of paratroopers, people from the 82nd Airborne Division. We've got talk about massive strikes. We've had contradictory stories in the Wall Street Journal. We've had this report from NBC. It is important to hold on to the point that we made before the conflict began, because this, to my mind, provides the key to understanding everything. Now, the whole point about the war was to try to create a political crisis in Iran,

to provoke some kind of regime change crisis in Iran, the people who are denying it now, but all you have to do is wheel back and read the kind of things that Trump was saying when the battle started. And to do that quickly, within not four weeks, as people are saying now, but within 48, 72, 96 hours, that was the sort of time frame. And the point that we made before the war actually started is that this had to succeed quickly, very quickly, because if it didn't, if the Iranian government held together, if Iran was able to continue fighting, if there was no sign that the army was fracturing and turning again. against the Ayatollahs. There was no sign that there were protests on the streets or a breakdown within the government. Then with every day that it passed, with every week that it passed, the risk was for Trump that Iran would start to get stronger and would start to gain the initiative.

and the United States, which is short of precision guided weapons, as we've discussed many times, which has to face concerns about the situation in the global economy, which is all sorts of other issues and other problems, that the United States would start to lose the initiative, and things would begin to get more and more difficult, and eventually we would move from a position where the United States was, appearing strong and successful to one where on the contrary it began to look like a debacle. And that is the situation we are in now.

After several weeks of missile strikes, of attacks on Iran, of decapitation strikes on many Iranian leaders, the government of Iran, the political system is still functioning, The country continues to work and function. There is no sign of a political collapse. The Iranians have imposed a tight control over the Strait of Hormuz. Energy prices around the world are, well, either rising or being manipulated downwards. But of course, keeping oil prices and energy prices low at a time when, there is a worldwide shortage simply aggravates the shortage because then people will stoppile

whilst the price remains low, which will mean that in a few weeks or months' time, the shortage is going to be even greater and the prices are going to rise even higher. There are also problems across global supply chains. and, well, we see that the Gulf monarchies are in crisis as well. So Trump needs to end the war fast. This is his priority now. He may be listening to two-minute videos from the Pentagon, which is, by the way, if it's true, and I'm sure it is true,

it is very, very concerning. It's concerning about him that he is satisfied with just two-minute videos. it is even more concerning about the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff that instead of insisting on giving briefings to the Commander-in-Chief and informing him about what is actually going on, they are palming two-minute videos upon him. I mean, it really speaks very badly about the situation in the Pentagon. But anyway, we can get distracted by those. stories, the political imperative is to bring the war to a conclusion quickly in a way that limits any political damage and which enables Trump to say that this is all worthwhile

and that it achieved something. So what they're trying to do and they can't decide on doing one or the other, they're trying to do both at the same time, is that they're trying to draw the Iranians into negotiations. They're coming up with plans and proposals. They're talking about ceasefires. They're talking about all of those sort of things. And at the same time, they're talking about a massive, overwhelming strike that is finally going to achieve the outcome that they want, that's going to push the Iranians, either to break down, or, you're going to to sue for peace and to accept American terms. There's talk about deploying troops, seizing Harg Island, or if not Harg Island, one of the islands in the Strait of Hormuz, all of those things.

But the imperative is to get the war ended as quickly as possible before further damage is done and hope that if the war ends and the Strait of Hormuz reopens and all of those oil tankers start to move. Well, that will give you a few months cushion as all of that oil is released into the global energy system, which will get you perhaps through the midterms. And it will also provide you with some time and space to get production in the Gulf up and running again. So it is time. Time is now the factor that is running out and which is causing all of these strange moves by the president Donald Trump and his officials. Yeah, but that is the problem that the Trump administration has right now is that they want

to finish the war militarily. So they're talking about a big decisive strike. And at the same time, they're trying to figure out a way to enter negotiations, but those negotiations have to be framed as an Iranian capitulation. Yes. You can't have both. Exactly. You can't go to the opposition or your enemy, whoever you're at war with, and say, okay,

we're going to destroy you and we're going to crush you militarily. But we also want to negotiate with you. And during those negotiations, can you please, you know, surrender to us if you don't mind? I mean, that's basically what's happening. You have put your finger on the exact problem. And that's why we're getting all this dissonance. and all these contradictory statements and all of this feverish activity. At least they're going to try, and this is my own view,

they're going to try over the next few days to do something in the wall, which they hope will tip the Iranians into peace talks on American terms, because it's looking increasingly unlikely that they're going to get regime collapse. and if you take the 15-point plan seriously. And by the way, there are contradictions. I mean, it's clearly been cobbled together in an enormous hurry without anybody thinking about it. So one section says that Iran can continue enrichment on its own territory,

but at extremely low levels. And another section says that Iran must hand over all of its enriched uranium to the IAEA and have it taken out of the country. So you can see this isn't even thought through. It's a copy and paste of the Russian 20 point piece plan in some parts as well. Absolutely. I mean, it's all. I mean, it's just, it's just bizarre, actually.

