The Duran Podcast - Regime change and regime survival

Episode Date: June 14, 2025

Regime change and regime survival

All right, Alexander, let's talk about what is going on in Iran and with the United States, Iran and Israel. And let's approach this from the diplomacy front, if there is any diplomacy going on, or is that over? We're done with negotiations. We're done with diplomacy. We were scheduled for a sixth round of talks between Whitkoff and the Iranian foreign minister, a technical talks of which about, a month and a half ago, both Whitkoff and the Iranian foreign minister, they said that things were moving in a very positive direction. That's what the Iranian foreign minister said. That's what Whitkoff said. And now we're heading towards a war and the negotiations look like they're completely over. What are your thoughts? Well, indeed. I think that we have to understand these Israeli attacks on Iran in the context

of what the Israelis have been up to for about a year. I mean, back in April, last year, if you remember, the attack, the Iranian embassy buildings in Damascus. That provoked a Iranian response. Then there was a second round of strikes between Israel and Iran in the autumn. I think it was in October. In the meantime, Netanyahu came to Congress and gave an incredibly belligerent speech in which he was making it absolutely clear that as far as he was concerned, he wanted to go all out across the Middle East, take on all of Israel's enemies, Houthis, Hezbollah, Hamas, whomever.

We had a wave of assassination strikes against Hezbollah. We had the successful assassination of the head of Hamas in Tehran and Sinwa, the military chief of Hamas in Gaza. Then we got reports through the autumn that Netanyahu's people came and spoke first to Biden. This is after the U.S. presidential election, but before the inauguration of Trump as president, during the transition period, they came to Biden and asked Biden for permission to launch missile strikes and bombing strikes against Iran. and Biden said, look, this is something you need to talk to Trump about. And then the Israelis went and talked to Trump and that we got reports in Axios saying that that Trump wasn't happy and said no. He wanted to try negotiations first.

Then we got more negotiations between the Americans and the Iranians. But at the same time, Netanyahu himself. continued to press for the attack on Iran. And over the last couple of weeks, the drums have been beating louder and louder, both in Israel, but importantly, in the United States as well, demanding a strike on Iran. And we had people like Mark Levin. This is we get from Taco Carlson, turning up at the White House and basically telling Trump to agree to his strike on Iran, and we've had the strike on Iran. So on the one hand, we've seen rather ineffectively, and I have to say this, Trump conducting negotiations with Iran, but Netanyahu

and the neocons in the United States have been determined, and they've been determined, I think, ever since April of last year, at the latest to start a conflict with Iran. And I don't know what passed, obviously, between Mark Levin and Trump. But Tucker Carlson was very alarmed about that meeting, as apparently were others within the MAGA base. But nonetheless, we've seen the fact that now the strike against Iran has taken place. Trump is still trying to distance the United States from it. Rubio has gone out of his way to say that this is a unilateral attack by Iran.

Israel upon Iran, that the United States itself is not directly involved. Trump still wants to conduct the meeting with Arakchi between Wigov and Arakshi. I can't imagine that this meeting will take place. As far as the Iranians are concerned, they will conclude one of either two things. Either one, Trump is being duplicitous. He's been fooling them, pulling the wool over their eyes as Israel moves forward to attack Iran. That is. I'm sure one view that is being expressed in Tehran today. Or, and this is my own personal view, at the end of the day, Trump wasn't able to control the forces around him. People like, you remember Mike Walsh, who was also lobbying for the attack on the Iran? Ultimately, he's proved ineffective again.

