A War Coming to Iran as it Moves Closer to Possessing a Nuclear Weapon? Geopolitical Trends

All right, hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Excited to be with you. Hope you have a— or you had rather a quiet, peaceful, enjoyable weekends and you are rolling with the new week. So anyway, very, very excited. I have an interesting topic to talk to you about. This one has to do with the recent Uh, let me silence the computer here so I won't get bothered. Uh, recent, uh, US-Iran talks that took place in Rome, Italy this past weekend. Uh, so I was following that closely, uh, read whatever I needed to read, all the white papers, the analysis coming out of the meeting and so forth. And I decided to do a video for you, the reason being because there is a lot of information out there that is kind of, uh, I won't say misinformation, it's just they are not putting things in a proper context. And this is the reason why I wanted to, like I always say, my responsibility not only to provide you an objective assessment of my own analysis, but also to protect the community from— so you can listen to whatever you want, read whatever you want, just be aware of what you are consuming. And this is what I'm gonna be talking to you about. So it's gonna be a lengthy one, so get yourself a cup of tea, cup of coffee, popcorn, whatever you do, and let's enjoy this one here. So, well, first let me say hi quickly to our wonderful community. As always, Liang, good to see you. Truth Seeker, Tom Saya Wires, Matt Becky, as always. Hang in G, as always. And thank you for your comments, Hang in G. Liang, good to see you. YT, as always. Willie Holman, uh, Thunderbolt, good to see you. Thunderbolt Designs. Alok, good to see you. Uh, Fida, here you are. Rose, good to see you. Timeline Dunkley. Francis Tango, see you. A, there is this one right here, that's all it says right there. A, good to see you. Laval, good to see you. Uh, and Ping Yu, Good to see you here, son. All right guys, let me get it because I got a lot to cover. So I want to start with some housekeeping stuff. Uh, I hope you guys, uh, enjoyed, uh, both my conversations with, uh, Einar Tengen, of course, a dear friend of mine, and Dr. Warwick Pao, also a dear friend. Also hope you enjoyed the conversation. Now speaking of this too, I am going to be coordinating with them down the road and I'm gonna be having them on the channel on a monthly basis. Would you guys like to have that? You know, those are not your average people intellectually speaking, so this is something you learn from. So I'm gonna coordinate with them and see what their schedule looks like, and we'll go from there. And speaking of a monthly conversation, be on the lookout for my upcoming conversation with Carl Zah. Of course, once a month we do this. And as to Garland and Brian, I am reaching out to— I already reached out to Garland. We're waiting to hear from Brian. Uh, so because I promised to host, uh, the next roundtable, uh, talks. So we're waiting to hear from Brian, and once that happens, I will do that. So now I want to quickly share with you, uh, the survey you guys took, uh, uh, part of regarding— that was a Hang in G's question, believe it or not. So, and one of the questions was, would you, uh, one of the questions, how many years Does it take America to repair the Baltimore Bridge? Now, the Baltimore Bridge, to those who don't know, I used to live in Pennsylvania, so Baltimore was closer to me. I used to go there on weekends, so I'm very familiar with the bridge. And, uh, so the question was— the first question was, uh, or the question rather, will it take 5 years, 10 years, 30 years? And I put another option there as I don't know. So 36% of you put it at 30 years. That's how long it takes to fix. Uh, uh, 29% of you said 10, and 15% said 5. So, but here is the thing I'm gonna share with you. Did you guys know the state of Texas, where I live, we just received the report cards for 2025? You know what was our grade? C regarding the infrastructure. And this specifically has to do with two things: the transit and the water decline, the quality that is. So, so the American Society of Civil Engineers found the slight improvements in aviation and roads to a degree, but a decline in drinking water. Yeah, in America, you believe that? Energy and transit, among other categories. So So I was very, uh, very surprised to, to see that, and I wanted just to tie it to what, uh, Hangin' G shared with us. Now, now, next thing I want to share with you, and this is literally bothered me because of our community. I'm gonna share on the screen. Take a look, guys. Here it is, what this individual wrote about our community, and I guess I won't have it He said, and I quote, he or she, I don't know, and I quote, "Your audience seems to be reactionary and ignorant." So I answered back and I said, "I respectfully disagree. You cannot paint an entire community with broad brush because you may not like the answer of some." You know, I quite, and this has to do with the survey, didn't, not a survey, I'm sorry. It had to do with the posting that I did about, China dumping Boeing. You all remember that one, right? And I shared it with you guys, and apparently this individual didn't, didn't like that one. And I was like, well, that's too bad, because it was official that China now holds Boeing aircraft deliveries altogether, which deals a big blow to the US aviation industry. So for this person to say the whole community is ignorant, I kind of, uh, didn't, didn't— he's entitled, he or she is entitled to express himself, but when you start sort of insulting the community because you didn't like an answer, I'm gonna push back against that. So anyway, I just wanted to share. Of course, the person is welcome to our community if he or she has something positive to contribute. So anyway, let's move on, guys. Let's move on to our headlines. I have few headlines, then I'll move on into my analysis. So, well, the first, uh, one I'm gonna share with you is that right here is that dozen of organizations and unions around the world, yeah, have called now on the global shipping company Maersk. You guys familiar with this company? I'm gonna put a link in here for you. And I— let me see something— give credit to the Associated Press for this picture. So take a look here, guys. This is Maersk. Why is this? It's because the company— the reason why the demonstrations by the organizations and so forth calling for the halt, because Maersk has been involved in transporting parts of the F-35 aircraft components to Israel and any other military material used in the war in Gaza. So, and of course, in response, uh, Merckx Line was transporting military shipments to Israel. So the company denied, uh, uh, and denied to this to Al Jazeera, believe it or not. So that is described it as allegations. What do you guys think? So Merckx is not involved just in commodities, transporting of commodities. Second one is, this one has to do with the China Southern CZ, and this is a plane from China. I think I flew on this one from Shanghai to Guangzhou. I bet you, because it was with the China Southern Airlines. So I remember this one. So here's the thing, 10 Boeing 787 aircraft. So