The Munk Debates Podcast - Friday Focus: Iran tests America's resolve and anti-Zionism becomes a winning strategy in New York

Episode Date: June 26, 2026

Programming note: Friday Focus will be taking a summer break. We will be back with new episodes starting September 11 (and, of course, if any serious news breaks over the summer!).Janice and Rudyard begin by unpacking an IRGC attack on a tanker transiting the Strait of Hormuz, exposing a fundamental divide between Washington and Tehran over freedom of navigation. While the U.S. insists on open access without fees or restrictions, Iran views the waterway as a source of leverage. If the two sides cannot bridge that gap, what hope is there of resolving the far more consequential nuclear dispute? Iran sees a U.S. president who makes a lot of threats but does not have the resolve to make good on them.In the second half, the conversation turns to Israel’s waning international support and the growing political potency of anti-Zionism. Following a string of primary victories in New York by candidates sharply critical of Israel, Rudyard and Janice ask whether opposition to the Israeli state is becoming a defining electoral issue, particularly among younger voters. They explore the claim that for figures like Zohran Mamdani, Palestine is a central political cause, and consider why anti-Zionist—and at times antisemitic—rhetoric is generating such traction across parts of both the political left and right, and whether that trend can be reversed.Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I think that's a real risk here that the Iranians will overestimate how much room they have here. And Trump is nobody's president as usual. Let me put us that way. Welcome to the Friday Focus podcast for the 26th of June 2026. I'm Roger Griffiths chair of the Monk Debates in studio with Janice Gross Stein, my co-host and the founding director of the Monk School of Global Affairs. Okay, Roger. It is 06. 26, 26 today.

What are you going to make of that one? I'm going to blame these horrible earthquakes that devastated parts of Venezuela and simultaneous earthquake in Japan. It's supposedly once in a 1,000, 2,000-year event. I guess our hearts go out to what look like real scenes of devastation across Caracas. Terrible. And just less than a minute apart and big ones. And big ones.

I think we've got to start the week with a survey, a pass on the events that have kind of unfolded since the MOU came into effect between Iran and the United States. Most recently in the last 24 hours, there are reports that an IRGC, that is an Iranian military strike, was initiated on a tanker that strayed outside of lines of, transit that Iran has delineated for its side of the straight. This comes in the context, Janice, of what seems to be a really fundamental disagreement emerging between the Trump administration, the government of Iran, around the future of the straight after this 60-day period. Iran in no uncertain terms saying, we will control this straight, we will charge fees. Maybe they're not using the toll word, but they definitely are using the F word, the fee word. We're hearing the complete opposite from both Marco Rubio and President Trump. I'm not so sure J.D. Vance has weighed into this

one, but key figures in the U.S. administration are saying, absolutely, no fees, no tolls, complete freedom of navigation. What do you make of this? And if they can't solve on this issue, what's the potential to deal with the more substantial and serious one, which is, the atomic program of the Iranian government and the risks that it presents to the region and to the world? This is not a good sign for the stability of the ceasefire. And I'm frankly surprised that Iran is pushing now this heart because it's in Iran's interest to get its oil flowing out.

And money coming in. And money coming in. and we are very early days into this, Rudyard. And so they could have punted on this for several more weeks when it would actually be more difficult for the Trump administration to do anything about it. So I'm surprised, and I really am. And what does this say this is a regime in Iran of hardline military guys, and they see this as a source of revenue,

and it looks like they're digging in, and they're not going to back down. You marry that with Rubio's trip to the Gulf. What's the number one? There's two issues that every Gulf state, regardless of where they are in the constellation, there's divisions put on the agenda. Number one, the straight with no tolls, no fees.