I mean, and, and I mean, it's bizarre how they're trying to bring in some of the points that the Russians are making to try to fly them to the Iranians. And you're even starting, which is, I find almost beyond belief, you're even starting to get some American officials. and some pro-US, pro-Trump commentators actually starting to say, well, you know, this is like the SMO, and we're approaching it in the way that Putin approached the SMO in Ukraine, and that there are similarities and parallels. I mean, there are no similarities. They have no understanding of the SMO. Even to this day, they have no understanding of the conflict in Ukraine. Absolutely.

Absolutely. They're completely ignorant about what happened in Ukraine. Correct. Correct. But as I said, they're called. fobbling things together in a hurry. I mean, that 15-point plan. By the way, the Russians have sneered at it.

They've said, you know, there's all these American plans. We've had all sorts of American plans over Ukraine. We haven't seen most of them. It looks to us. It's exactly the same as happening over Iran. There's all sorts of American plans all flying around. At the same time, I mean, Trump does understand that if he's going to talk to the Iranians. He's got to talk in a way that the Iranians finally feel that they're talking to

serious people. So he's now pushing or pretending to push Whitgolf and Kushner to one side. So he's bringing out finally Vance and Rubio. And I mean, this is clearly intended to make the Iranians take the bait to agree to talk. But at the same time, it has to be a negotiation. in which he comes out in some way the winner. So it's no longer regime change. And not even in the 15-point plan. There's no radical changes or reforms in the way that Iran is governed anymore. That's not actually there.

It's all back to nuclear enrichment and ballistic missiles. And that sort of thing, the sort of thing that the Iranians were prepared to make significant concessions about before the war started. It's an attempt to go back to that scenario to get a ceasefire, which is becoming increasingly imperative because of the crisis in the energy system, the hope that a ceasefire will lead to an opening of the Strait of Hormuz. It will give the US some time to restock its missile arsenals and to prepare for the next round. They're talking about a one-month ceasefire. But at the same time, since they know by now that the Iranians are not going to agree to any of this, they have to try and escalate the pressure. And so we have the deployments of the 82nd Airborne Division,

the talk of crushing blows against the Iranians, the seizure of islands in the Persian Gulf, in the Strait of Hormuz, all of that. So everything contradicts everything else, everything is in chaos. The Iranians for the moment are being completely uncooperative. They say that they were fooled. They were tricked, deceived by Trump twice. They're not prepared to be deceived a third time.

They're sticking to their demands, which we've discussed in previous programs, which are so sweeping that they would amount to a political answer. strategic geostrategic revolution in the Middle East, which it is impossible for Trump to accept. I mean, politically, the damage to him if he accepted those sort of terms, I mean, it's just, I would say unsurvivable. So he's gambling. He has to gamble that this big crushing strike, the seizure of Hargoyle and something else is finally going to be enough to get the Iranians to talk and to deliver something that he could sell to the American people and to the world as a success that will justify all the harm and all of the damage that has been done. So there's

all of these things going on, all of these different parts moving around. But if you keep your mind on the single picture, the simple picture and the imperative of time, it all makes sense. Now, just to add to the time issues, I had a number of discussions, both with someone from China yesterday and with two people in the UK. And they're both telling me that over the last couple of days, China has started to tighten export restrictions, exports, or reduce exports of rare earths and of other strategic. minerals. So the Chinese, without making any announcement, because they, I mean, they never make announcements about this sort of thing. But they are now starting to take action. They've already stopped exports of refined oil products, petrol and diesel, which is having an immense effect across East Asia. And they're now starting to take these further steps as well.

and reserves of some of these materials are apparently very short. So that is also putting further time pressure on Trump, assuming this information I have got is true. I don't know if there's time left, Alexander, if there's much time left. The casino's about to close. Trump is at the table and he wants to continue to bet and try to find a way to win. Leave the casino with some money in his pocket, but it looks like the casino is about to close. Boots on the ground is a possibility.