these planes handle critical network routes. This is like for, uh, for the Chinese. And now selling them as originally intended will have necessitated funding brand new aircraft. Those are the ones that Chinese now developing on their own. So what you're looking at, it's the Chinese now. This is why they want to head and dump the Boeing stuff. So, so just I want you to be aware of that. And the last thing I'll share with you is that on April 18th, which was over the weekend on Friday, the Houthis downed another— sorry for this one right here— down another, uh, another MQ 9, and I give credit to Anadolu Agency for this picture right here, guys. Yeah, so the Houthis have shut down another one. This is the 5th. So since it's begun, since the US began its military campaign in March 15, so on. Of course, now the total reach about 20, and those planes, those, those drones are very, very sort of advance, and yet the Houthis were able to down them. Makes you just wonder, do they have something special that we are not aware of? So anyway, let's get into our topic here. And I, uh, this one I'm gonna start with a picture here, uh, for, uh, the Houthi— the— I'm sorry, the Houthis. I give it to Anadolu Agency. This is the talks between Iran, and this is Italian delegation, not the Americans. Do not get confused, guys. They still— Iranians decided that the talks will be indirect, and I'm gonna get into the analysis why the US wants to push the talks to move from Mascat, which is the capital of Oman, into a European city. The Americans are, are flip-flopping here. We all know what it means. So Ali Khamenei is saying, no, no, no, no, we're gonna keep the talks indirect till further notice. So, so, and this is why, uh, now the logical question that comes after this we need to ask is where these talks are headed. There is optimism And there is pessimism. So, and, and I let you reach your own towards the end. Once I give you my own, or share with you rather, my own analysis based on the facts, and I'm going to be sharing also some excerpts with you from my book because it pertains to what's going on, then you reach your own conclusion for that. However, for me personally, I started with one specific question: is a war coming to Iran? Given where the talks are headed. There is no— media is saying, oh, the talks are constructive and all that. I don't buy that personally, you know. Uh, the other argument to this, for my question whether is a war coming to Iran, because it is only within a week Iran will have the capability of developing a nuclear weapon. So, and this is based on even Mr. Trump himself That is why he's arguing for an agreement with Iran, not a war with Iran. I bet you Mr. Trump understands the ramification of a war with Iran. First of all, we won't be able to defeat Iran. I'll tell you this straightforward, don't— despite the aircrafts and, and all uh, ain't gonna cut it because what Iran has in store for this. Second thing is that Mr. Trump is realizing possibility make more sense to cut a deal than to get involved in war. And the reason also, for me personally, why he's leaning more towards this is because this all came aimed— the estimates that Tehran could produce enough, uh, amount of enriched uranium needed to build a bomb in less than one week. I still believe Iran's mistake is that they didn't move forward with all this from the get-go because they left themselves vulnerable. And I always give the case of North Korea. There, the United States, to threaten North Korea. And this is where I'm gonna be starting to think in terms, is Iran in a better position? Is Iran in a stronger position to negotiate now the nuclear agreement? So it's now the second round just took place in Italy, as you know, in Rome on Saturday. There is an upcoming one. I think they're gonna now move into the technical aspects of it. So, uh, but you need to understand what took place behind the scenes prior to that particular meeting, and I'll get into all this as I move forward into this. So now you think about the, uh, if we are to think about the technical talks, because that's what's going to have to be next. So, uh, both parties, the Americans and the Iranians, will have to allocate technical individuals, because this is not for, uh, for diplomacy. This has nothing to do— it has to do with the technical aspects. So, and these talks might end up taking place back in Amman. I know I read one article and they misspelled the word Amman by, by spelling it with an A. M-M-A-N, which is Amman, is the capital of Jordan. This has nothing to do with that, so, no. And this is where you will think that for Iran, it's gonna be specifically ensuring that the talks are limited to the nuclear program, no more, no less. There is another aspect which has to do with the lifting of sanctions, so. And the problem the US has with this is that the US is concerned with other stuff. And the other stuff, meaning that the regional influence of Iran, the missile capabilities, you know, and the halting of all nuclear activities, including for civilian purposes, which is, in my opinion, is a red line for Iran. And second, this is not a concern of the United States, is a concern of Israel. So we are the win, the bidding for Israel. Because that's what it's all about. What's at the heart of it? What's at the heart of it is we wanted only one entity in West Asia or Middle East to possess nuclear weapon. Can anybody tell me which country is that? Let me see in the chat box. And once again, guys, just to engage you in the conversation, no more, no less. Uh, let me see what your answer is. Uh, uh, sorry, sorry, sorry, right here, let me— you got it first, you know, all the way through, you got it, it's Israel. YT, you got it, you guys got it. Francis Tango, you got it. And that's exactly the point for why all of a sudden We are shifting the, the goalposts to a different— it's like, hold on a second, you can't change horses in the middle of the race. And that again falls back to my original point way back, and I remember mentioning this: Iran will not trust the Americans— American government, that is, not the people. People are separate from all this. So And this is why you have two red lines, one for each, one for Iran and one for, uh, for the United States. So for Iran, as I mentioned earlier, uh, to them the conversation will only be limited to two main points. One of them is the nuclear program and the other one is the lifting of sanctions. That's about it. So for the United States to be talking about Iran's— wants to include Iran's missile capabilities, the halting of all its nuclear activities? No, no, that's a red line for Iran. For the United States, the red line is they wanted to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Of course, Iran denies any intentions of acquiring a nuclear bomb. Maybe that's the mistake, of Iran, in my opinion, because if Iran should have come forward, if, if, and, and again, I am leaning more towards saying Iran has the wild card, it's just not playing it right now for whatever reason. This is how I'm, I'm reading it. But on the other hand, if they would have come forward and said We have developed the bomb, and should you dare to threaten