Not anything followed by an issue that is off the table, frankly, which are missiles, because that's what imperiled Gulf security. So you really see both sides digging in here. The Israelis have other concerns. That's Lebanon for them right now. And it sure doesn't bode well. And all of this, while the United States, the rhetoric is we have a new relationship with Iran. We are embedding IRC.

leaders inside CENTCOM to de-conflict. There is a positive economic future, which Iranis never got from the Obama administration, if only you guys play ball. So this is a messy, confusing moment with really hard-line conflicting signals, frankly. The other issue, I guess, that we've seen the last week where there's a sharp contra-distinction on messages and claims

is regarding the return of, i.e. international atomic energy inspectors to Iran, the president claiming that this had been agreed upon at the highest levels and was happening, and then yet here the pattern repeats itself, 24-hour, 48 hours later, emphatic statements by key figures in the Iranian government that, no, inspectors will not be arriving at any time soon, nor are there any plans to invite inspectors into the country. Janice, how does, you know, obviously the Trump administration has a really strong interest in seeing this agreement extend, at least for some period of time, to deal with the price of the pump, which has come down significantly and inflation and other effects, which could affect the midterm elections. But at what

point does the daylight start to get so bright on many of the key facets and aspects of this deal that we get to a kind of emperor with no close moment where the Trump administration is leaning into something making claims that are just being either outright refuted or ignored by their Iranian interloculars. And, you know, the faith in the deal begins to break down. And maybe we saw a little bit of that in energy markets this week as some repricing starts to come into golf energy vis-a-vis how stable is this deal? How long can it last? You know, that's a great question. And here's the risk right here. There's from Iran experts and scholars, some of them. They are now writing about the possibility that Iran could lose this piece. okay it could underestimate

how Trump will react if Iran presses forward with every one of its demands and gives virtually nothing if it feels that it's won this war and it's going to claim victory and there's no need to accommodate the United States

anyway because there's no chance Trump will go back to war that is a very risky framework because we What do we know about Trump that when he's cornered, he lashes out, even if there's a political price. We saw it this week with Republicans in the Senate when he took his housing bill off the table because he was angry and injured his own party's chances in the midterms. I think that's a real risk here that the Iranians will overestimate how much room they're. have here and Trump is nobody's president as usual let me put it that way and when you think about

the capacity that this could start again I think it's higher than what the Iranians think it is yeah I you know we've talked about this before I think Trump is paying the price now for his flip-flops on China on on on Russia vis-a-vis the Ukraine war and claiming that he wanted to end that war and would plot the requisite pressure to Putin. Spectacular flip-flop on Greenland. And in some ways, you know, a flip-flop on Canada with a lot of, you know, hot talk out of the last election and our federal election that is the now kind of petered out.

You know, he's cried fire, you know, three, four times at the top of his voice. and then has studiously backed down. And I think it's one thing to do that with your Republican caucus in Congress. It's another thing when you contemplate that Iran could turn around and attack energy sites in the Gulf. It's another matter when your generals have probably told you that to forcibly reopen the Straits of Hermos would be. require some kind of ground forces on Karg Island or elsewhere and that there would be casualties involved in that. I don't know. I think the Iranians, I agree with you, they seem to be pushing much harder than one would think so early on, but the fact might be, Jan, is that they have the

right read of this president, that he is all hat and no cattle. Yeah. So that's, you know, You just put yourself in the shoes. Iranians who have to figure this out now and get the best deal they can without going over the edge. But let's take the one issue they're pushing on and here's where I think they're likely making a mistake. The reason to end this war for Donald Trump

was one reason and one reason. It was to get oil out of the streets. and bring down the price and put a lid on inflation to the extent that this is a big chunk, not the whole story on inflation. As you know very well, there are other issues. But this certainly was driving things as far as the midterms were concerned. Well, if that's not going to happen, then what incentive does Trump have to stick to the deal? And that's where I think they're making, they're likely making an error here.

Redyard. If Trump tackles on this, well, that's going to reinforce the story about a president who doesn't follow through. I'm, I think that's likely not going to be the case here because it was so clear. He said it himself, we don't have to guess. He said, I want the price of well to come down. That's why I ended this war. Do you think I was going to tip the the world economy into recession when he was explaining why he did it. Wow, if they're gonna fool around with tankers, that by the way, just let's talk about it.