He tends to sway from one side to the other. On the one point he wants talks, the next point, makes demands of the Iranians that contradict agreements that Whitgoff has already reached. Whitkoff wants to, says that the Iranians can keep nuclear enriched material up to 3.6%, I think it was, which is what would be needed for a civilian nuclear program. Then people like Levine and others demand zero nuclear enrichment by Iran, a demand which Iran was never going to. going to accept. So we have this swaying to and fro in the administration. And I think what Trump is now going to discover is that whatever his intentions were, whether he really did want to deal with Iran, whether he really was talking to Putin about achieving a deal with Iran, he's now lost

a chance. I think we are now looking at a war situation between Iran and Israel and sooner or later, inevitably the United States is going to be called in, which is what I think Netanyahu has wanted all along. Yeah. Well, we'll see how it plays out. Yeah, we're definitely heading towards a war situation, but we'll monitor everything day by day. It's a very, very difficult situation right now in the Middle East. Tucker was definitely tipped off on something from his sources in the White House, which obviously he's very close to Trump and various people. in the Trump administration. So obviously he knew something was going on with 11 meeting with Trump. And that's why he put that post on X, which was a very well, well-ridden, long post

on X, basically warning Trump not to get involved in a conflict with Iran. But anyway, there it is. I wanted to ask you the question that you mentioned. I wanted to ask you, you talked about it, but my next question was basically along the lines of what Trump knows or doesn't know. And I want to go back to the airfield strike in Russia, 18 months planning, this airfield strike. Trump and his team, they say, we had no idea. We had no idea. Any of this was going on. 18 months planning in Ukraine.

No idea. We're clueless. We're just as surprised as everyone, as you and me, just as surprised as Alex and Alexander. We had no clue. Now we have the narrative when it comes to Iran that we knew. Trump has admitted that he knew about this, but the U.S. is completely not involved. This is a unilateral action. They've said it.

It's a unilateral action. The United States had absolutely no involvement in this strike whatsoever. ever. Don't you dare hit any U.S. bases or or any U.S. facilities in the region, Iran, because we had nothing to do with this. They're on record as saying this. Either Trump thinks, the Trump administration, Trump, Ruby, all these guys, either they think where the world is completely stupid. Yeah. If they actually believe this, maybe people are believing this. I don't know, But I think it would blow my mind if people are actually believing that the Trump White House had no knowledge of any of these things going on in foreign policy. Very dangerous escalations, even the one in Russia, very dangerous escalation, as Jeffrey Sachs pointed out in our live stream.

Or, so that's what option, or the Trump administration, let's go down this fantasy narrative. Let's assume that Trump and Ruby and all these people are not lying. Let's assume this. They had no idea of any of this stuff going on. What the hell is going on then? I mean, both options are equally as bad and damning for the Trump administration and the Trump foreign policy. Both options.

I don't know. Do you see a third situation? Do you see something else going on here? But I mean, if Trump did not know about the. Airfields, he was not involved at all with the strike on Iran. Then it shows that the U.S. administration, when it comes to foreign policy, is completely inept and incompetent and clueless. Yes.

Which one? I mean, your thoughts on this? Well, I'm going to say straight away, if you're talking about the airfield strikes, the Russians clearly, and they made it absolutely clear, believe that the Americans were involved. I've been reading the Russian media, and they've been clearly saying this. My impression is that Trump's call to Putin did not go well at all, that the Russians took a very strong, as I said, Putin heard him in icy silence. And there's just been a meeting in Moscow where, as I said, I discussed it in my last program.

I think the Russians are now preparing to pull out of the START treaty. But fundamentally, and going to the inside of your question, it is so bad either way that I, Ultimately, it doesn't matter. I mean, if the Americans, if Trump, as I think is quite possible, let's talk about the attack on Iran now. If Trump honestly thinks that he can somehow distance himself from this operation and keep the United States out of the picture and tell the Iran, oh, no, no, no, don't worry, we can still negotiate. what the Israelis are doing has nothing to do with us. We're absolutely honest and serious about negotiating with you.

If he thinks that the Iranians are going to believe that, then as I said, he's just not living in the real world. The Iranians absolutely now do believe that the United States is involved. And the United States is involved because all that needed to happen to stop this strike was for Trump to pick up the phone and tell Netanyahu, under no circumstances, do this thing. I mean, Trump could have done that. He could have pulled intelligence assistance from Israel. He could have done all kinds of things in any kind of conflict of this kind, in any kind of situation of this kind.