us, whatever, you will see a reversal in how we will be dealing with Iran. The same argument I made about North Korea, same arguments about Pakistan or even India for that matter. So, so to the US, that is the red line because now we seems to be moving in a different direction altogether. So, and that's how I, I see it's moving forward. By the way, guys, if you're liking this video, don't just be a viewer or a watcher here. So go ahead and hit the like and subscribe button. I would greatly appreciate it. And also don't forget to hit the, uh, the notification button. So this way, just tap, tap the bell, tap the bell. So this way you will be notified every time I upload the new video or I'll do a live stream. So And this way you will be supporting the channel that stands for the truth, and you know that. So, so the choice is yours, and I'm very, very grateful to you for that. So it is— I'm going to put the link for those who might be here for the first time joining us. That's the— if you want to subscribe there. So now you think about, you know, what do Iranians know Do Iran— or does Iran, I'm sorry, does Iran have now any fear moving forward after the talks in Rome? And that is not an easy question for us to answer. This is not a yes or no question. It's not. It's because when you consider the conversation that took place the week before in Muscat, which is the capital of Oman, versus the one that took place in Rome The one back in Mascat were categorized as, and I put this in quote, "positive and constructive," end of quote. Yeah, of course, it was the first time. So however, when you think about the location of the second round, that's when it sparked a dispute. Because why? It's now quickly revealing the discrepancy that exist, that Tehran has attributed to contradictory and conflicting positions on part of the United States. So what is important about this? And here it is. There was, after the talks, some indications emerged that now moving forward, the talks might end up being held in a European country. Of course the Iranians said, hold on a second, uh, who are you to decide unilaterally where the next talks is going to be? That's one. Second, what that signals, because we need to understand, and here is the thing, guys, if the talks are held in Europe, we have influence over Europe. Look at what's going on with the Ukraine conflict. Look how we subdue all the Europeans, no exception. Uh, Hungary to a degree, but even Hungary end up not standing by on the right side of history when it allowed the plane of the Prime Minister of Israel who is wanted by the ICC to land without issuing an arrest. And that tells me right there, Mr. Orbán is also playing both sides. So, but, uh, to be fair, we, we gotta give be fair when— where fairness is due, or give credit where credit is due. So if the talks are in Europe, we will influence that directions. However, Iranians are saying no, the agreement was made that Oman will be hosting the talks, and we're gonna stick to that. So, and this is why Oman, the capital of— I'm sorry, Muscat the capital of Oman, announced on Thursday, which was the 17th, 16th or 17th, that by the way, the next talks and next round of talks is not going to be in Muscat, is going to be in Rome. So, and that makes you just wonder what's going on with that. So, and this is why sort of Washington now is staying silent on the location of the Actually, Washington didn't disclose, uh, the talks about the second round that will be in Rome only because the vice president flew to Italy on Friday, the day before the talk. Read between the lines, guys. Read between the lines. But again, when you see this behavior, if you are If you are on the Iranian side, you will be asking yourself, why the contradictory? This is not a good sign because this is the inconsistency of the American possessions. So, and this is again, you start to think, you think about the diversion. This to me is an indication of the diversion possessions of the US. Which means it has no intentions of moving honestly negotiating. And we all know how it is with the American government. Simple as that. Because here is the thing, and I had a chance to read the statement issued by the foreign ministry, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson. His name is Ismail Bakhi. I have a— I looked at a picture of his. He's the foreign— yeah, Ismail Bakhi. Here it is, that's a picture of his right here. So I had a chance to read his statements that's released from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and I quote here because I found it very specific. Here is what he wrote. Such behavior— meaning that the United States flip-flopping on the location— such behavior could be interpreted as an indication of lack of seriousness and good faith. He added, we are still in the testing phase, end of quote, which means they're just testing each other's accuracy, seriousness, intentions, and so forth. And this is where— and I couldn't agree more with him when he got the analogy in soccer, in football, not American football, but even for us American football, if you change the goalposts, that becomes a problem. And here is what he wrote, very, very measured: in football, changing the goalposts is a professional error and an unfair act. This is what Bakke wrote in a post on X, Twitter, that is, on Wednesday. He wrote, and I quote, in diplomacy, adopting such approach, which is promoted by extremists who lack understanding, logic, and national negotiation skills, risks sabotaging any start, end of quote. He is spot on. We can't be changing the horses in the middle of the race. We agreed that we're going to hold the talks in Amman, then that's what you keep the talking, you keep the negotiations till either we reach an agreement or we part ways. So, and this is again, it's because the United States did not like, uh, uh, uh, Amman's independence, meaning neutrality. Oman is neutral. It's not siding with Iran or siding with the Americans, and we didn't like that. So that is one of the problems that the US seems to be having. And moving forward with this, you're gonna now to think about, uh, regarding these locations, because it's very, very serious when you start just flipping, uh, uh, uh, locations at the whim of your desire. No, it doesn't work that way because now this one here shows the lack of trust between both, uh, countries, Iran and, uh, the Americans. I'm not surprised. I argued this back then that the Iranians not going to trust the Americans. Yes, they might sit with, with negotiations indirect ones. This is the reason why they wanted to hold the talks indirectly. So, and that is again why you need to understand why Washington is asking for face-to-face negotiations with Iran, but Iran is refusing, and rightly so. Because here's the thing, if you are to think about why all of a sudden switching from Muscat to Rome, what, what, what, what objective could the Americans have into that? Well, they— that is a tactic, tactic to pressure Iranians. Because here is the thing, if you were able to do this, what you're going to do next? You know, even the possibility that Washington might demand a change of the mediator and/or sponsor in the future. You all see