I would actually say it's more likely that we're going to have boots on the ground. There was a house meeting the other day and various members of the house left that meeting shocked. My understanding is that they were told that there's going to be some sort of an operation. Yes. An invasion, boots on the ground, taking an island, some sort of an operation, which will require American troops to be in Iran or to be in one of the islands that they're looking to seize. And my other impression from the various posts on next from members of the House is that there is no plan. That's why when Trump says we're on schedule and everyone asks, well, you know, what's the schedule? Right? We're on schedule to meet all our objectives. The Pentagon says or Trump says, and everyone

asks, well, what are the objectives? What's the schedule? He doesn't know. There is no schedule. There are no real objectives that they're going after. The objective was regime changed. That was it. That was it. So they don't really say what they're trying to do on the one hand. And then on the other side, they're saying, oh, we're way ahead of schedule. Well, what was the schedule? What is the schedule? What are the objectives? What are the goals? what are you trying to do now that you haven't got in regime change? And before you answer, Alexander, you know, it's also not very simple because you're not only dealing with the United States and Iran. You also have Israel in there as well.

And that complicates everything for the United States and for Iran. So, you know, you have Israel there, which has completely different goals. Absolutely. You're absolutely right. And I should say, I endorse your point. And I think your analogy of this. compulsive gambler at the table trying constantly to win back some of his money by raising his stakes, putting up his bids all the time, even as the casino is about to close, is exactly

right. That is exactly the situation that we are in. And that is why those people from Congress, including Republicans, by the way, were so upset with one Republican Congresswoman. And Nancy Mace. Nancy Mace, absolutely furious with Lindsay Graham, who she clearly sees as the person who's lured the president into this disaster. And, well, there it is. And I think that is exactly right. I would add something else, just because I've got little to respond to from your point,

because I think the way you set it out is so exactly right. But I would add something else, which is, let's say they capture one of these islands, Let's say they capture Harg Island or some of these other islands. First of all, I cannot see myself. I mean, maybe there's some explanation as to why capturing an island here or an island there is going to open the Strait of Hormuz. I don't see it myself. All I see is that the Iranians can respond by doing all kinds of things. They can start seeding the seas with mines, which they supposedly started to do in a lot.

a small way where they could escalate that. They could do all kinds of things. But I was reading in the British media yesterday that seizing an island is going to make even greater sets of problems. Because if you seize the island, you have to hold it. That will result obviously in casualties. But more importantly, inevitably, what's going to happen is that much of this aviation, this missile power, all of the rest. which currently is attacking targets inside Iran, is going to have to be diverted in order to protect those American troops on that island. So, in fact, it's going to divert your resources onto what might be, in some respects,

an unimportant strategic position, trying to hold it on to a target of only symbolic value, and Ireland of only symbolic value, whilst, of course, the Iranians would be free to continue their strikes right across the Middle East. Articles today are all over the British media, by the way, about drone deliveries from the Russians to Iran, about the Russians sending more and more supplies to Iran. Of course, we have no independent corroboration of this, none. But for the record, I believe it is true. And I was looking, reading at what Peskov had to say in response to this. And he was saying, oh, well, you know, there's all sorts of stories up there.

You shouldn't believe everything you read, which is his way of avoiding giving a simple answer. Well, the United States provided hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons to Ukraine, and they still do. They sell it to NATO. They don't give it anymore. They sell it. But whatever. Who's Trump fooling with that? Right?

They're still providing Ukraine with weapons. And, of course, all the intel and the targeting and all of that stuff. Yes. You know, you had drones hitting, hitting Russia just the other day. Who's sending those drones? Well, quite, precisely. You had, you had the middle of an energy crisis. You had decapitation strikes a few weeks ago against the president of Russia himself

because that was clearly what was happening. Despite all the denials. And absolutely, you're absolutely correct. I mean, so it's not surprising. It should surprise no one that for the Russians it's payback time. Only they're getting their money back with interest. Because this crisis is causing formal problems of the United States than the Russians have ever experienced in terms of their conflict in Ukraine.

That's a controversial statement. We will discuss that in a further program. But we could see how all of these problems are compounding, and they will continue to compound, the longer this conflict goes on. It's causing a lot of problems around the world, this conflict. Absolutely. The Middle East is wrecked. All these countries, Dubai, everything that were built on, the UAE, Dubai, everything

that were built on is now overshadowed. Asia's a mess. Europe is going to be completely demolished. from all of this and the Europeans are doing nothing about it, nothing at all. Who is Trump talking to when he says we won or we're winning? My sense is that he's actually addressing Iran. I almost think of it as a plea for help or kind of a trick to try and convince Iran that you're losing. We're winning Iran.

Come on. Don't you see it? We're winning. It keeps on saying it. I'm wondering, is he talking to the American people, or is he actually trying to convince Iran, trying to play some sort of mentalist mind game with constantly going on about winning, we're winning? I think you're exactly right. I think that is exactly what he's trying to do. He's trying to get the Iranians to sit down and talk to him. I mean, he invented an entirely fictitious negotiation over the weekend.