It is the United States. It is the dominant party. Of course, that would have come. at a political cost. It would have meant it would have meant going against the neocons. It would have meant going against Lindsay Graham and Mitch McConnell. It would have gone meant going against people like Mike Waltz and Mark Levin and people of that kind. But the fact is that what Trump perhaps doesn't understand is that what he has now authorized because he has effectively authorized it, whether he did so passively by letting it happen or by telling the Israelis, look, you can go ahead and do it and I'm right behind you.

The point is that what he has done now is going to come also at a political cost to him and at a political cost to the United States. So in some ways, it really doesn't matter whether, as I said, Trump knew about the air base strikes. I think he did know. I think the information was there and was passed on to him, and I don't think he paid much attention to it, and I don't think he understood the implications until Michael Flynn and Lane Holt and people like that began to point it up. But I think that he did know about it, or at least he had some information about it, or he could have certainly been properly briefed about it. He could have had, you know, he could have seen the daily brief. You could have said, you know, What's going on here? What's all this about? What are we, what are the Ukrainians really up to?

When do this operation begin? I mean, the United States, it's the CIA people are all over Ukraine. They're involved in every single intelligence outfit. There are CIA and DNI intelligence officers involved, the Defense Intelligence Agency, sorry, the DIA intelligence. officers involved in every single department of the Ukrainian government, the idea that they don't know, the idea that, you know, the British, by the way, not denied the thing you, just to say that the British knew and the Americans didn't, I mean, it's completely ridiculous. And sooner or later, this kind of information does ultimately get through to the United States in 18 months. it obviously does.

It must have been Biden or whoever was really running the administration in Biden's day, Sullivan presumably, were undoubtedly briefed about this thing. And I've no doubt that Trump was in some form or in some way. He might not have known all the details and he might not have understood the implications. But it is his job to get on top. Exactly. It is his job to get on top of the details. and to understand the implications.

It suggests that he has a completely broken national security council. He doesn't even have a national security advisor at the moment, because Rubio is running the state department, and it's impossible for him to double in both roles. Mike Walsh, as we know, was working with the Israelis all along pretty much. I mean, this is widely accepted. He was a whole hardliner on Ukraine too. As is either Trump has no controller of his own administration and all of these things

are going on and he's told all kinds of stories. Mark Levin comes along, tells him, you know, you've got to agree to this. If you don't, there'll be political trouble and we're still, you know, but don't worry. You can just tell the world that the United States is not involved. and they will all buy it, then the Iranians will come along and continue the negotiations. In other words, you can have your cake and eat it as well. Either he believes that, in which case, he is an innocent abroad, and I can use a much stronger words, I mean, a fool if you prefer.

Or he is playing a very cunning and duplicitous game, which I don't believe he is, by the way, because I don't think that's drunk, to be honest. I don't think he has that kind of sophistication, if I can say that, in which case it's just as bad. So, I mean, I don't really think in the end it greatly matters. One way or the other, we are trapped in a process of escalation. The Russians are now walking away from the start treating. Putin is now talking about taking steps to protect Russian strategic air bases, putting the aircraft under covers, doing that kind of thing.

And of course, the Iranians will have lost all belief in what the Americans are promising in any negotiations with the Americans at all. They're saying, at best, the Americans can't control the Israelis. At worst, the Americans are in this with the Israelis. So what's the point of continuing to talk? Yeah. I was thinking about what Iran should do. What will they do in retaliation?

And I was thinking that perhaps Iran should not look so much at retaliation and look more at preventing a regime change because I think that's what's coming for them. And now that they've realized the game that's being played by the United States, I mean, for them, they need to protect the the regime change that's going to hit them. And I think the United States is going to go full speed ahead in trying to get that regime change because obviously Iran now realizes that they can't trust or talk to the United States going forward. So if you're the U.S., I mean, I'm thinking, if you're the U.S., you're saying, you know what, there is no way forward as far as negotiations. Not that we ever wanted negotiations, but okay, we can't. There is no negotiations route anymore. No. So I can't post on truth social anymore about negotiations if you're Trump.