where this is going, because so far, Oman is being neutral. Oman is sitting between the two, of course in the separate halls, and taking the information from the Iranian side. And so I used to get involved in stuff like this, usually with foreign languages between high-ranking officials from both sides, the US and the whatever country we're dealing with. And of course my role was to specifically ensure that what this party is saying, it's exactly what this party is hearing. You can't add or deduct or just translate it according to your whim, whatever. No, no, no, it doesn't work that way. This is exactly what neutrality is. So, and this is again why Iranians are refusing the direct talks with the Americans. Because the thing is, for the Americans, what they couldn't achieve militarily, they understand, Washington understand that we won't be able to defeat the Iranians. So what we're going to try to do is we're trying to achieve this in a different way. How? By imposing demands on the negotiating table, which would make the opposite View, it moves on an orchestrated of suspicion. This is what I believe why the Americans wants to change the venue of the negotiations. And this is why Americans are pushing quietly. I don't want to rule that out, but again, I don't see Iranians agreeing to that. Because if they do, then that's it. That's it. You, as the saying goes, you give them an inch, they will take a foot. You give an American an inch, they will take a foot. So, so, however, the Americans, the American government will insist on transferring the negotiations to a European country because we can control Europe. Europe is useless anyway, and we control it. So the, the concern or the fear for the United States hand is because Oman, uh, or, or yeah, Oman is closer proximity to Iran. But even with that, so what? Oman is being neutral. There is no, uh, I, I, I don't see any. So, and what comes in all this to highlight to you why we don't even have a strategy. You know, Donald Trump, he just goes with whatever the wind is blowing. That's how it works. And what am I referring to here? I am referring to the leaked documents when Donald Trump sort of thwarting an Israeli plan to strike Iran's nuclear sites in May, next month. I still don't— I don't buy that. I don't buy that because here is why Donald Trump will dare to go against Israel. Tell you this straightforward. Could he— that he disclosed that to put pressure on Israel to agree to whatever the U.S. will agree with Iran? Maybe, maybe not. But it was Donald Trump who disclosed the inform— or thwarted, rather, the plan that Israel was planning to attack Iran. It's nonsense, first of all, because Israel will not be able to strike on its own. It can't, it can't attack Iran on its own. It doesn't have the means to do it. So, and that is why you're gonna have to understand the talks that took place in Rome was nothing but just reading between the lines and weighing the options. Because when you weigh the options, you're gonna have to decipher facts from fictions. And in negotiations, you're gonna have to know the reality from just the hypes, what the Americans are saying versus what is really on the ground. Of course, Iran is aware, is aware of all this. Iran is aware of the military buildup in the region, but Iran is also preparing and putting things in place, all the defensive missile systems are in place, by the way, and I'm gonna be sharing some pictures with you as I move forward. And this is just in case the path from negotiations diverge into a military trajectory. So once again, that's why I asked that question: Is a war coming to Iran? Iran is not scared of it. But also we need to understand the ramifications of this. So, and this, what triggers all this now is that the tone that took place in Masqat, the capital of Oman, during the first phase is very different from the tone that took place in Rome, and especially when it comes down to the uranium enrichment. Yeah, and that is again where you start to see the divisions that exist not only within the US but also between the US and Israel. And I'm gonna get into all this as I move forward because there is one particular thing I need you to know. All this comes on the heels of 3, or against the backdrop of 3 main things. And I'm gonna share with you the first one. It has to do with the Russian factor. This might surprise you to a degree because here is the thing: while all this happening, there is a question that loomed large. As a geopolitical analyst, you're gonna have to think outside the box, and that thinking pertains to whether Russia could move away from Iran to get closer to Washington. Because you might think, oh no, that ain't gonna happen, whatever. You don't— in geopolitics, it doesn't work that way. It works as far as the strategic interest, the national strategic interest. So of course Moscow will always support Iran against the Americans and the European pressure, as long as there are certain conditions met. And I'm gonna share just few with you and move on with that. So think about it. For example, I'll give you a few examples that the Russians will want to ensure that Iran's negotiations with the Americans do not lead to Tehran distancing itself from Moscow. In other words, that whatever concession the Americans will make will not allure Iranians to this side away from the Russians. That's one. This is— that's how Russians will think, and rightly so. Second example I'll give you for you. You can consider, as long as the negotiations between the Iranians and the Americans do not lead to an escalation of tensions. Why? Because the EU are going to be looking at the realignment of interests of the Russians, and the Russians worked very hard to establish their influence in West Asia. The third example I will give you is that as long as this does not negatively impact Russia's partnerships with Arab countries in the region. And the last example I'll give you about this is that Moscow interests are taken into account in any negotiations with the West. So, because you're going to have to consider all this. So I, uh, as I mentioned to you earlier, guys, I had a chance to write a book about Iran to the— you all know by now. And I told you I will share an excerpt with you. So here is what I wrote pertaining to this one here: Will the support of Russia and China help Iran challenge the status quo, not only in the Persian Gulf but also in the greater Middle East? How will the main allies of the United States in the region, like Saudi Arabia Jordan, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, etc., react to Iran's growing influence? These questions are at the heart of US foreign policy moving forward. The grandiose plans that the Washington establishment made during the Shah era faded the moment he was overthrown. That's exactly what I argued back then. In other words, US policy that used to have, it's not going to be holding anymore because the geopolitical landscape, landscape has shifted. And with the US not at the heart of it, because as a matter of fact, has shifted not to the liking of the United States. It's a reality. So, so that was the first one. Now the second point in all this, uh, remember I told you