And I really want to repeat that again because that is what he did. I do think anybody any longer, by the way, has any doubt about that. So, I mean, he invented entirely fictitious. Look, messages are being passed on between the two countries. That's true, right? Yeah, of course. Messages by third parties. Yes.

That's it. Yeah. That's it. That's all that's happened. Proper sit-down talks. They've not taken place. And they're not going to have. Who are you going to talk to?

Well, exactly. Exactly. Wouldn't a good move be to get rid of Wickkoff and Kushner? Wouldn't that be a good signal? Well, it would be an excellent signal. It would be an excellent signal. Sack them from all further negotiations, both over the Middle East and over Ukraine too, by the way. You don't even need to sack Kushner because no one even knows what his position is.

What is he? What is he? I know, but I mean, make it absolutely clear that he's no longer playing any role, any further role in negotiations at all. And the other thing is to empower the vice president who has managed to keep his distance from this debacle. He has up to now. I don't think that means that the Iranians trust Vance.

Obviously, they don't trust anybody. But here is what I think, I think the U.S. ought to be doing at this time. They should forget about, you know, seizing islands and all of those sort of things. They do need to get the war ended. They need to send someone, maybe vans, to Moscow and Beijing. Those are the two countries that have leverage over Iran. And they ought to ask these two countries for help and try to get these two countries to set up negotiations, real negotiations between Iran and the US, this time, not between Arakshi and Witgolf and Kushner, but with real negotiators, people who understand these things and negotiations that can be taken forward. And to be frank, if we go back to the original problem, the uranium enrichment issue,

you have pointed out in program after program on this channel, on other channels, in every place that, in fact, we previously had a deal, the JCPOA. We could go back to something like that with additional safeguards, which the Iranians, if they were probably agreed to. Especially if you lifted sanctions. Especially, and that's the other thing, you'd have to lift the sanctions. And of course, the Russians and the Chinese will demand a price. I mean, it'd be a price over Ukraine. It'll be applies over sanctions on Russia. But, well, that's the obvious step forward, the way to do this from this point on moving forward.

And by the way, if I can say it would not be inconsiderate. with the kind of policies that Donald Trump promised to follow when he was elected president, but which, as we have seen, he has completely gone back on, turn his back on. Our final question. Is this a type of Suez moment, or could this become a type of Suez moment for the United States? I know there are comparisons made between the Suez and this and there's a lot of differences. There are a lot of differences. But in general, could this turn out to be a kind of Suez moment for the United States? In general, in general.

Right. As a British person, I want to say something about Suez. Suez was the moment when the British Empire basically finished. It could have been, it should have been a massive galvanizing moment. It was an opportunity to put the empire behind and to focus on redeveloping Britain itself. And if you actually know anything about what happened in Britain in the late 50s and early 60s, there was actually quite a lot of discussion about that. There was an important speech by an academic called C.P. Snow.

There were all sorts of proposals by the man who eventually became prime minister, Harold Wilson. Nothing like that in the end happened. I mean, the British never really addressed their own problems in any coherent way. The United States, yes, it is a moment which they could treat as something like that. It would not be the kind of massive end to empire that Suez for Britain was. because Britain after Suez ceased to be a global power. The United States would still be a global power.

Its resources are immensely greater than Britain's were, relatively speaking, after Suez. If the US were to treat this as a galvanising moment, if they were to take a hard look, if they were to say, for example, well, maybe the US military as is currently configured, isn't really the kind of military we need anymore. Maybe this is the moment to start doing what Donald Trump, and Marco Rubio, by the way, was saying they would do when Trump was elected and start coming to long-term agreements with the other superpowers with the Chinese and the Russians. Maybe if the United States were finally to say,

well, look, let's stop getting ourselves bogged down in the Middle East, then it would not be that exclamation mark full stop that Sue is what for Britain in terms of Britain's global role. Maybe it would be a punctuation mark in which the United States moved from one situation as a global power to a different, much more sustainable one. But, you know, I have to say, at the moment, all of the rhetoric from Washington, the dominant group in Washington still remain the neocons. We've seen how incredibly influential they are, how whenever it's a question of making a decision

about any subject, it's the neocons who always seem to win, how they always get the wars they want, how they always move from one disaster to the next. What I worry is that after this, assuming we end up with a kind of outcome where it would be seen as a US, well, maybe not a defeat or a retreat or a failure, call it whatever nice word you want. What will problem more like? to happen is that the neocons will remain in control. They will say that we only lost because we weren't properly prepared, that it was a question of weak will. And they will also, or blame it all, on one individual Donald Trump, who is made to be almost, who has almost set himself up to be the scapegoat for this disaster. Oh, yeah. Just another final quick question.