So what's the only viable path forward with Iran if you're the United States? A regime change and you better do it quickly. I mean, my point in all of this, Alexandria, I think that Iran, if they're smart about it, should think more like how Russia would handle something like this, which I think like Putin would probably take a step back and say, okay, we need to protect the, the possibility of a regime change before we do any type of strike. I mean, what do you think about that? Yeah. I absolutely agree with this. I think the idea that many people have that Iran will probably now begin by somehow expanding the war and launching direct strikes to Israel. I mean,

they're probably going to have to do something at this kind. But their priority ought to be and should be regime survival. Right. Reim survival, exactly. And that, I mean, because, you know, we'll no doubt discuss this in more detail. But, I mean, if you look at the balance of the attacks that Israel has conducted over the last couple of hours, obviously they've attacked some of the nuclear sites. Also, they've attacked some of the air defense facilities.

We don't know very much about their strikes and how successful they've been. But one thing we can absolutely say is that Israel is coming after is Iran's military and ultimately, I suspect, soon it's political leaders. I mean, they've already killed the head of the IRGC and the chief of staff of the Iranian army. And no doubt they will be looking for the politicians, the supreme leader and people like that too. Now, that I think ought to be the priority. I should say that in terms of Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis, the decapitation strikes, which seems spectacularly successful at the beginning as time has passed, where we see that all three of those organizations are still there

and have apparently largely recovered. We'll just have to wait and see how strong the Iranian regime actually is. and whether indeed it is capable of withstanding an attack of this kind. This is going to continue for some time. And maybe the right thing for the Iranians to do is to see this through, preserve the regime, and then think about the next step that they're going to take. And I'm afraid, and this is where I really, really, my heart sinks, frankly. But I can't help but think that the voices inside Iranians.

which say, look, we're being attacked for something that we have not actually done. We've never actually worked towards acquiring nuclear weapons. But if the Americans and the Israelis are going to attack us, in spite of the fact that we have not acquired nuclear weapons. And somebody's unearthed, by the way, an article that goes all the way back to 1984, which predicted that Iran was a few years away. from acquiring nuclear weapons. Well, we might as well do it.

We have the means to do it. We have the technology. We have the enriched uranium to do it. So let's just go ahead and do it. Because look at North Korea, look at Kim Jong-un. He is now secure because he has a nuclear weapons capability. So let's do the same thing because ultimately that is the only long-term guarantee for the survival of our regime.

And that will be ultimately a far more powerful response to the Americans and the Israelis than anything else. So it is now really, I think, a race, and I think those voices are not only going to grow, but they're going to probably win the argument now in Tehran. And that takes us back to your original point because if it becomes clear over the next few weeks that the regime is indeed going to survive, that it will be able to absorb the losses of its leaders, but is heading in this kind of direction towards acquiring nuclear weapons, which it might very well decide to do.

Then at that point, it seems to me the pressure in the United States from the neocons and everyone else to intensify the war and to get the United States inviore. involved is going to grow by orders of magnitude and the pressures are going to become irresistible. So this is the disastrous, you know, slide that we are now seeing. And it comes back, I'm afraid, to the catastrophic decision that Donald Trump made. I mean, he appears to think that if he lets the Israelis, you know, unleashes the Israelis, that can somehow pressure the Iranians into concession. What he could very well find instead is that it's actually leading the United States into another conflict in the Middle East against one of the biggest and most powerful countries there, which is, of course, Iran.

So this goes back to the point that, you know, you brought up, which we were making before, that however you look at this, this is a disastrous thing. Either this operation succeeds quickly and the regime collapses, or it doesn't, in which case the risk is it becomes stronger and more hard line and starts to go seriously down the nuclear route in the way that North Korea did. And, I mean, that would be a geopolitical disaster, which I just can't even begin to imagine what the consequences of it would be. But isn't that the trap that Netanyahu has now set for the Trump administration for the United States? I mean, it sounds, what you're describing is a trap.