all this comes on the heels of three main things. The first one was Russia, and the second one has to do with Steve Werichow, the guy who is leading the negotiations. I have shared picture with you here, and I give credit to Reuters for this. This is Steve Werichow. Now, for Steve, you know, I don't know how much— the guy deals with real estate and all that stuff. Diplomacy is a different ball game altogether. It won't matter. Here is the thing with what happened with Steve. What a cough now. Now he appears sort of, uh, to accept a cap on the Iranian uranium enrichment. That's what he said first. Suddenly he flipped because he was a— there is a post, I wish I didn't get it, I'm sorry guys, but I am aware of it. There is post on X, on Twitter, on social media, that he disclosed that now Iran has to give up all uranium enrichment So makes you just wonder how you flip from— you go from having accepting a cap on Iran's uranium enrichment to giving up all— Iran has to give up all its uranium enrichment. So, so to me became like a— what it called took about face. Yeah. And that's to me right there, it gives the Iranian sort of pause into this is why we are not gonna negotiate directly with the Americans because you don't wanna give the Americans that opportunity. And second, we're gonna have to move carefully. And that's exactly what the Iranians are doing. So because here is the thing that Verkhov didn't think about. For Iran, civilian nuclear, uh, the Iran enrichment of uranium, which is, by the way, it's a sovereign right because Iran is part of the NPT, Non-Proliferation Treaty Organization. So they have the right And that's once again the shifting position, sort of. Uh, I'm sure Iranians will look at it like, wait a minute, how do we interpret this? As an insult? As, as a dictation? That the Americans dictating to us to halt all enrichment, Iranian? What happened to our sovereignty? So, and that's to me, it's not a good sign for what lies ahead, in my opinion. So, and this is again what's going to make Iranian pause and reflect. And once again, I need you to remember, this is not the Americans speaking, this is the Americans speaking on behalf of Israel. You know, it's, it's not a secret, guys, everybody knows it. So And the third element, it has to do with the trip by this guy to Iran. Now, who is this guy? This is the Saudi defense minister. His name is Prince Khalid bin Salman Al Saud. Has no clue in the military whatsoever, and the guy was born in 1988, you know. You got the idea. So by the way, I give credit for that picture to the Iranian Army Office. That's their pictures. Now this guy, he's the grandson of the founder of Saudi Arabia, King Abdulaziz, and he is the 10th child and the 9th son of King Salman. He's the younger brother of MBS. But here is the shocking thing about this guy. The CIA, in CIA's leaked assessment, and it's again not classified, Prince Khalid, this guy you are looking at here, right here, this guy, he was involved in the assassination of This guy, you guys know who this is? Can anybody type in, in the chat box who this person is? Let me see. I know it takes a while to show up here. Oh, oh, Idris! Uh, sorry, where are you? Idris Williams, you got it. That's, that's Jamal Khashoggi. That is correct. That is correct. So it's Jamal Khashoggi. So, and instructing Khashoggi to go to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, where Khashoggi was subsequently strangled and dismembered. So, but anyway, this is not the point. My point into this You have to understand this dynamics as to what's, what's going on, because the Saudis were very concerned. Because remember, if it weren't for China, the Saudis were— yeah, you know, because remember Saudi Arabia. And again, when I wrote the Saudi book, I detailed all this. As a matter of fact, guys, I am even thinking of doing a show for you about this Would you like me to do this? Yes or no? Would you like me to provide you my own analysis about the Saudi defense minister visit to Iran only a day and a half prior to the US-Iran negotiations in Rome, Italy? So, so just, uh, if you will be kind and just answer in the chat box, and I will take it up from there soon. So here's what I need you to know. Saudi Arabia, along with other Gulf States, Arab states, that is the useless ones. Anyway, all of them have been wary of getting embroiled in Iran's conflict with Israel and the United States. Well, of course they are concerned. Why? They're concerned because they know they're going to become a target if any attack is launched from their soil, because Iran made it clear, and all Iran's missiles are within reach. And even the Patriot missile system, the defense one that the Saudis have, was useless against the Houthis. This is why the Saudis, along with Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, you name it, they are useless. Jordan, all of them. I mean, tell me right now if any of them has the gut to take stand regarding what's going on in Gaza. None. No, it's just a Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, you name it, you name it. So here is what happened last year. Of course, Iran exchanged strikes with Israel. You all remember, and I covered this one for you. So what happened is that the Arab states in the region, the Gulf, have expressed concern to the U.S. about a potential attack by Israel on Iranian oil facilities. Yeah, like they care for Iran. No, no, no, no, no, no. They care about the revenues for their survival, for the survival of the monarchies. Remember, those countries in the Gulf, whatever, they controlling the resources. The citizens are not having much of that. Yeah, they do give them a stipend, whatever, but that's like crumbs. That's what they do. So they were concerned about the survival of the monarchies because if unemployment goes out of control, if poverty starts to become the norm, people is gonna say, we're done with this monarchy here. That's why those Gulf Arab countries expressed their concern to the US so the US can pressure Israel. But this has nothing to do— I read some analysis that says, Oh, the Arab states were— the Gulf Arab states were concerned about economic and environmental impacts. No, that's BS. They care less for that. They worry about their survival. Because here is the thing, because Iran publicly warned that any party seen as aiding or helping Israel will be treated as aggressor, and rightly so, because I'm going to share a map with you if I have it. I still— I think I do. And just, just an overview, guys, just an overview. Take a look here, just look at here. For Israel to go to attack Iran, he has to go through some airspace of some Arab countries. You have Iraq, Iraq. You have Saudi Arabia, you have Jordan, then you have the Gulf. This is what it's all about. The Saudi defense minister trip to Iran ain't about relationship strengthening, whatever. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. They are concerned and they wanted to test the water to see how far Iran is willing to go. And of course, Iran is not going to disclose that. It would be a mistake if you trust the Saudis. That would be a mistake. So this is what's happening. So now there is one other point that you need to know, and this one has to do with the disaster and the division that exists inside Israel with all this. Because remember, Israel is vehemently opposing any talks between the Americans and the Iranians because Israel wants to remain the only power with the nukes in, in, in the Middle East or West Asia. And once again, I think Iran should have moved forward years ago and declare whatever, and that's it. You will see we will not dare to threaten them. The same arguments I make about North for you. So, and here is what's concerning about Israel. What's concerning about it is that the head of the— and I'm not gonna get into the weeds of it because their system is different. For example, their Supreme Court— now their Supreme Court is refusing the dismissal of the head of the Shabak. His name is Bar. I think I have a picture of his. You, you need to understand this dynamics, guys, because it will make more sense to you. I think I have a picture. No, I don't. Sorry, guys. The head of Shabak. Anyway, uh, that, uh, he is now, uh, no, the Supreme Court said the government cannot dismiss the guy. And even now you have Lipid. Lipid is one who was in the government. He is now arguing publicly that Israel is headed for a disaster. And soon you're gonna be seeing political assassinations are coming because there is a mess division that exists inside Israel. And all this plays a role into why the Americans wants to flip the venue of the negotiations with Iran regarding nuclear program into Europe. Because if we do in Europe, We have more control over the outcome that way. And this is again where that classified report has came out as far as the, uh, uh, on, on April 17th, just like a few days ago, uh, why Mr. Trump blocked Israeli plan to strike Iran nuclear sites. Uh, they, they, they, they won't be able to go. Because remember, and I disclosed this before, Israel already tried to target certain, and they did some, but not the facilities. They couldn't go deeper inside. Why? It's because the Iran defense missile systems and also the radars, because the Israelis couldn't jam the communications for the Iranians. So Israel knew not to go deeper. Yeah, they went out some, and I confirmed this with someone I know, but it was nothing, nothing. So that's why Iranians didn't even talk much about it. So when Iran— Israel said, oh, we're gonna go, or even Trump said, I have blocked Israel plan to strike Iran's nuclear sites. Those are very, very deep in the mountains, and it's not gonna be easy to get into. It's not going to be easy to get into. So, so that's the way I see it, because here is the reason why. And I'm going to share a picture with you of a specific missile, this one here. And this is, by the way, this is a new type, new type in its development. Iran already had some of this. What you're looking at, you're looking at what's called Sayyad 3. That's an Arabic word for the, uh, uh, the English translation is, uh, hunter. Sayyad 3. And this is one of the two new air defense systems for, for Iran. So Israel is aware, and they are, by the way, uh, Sayyad 1, Sayyad 2, Sayyad 3. They even have Sayyad 4. I looked it up and, and read up a little bit on it. Let me see a picture. Yes, I do have it. And this one has two main things to it, you know, uh, more range, meaning distance, and the other thing has to do with the, uh, uh, the, uh, maneuverability. That's what it is. Take a look here, guys, right there. So Israel— I'm sorry, Iran already developed all this. So, and let alone the radar systems are very, very, very strong. So, so this is why, then no matter what you hear, uh, it just don't fall for— that's the reason why I wanted to do this, uh, uh, for you guys. I'm gonna put a link for you guys, you can read up on this later on should you decide to do so. And again, because of the community, I am very concerned as to when you start, you know, I, I read and I watch and, and I hear this, you know, when things don't make any sense, it becomes my responsibility to ensure that our community at least have the facts. And of course, as I always say, guys, that's my rule. You reach your own conclusion. You might disagree with me, and that's fine. And of course I welcome that because that's how we develop ideas. That's how we change. That's how we learn. Uh, you don't have to agree with me, of course. So now we're not talking only about the division that exists in, in, uh, in Israel. We are talking about divisions that exist in American government. And what am I referring to? I am referring to two individuals right here, two neocons. Oh, oh, I have a picture of the head of the Shabbat right here. I knew I did. This is, uh, Ronan Barr. So he's still in his possession. So it would be a mistake of Netanyahu to dismiss him because security services are— so, but anyway, the division that exists in the United States We do have division also, and it's very, very important. Why? Because you have two individuals. Uh, it's one of them— wait, I thought I had the picture. Let me see, I'm looking to see if I kept the picture. Maybe I didn't. No, I didn't. My apologies, guys. Anyway, two individuals, Mike Walls, the National Security Advisor, and Rubio, the Secretary of State. Two neocons, two warmongers that they are pushing towards a war with Iran. You know, the president, Donald Trump, that's, that's Donald Trump. So, but you have to understand this reality. So given this division that exists within the US national security team, and especially with these two, Rubio and Mike Waltz, you know, over how to deal with Iran and prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons, you know, and you start to think in terms of where this is moving forward. That's why the Iranians will have to think twice about how much can we even deal with the Americans. And what makes you even certain that by the time you reach a deal with the Americans, only next 2 years or 3, the next president will turn it over? This is one of the flaws of our systems. We can't hold our end of the bargain. And that's again why I am convinced moving forward in these talks, it's going to be in one of those atmospheres of optimism and sort of pessimism or cautionary reactions and so forth. Because that's the only way I see it. You can't think and— I mean, it will even, in my opinion, this will reach a point where sort of it will collapse on its own. Because we put in now more restrictions on the Iranians that what makes us think they're going to agree? We haven't succeeded in bringing them down since the revolution. What makes us think we're gonna succeed today? You know, "Trump or Heinrich" and all that stuff is not gonna cut it. Iran today is not Iran of 30 years. The same arguments I make about China. China today is not China of 20 years ago. And that's why Mr. Trump was shocked as to how China has responded to his tariffs policies. He didn't see that coming. And again, that's an indication of the imminent collapse of the empire. It pains me to say this is my country. Do I wish my country will develop and all that? Yes, I do, because we can't deny this. But again, I will not shy away from criticizing when my country does wrong, because that is the right thing to do. You put your emotions