Where was this tanker that was hit? It was in Omanne waters. Oman is one of the states that along with Iran controls that part. It's not undisputed solely Iranian waters there, even if you ignore the fact that it's. This is an international strait. So this government in Iran is really pushing the awful up right now. Yeah.

There are seemingly incredible reports that the president is spending the majority of his time focusing on the reflecting pool in front of the Lincoln Memorial. He's concerned that it will not be American flag blue in time for the July 4th, 250th celebrations of the founding. founding of the U.S. Republic, the paint is peeling off the bottom because of a no-bid contract that he assigned to seemingly an individual or company that there may be some conflict of interest, a word, a phrase that now is synonymous with this administration. So again, I hope this agreement sticks, but everything the president is doing from his personal piccadillos with. with ponds and algae and peeling paint to, you know, this inability, seeming of his administration

to even acknowledge, let alone push back this week against these completely contradictory claims by the Iranian government versus the stated claims that they're making. It's as if it's see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. I just don't know if that's a credible position. You've studied a lot more about negotiation, but you need to project some deterrent, some threat. Resolve. Some resolve.

And I don't know. You're seeing an administration that seems almost craven in its desire to have this deal stay together in word, not fact. And a president who, I just think you have to call for what it is, who seems serially distracted from the war itself and fixated on things like this reflecting pool, like his plan to build a triumphal arch in the style of a Roman emperor who would have been awarded such an arch on the basis of a major campaign victory, I don't know, in Thessalonica or some other great,

stomping ground for Roman legions. That's not the case in this instance. You know, I can't help smiling when you talk about the triumphal arch and the America blue pool that is now filled with algae within, what, two weeks of its completion. But there are two people out there who are drawing some lines. So Rubio just spent three days in the golf, a very strong statement that came out. And Vance who's saying, I'm telling you, I know what happened. Those inspectors are coming back.

I can tell you that. But you know from your history of studying this regime in Iran, that it is a regime of factions. And that the people in the Foreign Affairs Ministry always say what Westerners want to hear. But the real power in the regime, especially now, is with the IRGC. And they're not at the table. They're not sitting. Well, they're not in Switzerland having these talks. This is the foreign affairs faction of the regime.

And I think we know, again, it's a very effective negotiating strategy because they allow, in a sense, two voices, two faces to be talking simultaneously, and it really confuses interloculars with Iran. Who am I talking to? That's right. But, you know, that's part of the puzzle here, Roger. that there is this huge internal debate going on, as you just said, inside around. So how much of what you hear is for internal, oh, no, no inspectors on going back,

even though Rafael Grossi, the Secretary General of the IAEA was in the room going back and forth, I'm talking about the conditions that they would need to meet. So how much of that is domestic signaling to the hardliners at home that they have to do? The guys are the guns. The guys with the guns. And we've got the same kind of division which shouldn't exist between, in this case, Vance and Rubio, and they don't see eye to eye all the time either. But they're more credible both of them than Donald Trump who's talking about the arch.

So how much, you know, how much are they signaling to Republicans and now their case? constituency, how much do they have their eye on the president who they are trying to keep focused on this issue. So that's why a lot, some of what we're seeing is theater. But I think we both agree in it in us that the president, in spite of his own interest and the national interest, is finding very unique ways to express weakness. Yeah. Yeah. There's no questions. This is, you know what, I'm struck by if I did it. It's a weird way at a high-stakes moment. Yeah. To be communicating and to be engaging in what is, you know, could be the death now of this administration.

If they lose control of the Senate, then impeachment's back on the table. For sure. And he's likely into not just a lame duck second half of his presidency, but the potential for a historic admonishment. Yeah, no besieged. You can certainly just leave the second half of his parents to see. He would be besieged, frankly. This is the guy who wrote the R of the Deal, which is what I come back to.