It looks like Netanyahu completely outplayed Trump. I mean, for all his talk about being the best negotiator in the world, Trump is a pretty bad negotiator when it comes to foreign policy. I don't know how he deals with real estate and business. Maybe he's the best negotiator when it comes to selling an apartment. But when it comes to foreign policy and negotiating with other world leaders or dealing with these types of situations, man, he is bad. He is really, really bad because everything you described, Alexander, is a trap.

It's a trap. It's basically Netanyahu going to Trump now and saying, look, you said it. You have two options, Mr. President of the United States. either we strike quickly now and get a regime change, or Iran's just going to get more hard line and they're going to accelerate the uranium enrichment. They're going to get a nuclear weapon quicker. And it's just going to be more difficult for us to then prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons and from removing the regime, right?

I mean, those are the two options that are now going to be presented to Trump. And both options, to me, sound really, really bad. And both options involve the United States getting involved. And Trump boxed himself in. My final point on this is Trump boxed himself in, which you never do if you're a good negotiator. What kind of negotiator is this guy? He's a terrible negotiator. He boxed himself in by publicly announcing that the United States will protect Israel no matter what.

So on the one hand, he's saying that the U.S. was not involved. This was unilateral. We had nothing to do with it. But on the other hand, he's now saying, but if Iran retaliates, then we're going to protect theirs. So, I mean, he's completely boxed himself into this situation. You're absolutely correct. I mean, what the fundamental mistake Trump is constantly making is that he's constantly looking for leverage. He thinks that what he needs to do over the Russians, over the Iranian, is to gain leverage. And I suspect this is what the neocons especially and Netanyahu have been telling him. They tell him this, look, the sanctions haven't worked. Iran is now in Bricks. You want to get this big, successful deal with Iran.

The Iranians are digging in, however. They're not prepared to stop complete uranium enrichment, go to zero enrichment. So you need to give yourself leverage and the way you give that is by unleashing us. And of course the trouble is that exactly in the way that you said, that is a trap. Because leverage is not really what you should be working towards achieving in international negotiations. International negotiations can't be dealt with, can't be run in the same way that real estate deals. are done. So what you need to do is you need to work hard. You need to set our proper negotiating teams.

You need to work with the other side. You need to find where the points of commonality are. You then need to work towards getting agreements and that kind of thing. And it can take time and it's hard work. But if it's done properly, it can succeed. And by the way, just to repeat a point, which we have made many times in many programs, all the elements in terms of the negotiations with Iran were there to make this work. The Iranian said they didn't want nuclear weapons. The United States said they don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons. The Russians were prepared to be helpful, as they have repeatedly made clear.

So all the elements were there to do it. It did require time. It did require the United States accepting that the government in Iran is in some way a legitimate authority in Iran and also being prepared to take its time and maybe even to make certain concessions. But it could have been achieved. It's not going to be achieved now. And because of this attempt to get a fantastic deal. in order to acquire and this search for leverage to achieve it,

you end up in a far, far worse situation than the one in which you were in, where Netanyahu, and by the way, the neocons, have laid a trap for Donald Trump into which he has walked in and he's walked straight in to it with the United States. And he's now, by the way, starting to see

and is going to increasingly see his Maga base starts to divide and break down. We've had Tucker Carlson's comments about the meeting between Trump and Mark Levin. We've had Marjorie Taylor Green, who does not like Iran at all, to be very clear, but she says she does not want to see the United States involved in a conflict with Iran. and she says that she speaks with the base, and I have absolutely no doubt that she's right. And then we had a very, very strong statement by Tulsi Gabbard just a few days ago, which she spoke about warmongers trying to lead the United States into World War III.

I thought when she said that, that she was referring to the Ukrainian drone attack on the Russian air bases. I now believe that she was actually talking in effect about this attack on Iran. So sooner or later, if this continues, all of these people are going to start distancing themselves from Trump. And he's going to find himself increasingly isolated in Washington over which he no longer has control. I wouldn't be surprised if Tulsi Gabbard resigns. Yes. I wouldn't be surprised. No, I would not be too surprised.