If Trump continues to escalate and continues this war, is this a Suez moment for the U.S.? Well, yes. I mean, it could be. I mean, it could become that. If this gets long and drawn out. If it gets long, that's the other thing. It gets long and drawn out. Then it will be a serious moment for the United States.

And I'll explain why. Because more and more players, actors, countries around the world are going to say to themselves. Well, we've worked within an American system on the basis on an assumption of American power and American protection. And we could see that that power and that protection isn't there. So at some point, the Asians are going to start cutting deals with the Chinese and the Russians. I mean, that's coming. With the Japanese probably will want to start importing oil and gas from Russia. The South Koreans too. The Indians already are now importing oil from Russia again.

They're coming to the Russians asking for fertilizer. Other countries in East Asia, the Indonesia, for example, even the Philippines, will start to say to themselves, well, can we really afford to be in rivalry with China? Taiwan, apparently there's a pendulum swing of opinion there. They will start to say to themselves, well, maybe relying on the, The US isn't such a good idea. Maybe we need to sort ourselves out with China, with Beijing as well. Taiwan is in a particular crisis because they need helium to make their microchips.

Where did they get the helium from? They got it from the Gulf. It's not coming from the Gulf at the moment. Who is the only remaining big, reliable supplier of helium? It's the Russians. The Chinese too. So maybe we start, we get to have to start making deals with them. And other allies of the US, one can't assume that, well, perhaps forever.

I mean, either way, I agree with your point about you, the European leaders. The European leaders are useless. They are making no decisions at all here. They're not going to Washington and telling Trump, this war has to end, which is what they should be doing. They're not talking, they're not seriously looking at easing sanctions on Russia. They're just continuing in the same way as always. But eventually, possibly other European leaders might come up. They might say, look, the United States is unreliable, it's unpredictable, it's landed

us all into this existential, terrible crisis. Again, the moment has finally come. for our own survival, we have to start talking and cutting deals at the other side. Now, if that sort of scenario shapes out, then of course the United States risks international isolation because it's come to scene as a disruptor and a problem. And then it is a serious moment because an isolated power is not. no longer a global power. And that is, then we are justified about talking about a Sue's moment and an end to empire

and a full stop in the most chaotic and for the United States disruptive way. And just to finish, putting aside issues of rare earths and other things. The other thing is that countries around the world, Japan, for example, need to import oil. They see skyrocketing prices or even prices fall, but production falls even further. They need money. So what are they going to start to do? They start to sell off treasuries.

And I've heard people talk about this that come the autumn, for example, if there's competition, global competition and a scramble for not just oil, but naphther, aluminium. fertilizer, all of those things, people are going to start to have to come up with money to buy these things at potentially elevated prices. They might start selling off their treasuries in order to come up with cash to buy these things. I am not an expert in this. That's not a prediction. That's not my saying that that is what is going to happen. But if we start getting that kind of fire sale of treasuries because people have to sell them, they have to run down their investments. There was just one data point that I heard.

I understand it's a fact. Where is all that money from the Gulf going to now? Money's pouring out of the Gulf because Dubai is collapsing. The UAE is collapsing. Once upon a time it would have gone to the US. Now, apparently, the major destination is Hong Kong. Hong Kong used to get between $2 and $4 billion of capital inflow from the Gulf each month before this crisis began. They're now getting capital inflow from the Gulf at the rate of $40 billion a week.

That gives you a sense of what is happening. Are you serious? I am absolutely serious. Oh, crap. Absolutely. So a fire sale of treasuries, it's not impossible. I'm not predicting it. I'm not saying it's definitely going to happen.

But there it is. If you let yourself get to that kind of position, then, as I said, a serious moment of the kind of Britain faced in 1950. 56 is a possibility. It would not be the end of the United States. The United States could still be galvanized by it, but it would be far more disruptive, far more difficult for the American people than if it would, if it were negotiated through. Get out now, yeah. Negotiated, yeah.

Negotiated through. Get out now. Take your lumps. take the hit that you're going to get. You fucked up. Accept it and end it. What are you going to do? The world's going to be a different place,

but at least it's not going to be the damage that you described. Exactly. All right. We'll end it there. The durand.orgals.com. We are on X, rumble, and telegram. Go to Durant Shop, pickups of merch. There's a link in the description box down below

and also check us out on a substack as well. That link is in the description box. Take care.