aside. That's like differentiating between what's right and what's wrong. You can't be cherry-picking only when it suits you. You can't turn a blind eye on this and say, oh, it's only this. If you are to present an argument an analysis, an objective one, you provide both sides of the argument and let people decide. So, and of course, I am more now realizing maybe Mr. Trump's rhetoric for the, we're gonna have to pressure hard if you don't come to the negotiating table, whatever, turns out to be this pressure on Iran didn't work. Because one of the demands was we want to have direct talks, Iran saying no. And now I will be keeping my eyes open as to whether the talks is going to go back to Amman or not. And I bet you if Iran ever agree to changing the venue, then they are setting themselves for bad outcome. Because you don't want to negotiate with the Americans from a weak position. This is where China is, because China now is in a strong position, so it doesn't need— so that's why Mr. Trump is kind of waiting on a phone call from Mr. Xi. I don't think so it will ever happen. I ain't gonna happen. Keep waiting because you didn't think through of your decisions, and it's affecting an entire country. This is not about ego. This is not about— because what he was thinking is about his image per se, disregarding the welfare of the entire country. Anyway, now there is one more point, uh, two more points I need to talk about this, and I'll, I'll end it here. So as I mentioned, the Vice President, J.D. Vance, visited Rome. He was in Rome on the eve of the talks between Iran. What would you go to Rome for? To give them the talking points? So, and that is exactly why you need to start to think about how much Washington wants to influence the course of these talks by now trying to push the narrative towards having European country holds the negotiations. Iran will be making a grave mistake if they ever agree to this. And the war, yes, they're gonna— Iran is ready for it. Iran is prepared. And the consequences for us also is not going to be nice. And the consequences for the regional countries, it's not going to be pretty. So, so, and here is the thing that media didn't disclose openly, is that Oman, the capital of, uh, of, uh, I'm sorry, Muscat, which is the capital of Oman, Oman rejected the American demand for media coverage. Yeah, you know, during the first round Herman didn't agree. The Americans tried to pressure Herman because, you know, the coverage, the media misleading stuff. This is again why I decide to do this, because it's my, you know, it's our community. I gotta protect to make sure you are not being misled into a different outcome when you hear about the topic. Because one thing you need to understand, that whatever you need to pay close attention to these negotiations and so because the outcome will impact you one way or another. I hope it never gets to a war. And this is again why we wanted to change the venue, because we couldn't influence the publicity of it. That's why I said, when the— they in the West saying, oh, the negotiations were constructive and positive, I'll take a step back and think twice about that. I know better. So, and this is where when the Americans are pressing for direct talks while the Iranians say, no, we're gonna maintain the indirect talks. That's how. And because Iran believes in the Ummah's neutrality, and that in itself has sort of irritated the Americans. We didn't like it because we wanted now to change the playing field, per se. I mean, we are not even talking now about replacing the mediators. No, no. Who are we? And I'm gonna bring you to my last point, and this one has to do, uh, with the— because remember, Iran's fear stems from experience. What am I referring to here? I am referring to 2015 when the U.S. security agencies and others were spying on the Iranian delegations regarding the nuclear agreements. So I have a picture here of, what's his name, former president, and I give credit to Behrouz Mehri, that's his picture, for Hassan Rouhani, because remember, it was during Hassan Rouhani when the JCPOA was reached. We were spying on the Iranian delegations. And of course, we all know the NSA, the National Security Agency, I'm sure they are listening to what I'm saying here, but again, No, I'm not saying something that is not out there. Spying on foreign leaders like the Iranian former president, Hassan Rouhani, and that was even during the UN General Assembly in New York. So as a matter of fact, I'm aware of a top-secret document, but again, it's declassified, but it was classified. Back then. So the top secret report on a previous NSA operation against Iran's UN delegation illustrated just how extensive this electronic surveillance can be. So, and this document, why, by the way, was obtained by another news outlet here in the US, and it showed that the US bugged the hotel rooms and phones of the Iranian president at that time, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, you know, and his entire delegation of 143 members back in 2007. I mean, you all know we spied on Angela Merkel. We were listening to her cell phone. This is an ally. So yeah, Israelis Do it for the Americans. When some of us used to travel to Israel, those hotel rooms were bugged and all that stuff. That, that's just nothing. And I disclosed this in my, uh, when I did my presentations, of course, the unclassified side of that. So I usually, because sometimes I give presentations to private audiences here. So here's a link to my, uh, speaking, uh, And I did it for military, high-ranking military officials. You know, sometimes you disclose, but not the classified side, because I'm bound by the law. Simple as that. So, and now this is where you start to realize, you take both the divisions that exist in Israel, the divisions that exist in the US. And interesting enough is that in the US is the war hawks like Rubio. Rubio, if you go If you look at his career, how he get to where he is, who was funding him in Congress, in the Senate? What is it? It was the AIPAC. And this is where you are seeing now, as a matter of fact, the change to Washington's position regarding now Steve Whitaker saying Iran has to dismantle all its nuclear program and all that. This one has to do with a meeting between Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs, his name is Ron Diner, and the Mossad director, his name is David Bernia. They met with the U.S. envoy, Werikoff, just a day before his meeting in Rome. And where did he met? They didn't meet in Italy. They met in Paris. So once again, and this is where you have to understand, I, I couldn't wait to do this for you guys because you need to understand all this what's going on. And even I'll go as far as having even a former, uh, Secretary of State, uh, uh, you know, the guy was never fit for that position. Uh, Pompeo right here, and I wrote some articles about him back then. Uh, so even for him, it was kind of— didn't make sense. And here is what, what Pompeo is saying, and I will provide you the link. Actually, I'm going to put the link for you guys. You can read it later on should you decide to do so. Here is what Pompeo is saying. Pompeo is saying that the Trump administration