You know, he claims to be an expert on getting great deals. And look at his behavior, Roger. How does that fit with the image? Well, he's a different person, I think, to give him some grace. He's a very different person than when he wrote that. book, you can only look at the pictures of him over the last few weeks. He's visibly aging. He doesn't look particularly well. His slurring of his speech, his seeming continuing problems with impulse control. You know, this is not the Donald Trump of the apprentice, not saying

that person should have been president of the United States either. But this is a man, his own sister, who finally settled a very contentious lawsuit. She's a judge, I believe a federal judge in the U.S. judicial system, stated for what it's worth, that she sees in Donald Trump now at 80 years of age the signs of mental decline in their own father when he hit that age, that advanced age also. So I don't know. Is that a sister who's angry about a lawsuit taking a decade to resolve with her brother over the family finances, or is this someone who has known this person all their life?

And as you know in families, family members can sense when this happens. The changes in behavior, the changes in temperament, the physical. Very early. Long before. Yeah. Long before clinicians notice, family members know. It is certainly, I think we would both agree, it is certainly bizarre behavior. It would explain a lot.

Yeah. Wouldn't it? Yeah. If Occam's Razor is one of the bywords. of this show. But boy, just think about what you're saying, Roger, let's grant that that is the case. It happened with Reagan.

Yes, it did. We've been through this before. Yeah, and it happened with Joe Biden, too. Of course it did. But if this is the case, we have the highest stakes negotiations. What's really at stake here? There are two issues on the table here. It doesn't matter your partisan views for a moment.

One is the freedom of navigation through international waterways. You know, we're all talking about the Strait of Tehran, but the Strait of Malacca, 30% of World Trade goes through those narrow waterways. 30%. Let's not even think about the Strait of Taiwan, right? This has been something that admittedly Western powers have defended for 200 years. If we have a distracted, less than focused president who just lets that one go by,

that is a precedent that is relevant not only to the Gulf but to the whole of the global economy a lot of tollbooths could be going up fast a lot of tollbooths right and then the other one is is nuclear proliferation yes right these are two big I think the first one probably bigger in terms of its immediate consequences so people are right to be focused on it but nuclear proliferation as we say ain't nothing yeah and so these are huge issues that are caught up you know, reflecting pool and an arch and a 250th celebration.

Kennedy Center. Kennedy Center with big tarps all over. Well, because they haven't, the judge's order was to remove his name, so instead they've covered it up. Yeah. It's good. They're smart sometimes about these things.

Anyway, let's say goodbye to our complimentary listeners and viewers are going to join Monk donors on the back half of the show, exclusive, all kinds of great content for Monk donors, including our archive repository of 15 years of on-stage debates. Janice, we're going to talk about a comment that I could see coming up in some of the YouTube videos

that we've done the last few weeks, which is where does Israel fit into all this? And more importantly, the extent to which Israel is losing public opinion and goodwill in the rest of the world because of this war and the war that's going on in southern Lebanon. So let's unpack that. We had some important elections in the city of New York that might telegraph that Israel has a big PR problem in the West and consequential elections of its own coming up. So we're going to have that exclusive for monk donors after this short break. Thank you for listening to the first half of the Friday Focus podcast. To get access to the full episode right now, become a monk donor.

You can do that for just $50 a year. That's less than a dollar a week. You also get advanced access to full-length editions of our weekly monk dialogues with Andrew Coyne, exclusive live streams of our main stage debates and all kinds of other great perks and privileges. Simply go to our website, triplew.munkdebates.com. That's MUNK, Debates with an S.com. Click on the join button on the top right-hand corner of the screen. Again, that website, triplew.com.

The Monk debates are a project of the Aurea and Peter and Melanie Monk Charitable Foundations. Rudyard Griffiths and Ricky Gerwitz are the producers. Be sure to download and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. And if you like us, feel free to give us a five-star rating. Thank you again for listening.