Exactly. Yeah. Do I have a final question here? I had something on my mind, but I completely. forgot it. As happens to us all the time. There's so much information to keep in one's head that inevitably things get lost. But anyway.

Yeah. Do you think that they're going to get a regime change in Iran? No, I don't. I think that where people get this wrong is that because there's an awful lot of criticism of the regime in Iran, which there is, by the way, and because Iran has a relatively, not completely, but relatively open system, which allows this criticism to circulate. I think that there is a sense that the regime is basically lost contact with the Iranian population and is ripe for collapse. I mean, I should stress, I don't know Iran very well. I've never

been there. I've had very, very limited contacts with people from Iran. So this is to some extent, an impression. My own sense is that Iran is a very, very nationalistic society that many people who are critical of the regime will nonetheless respond to an attack like the one we're seeing now by rallying behind it and that we will probably see a consolidation rather than a disintegration of the regime. But then the other uncertainty is the regime itself and how stable hit his internally. And I mean, as we saw with Hezbollah, there are the problems of indiscipline. There's clearly a degree of intelligence penetration. I mean, the fact that the Israelis were able to kill the head of the IRGC and the chief of staff of the army. Iran has a really bad

intel. Very, very bad. They're very, very bad. To put it mildly. So, I mean, it could be that, you know, these are also problems that could affect them to. And I mean, we saw that. I suspect there's also, you know, inefficiencies and corruption and things of that kind. But in the end, I think as would happen with Hezbollah, I think it will just about hold together. And the longer it holds together under this kind of pressure, the risk is the stronger it will be when it comes out, when it comes through at the other end. I remember saying making exactly the same point with Hezbollah. I said when the leaders of Hezbollah were first killed and we had all the attacks with the pages and all of that.

This is the test. If Hezbollah disintegrated, well, I thought there was a chance that it might disintegrate. But if it didn't disintegrate, then that would suggest a, you know, a, you know, a, you know, an organization with strong roots, which it's difficult to break. And in the event, it didn't disintegrate. And I suspect that's what we're going to see with. It didn't it? It did weaken.

It did weaken. But not so much that it was, as I said, fatally undermined. Because apparently it is now recovering quickly. And it's Rihani as well, by the way, because Jalani and all of those people, Erdogan, are apparently quietly letting Iran transfer weapons back to Hezbollah across Syria. And incidentally, and this is something that has attracted absolutely no attention, but two days ago, we had the first missile strikes on Israel from Syria. So Al Jalani either has very fragile control over the country, which I'm sure it's the case.

and some factions are starting to break away from his control, or he himself was playing an incredibly complicated double game, which given that this is the Middle East, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. Erdogan. Erdogan, exactly. Which is what he thrives at. He thrives at. That's what he lives for. He lives for. This is classic Erdogan. What you're describing right now is classic Erdogan. Excellent. Yeah, I was just going to say, remember what I wanted to say, just real quick, that the deal that the Trump administration could have made with Iran was just a slam dunk. It was so easy. It could have been negotiated by a three-year-old.

Absolutely. Basically, let me know if I'm wrong here. Basically, it could have been, it should have been JCPOA with no time limit and with Russia guaranteeing it. Absolutely. That's a deal. It would have been signed. Absolutely.

Which would have been a much better deal, by the way, than the JCPOA. I mean, because it would have been, it would, there would, there would, there. It would have been a Russian guarantee, which you can bank. You could have banked because the Russians did not want to acquire nuclear weapons. I mean, Putin has made that very clear. The Russians have made that very, very clear. Plus, it would have been indefinite, whereas the original JCPOA was time limited, which was a significant criticism of it that could have been made.

Yeah. All right, we'll end the video there at the durand.orgas.com. We are on Rumble, Odyssey, bitch, shoot, telegram, and X, go to the Duran Shop, pick up some merch like what we are wearing in this video update. Link is in the description box down below.