sort of the negotiations with Iran is the weakest strategic point in decades. And the president hands could not be stronger. So therefore, this is again what Pompeo is saying, therefore an agreement that permits Iran This is his word, and I'm quoting here: Permit Iran to continue with its current nuclear rate of development is not a deal worth making, according to the former CIA director. Instead, similarly to what he shared in 2018, Pompeo argued a new, new accord with Tehran should be based on 3 main conditions. Just take a listen at this: Iran destroying all uranium enrichment sites, to stop providing political, military, and financial support to its proxies, and 3, striking a peace deal with its Gulf Arab neighbors along with, with doing away with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. And the— wishful thinking, if I may add. Because what makes him think that Iran is going to even agree to any of this, let alone what is the role of Pompeo into all this to begin with? You know, disaster policies that he pursued back then. So that's why I don't, I don't quite understand where he is moving forward. So, and I'm gonna end this, guys, with the, with the an excerpt from my Iran book, just to put once again things in perspective. It is what I wrote back then. In the last 2 or 3 decades, the national conversation centered on the path, the direction of U.S. foreign policy. Questions emerged, for instance, as to where the U.S. was headed. Was there a foreign policy strategy in place? How was the US going to lead in a chaotic, soon-to-be multipolar world? And how was the United States going to deal with countries that not only do not share its vision but are also armed with nuclear weapons? My reference is in that final question is to Iran. US-Iranian relations have been marked by US culpability, particularly regarding the CIA's role and MI6 in the overthrow of Mossadegh. Yet this narrative continues even today to shape policies in both countries and influence US-Iranian relations in a way that allows each country to write the narrative that serves its interests and appeals to its population. Us. And that's what I wrote back then. So anyway, that's all I have to share with you. I hope you find it very, very interesting. Let me say thank you to some of our great supporters. I'll start with Rafael Gond. As always, man, truly appreciate your support. The joint exercise between China and Egypt is the beginning of the establishment of a free and independent Palestine. States. Yeah, except, Rafael, I am here to tell you, you can't trust the Egyptians either. You can't. If you only know how the former head of the intelligence division, Amr Moussa, used to deal with the Israeli Mossad and all that at the expense of the Palestinians. So, so, but yeah, that could be a possibility. France is already— France has already announced that in the summer, they might be considering declaration of Palestinian state. We'll see what France does. So thank you so much for your super sticker. Yeah. Arimov, much appreciate you. For Iran to negotiate is to admit the Islamic Revolution to genocide Jews and conquer the world failed. They will never admit Islamic ideology failed. Uh, appreciate your super sticker. However, I have to disagree with you on one aspect. And this one has to do with the Islamic ideology because there was this argument that Iran after the revolution was aimed at dominating the Muslim world. Iran had no interest in that because how do you expect over 170 million, give or take a million Shia, in a population of 1.4 to 1.6 billion Muslim including the Sunnis, you know, it just doesn't make any sense. Second, most Arab countries will not accept it anyway. So in my argument back then, I made the argument— if you get a chance to read my Iran book, you will find out there that I disclosed that Iran has no— at least the research that I conducted didn't give me any indications. Once again, thank you very much, Arimauf. Truly appreciate your support. Once again, Rafael, truly appreciate you. There's not gonna be a war with Iran. The hydrogen bomb test yesterday in China and Russia tells us— I, I'm aware of the Chinese testing the hydrogen bomb. That's very, very interesting. You have to know also that there is another one that exists in the region in West Asia. Can't disclose the locations of where that is, but I see your point. I see your point. There are those who are saying, oh, the US is going to attack Iran with— uh, don't— I, I didn't buy that argument. I didn't buy that argument. You know, uh, to, to me, what the administration is doing right now, it gives me an idea that they know that this is not a cakewalk. And like I always say, Iran is not Iraq. Iran is not Syria, so, and we will not be able to defeat Iran anyway. Look, we haven't even defeated the Houthis. What makes us think so? Uh, Francis Tango, as always, truly appreciate your support. What will BRICS countries do with tariffs, Dr. O? It will be very interesting because I'm going to have a conversation on Wednesday, I think at 7 PM, not on this channel. I was invited to, to another channel, uh, to do— he wants me to talk about BRICS moving forward. So, uh, BRICS, I mean, beside India, I don't know. India is the weak. Get rid of India and strengthen BRICS. But even with that, I'm starting now to sense, uh, BRICS might not have what it takes to push back hard against Western hegemony, because China cannot do it by itself. China has to think of its own people, its own country. Why should they carry the weight for the entire BRICS? Because remember, there are about 40 countries wants to join BRICS. I say hold on on that, hold on on that till BRICS strengthen its, its structure, because the structure of BRICS is very, very not strong enough., uh, that will give it more strength on the global stage. Till they do that, then we'll have a different conversation. So once again, Francis Tango, thank you so much for your super sticker. And the last person is Army with Harmony, uh, much appreciate. Vance is blind to the poor in his own backyard. Yeah, absolutely correct, Army with Harmony, couldn't agree more with your assertion. And, uh, I mean, I look at it just right here in America with infrastructure and where things are and poverty and you name it, education. Students aren't learning anything here in this country anymore. And, and, and it gives me a pause. Why are we going and venturing? I mean, Trump misled the population, but again, they voted for him. They're gonna have to live with those consequences, and that's their deal. So they're gonna have to decide how they move forward with that. So, okay, let me once again appreciate you all, guys. Thank you for being here. Remember to support the channel for my upcoming trip to Asia. Here is the link. I would greatly appreciate that. And I'm still planning on going there sometime in August. So, uh, once again, I am— my apologies because I didn't do the update for the funding. So I'll show you what everything is and we'll move forward with that. All right guys, uh, please make sure to hit the like button and share this with everyone else. And as always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time guys, bye-bye.