INTERVIEW: "Trump Has No Real Military Options", Jeffrey Sachs TORCHES Trump's Iran Strategy

Hello, and welcome to Frankly Speaking.The war in Iran is approaching three months since it began.It seems to be stuck in a stalemate.Neither the United States and Israel nor Iran are able to see outright victory.The Strait of Hormuz is shut, and that is affecting the rest of the world, including India, because of a paucity of oil supplies.Last week, President Trump and President Xi Jinping of China met, and there was hope for some kind of a breakthrough.

But that did not happen.So as the war approaches three months, Trump is threatening to restart the war.And even if he were to, there is no guarantee that America and Israel can win this war.Iran, on the other hand, says it has submitted a 14 -point proposal back to the Americans.But ultimately, the nub of this issue boils down to two points.One, will Iran be allowed to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes?

And two, Will the Strait of Hormuz be reopened for business?I'm now joined by a very special guest.Professor Jeffrey Sachs is a leading economist in the world, teaches with the Columbia University.Thank you very much, Professor Sachs, for speaking with us here on Frankly Speaking and on Times Now.The ceasefire between America and Iran, which came into existence on the 8th of April, it's been over a month now, but it's hanging by a thread.And Donald Trump this past week had said, that he was about an hour away from striking Iran again.

How do you see this war situation evolving, particularly in the next few days?Whether there is a prospect of the war restarting, or will better sense prevail?Will negotiations resume now that Iran has submitted its new 14 -point peace proposal?

I don't think that Trumpnegotiating, well, there's probably some truth to that, because Qatar, the Emirates and Saudi Arabia do not want to be plunged into a regional war that they know would be disastrous.Whether Trump was actually intending on carrying out renewed attacks is another matter.Maybe it was an empty threat, as is usual with Trump.But in any event, Trump has no real military options that anybody has credibly put forward.What does this mean?

It means one of two things.Well, maybe one of three things.One is that the current situation continues, but the current situation is not satisfactory.The Strait of Hormuz is largely closed.Oil prices are high and with the tendency to continue to rise with the Brent oil above $110 a barrel and profound uncertainty and instability.A second possibility is a negotiated outcome.

The fact of the matter is the two sides have such different visions of a negotiated outcome, I find it hard to believe that it can be accomplished.The third possibility, which I subscribe to, maybe not so likely, is that the United States just leaves and that life goes back to something akin to normal before Israel and the United States launch this absolutely absurd and destructive war.

So, you know, amid this ceasefire, and it's a tenuous one, as you articulated, there have been drone attacks carried out by Iran on the UAE and also on Saudi Arabia.The Americans and their Gulf allies, they want to claim that they are under attack, they're exercising restraint, while Iran is the one that's violating the ceasefire.Do you see that putting a spanner in the works in the further sort of expansion of this ceasefire, or at least leading to some kind of a permanent peace?

I don't have any inside knowledge, but the way that they were reported without the countries even making claims of who had actually launched the drones make them quite suspicious.Were these false flag operations?Who knows?But even the country's hit did not make a big deal of them.So these are the kinds of blips that show up.I don't think that they were decisive events, and I don't think that they signified the fact that Iran is about to go to an escalated war on its side without a US provocation to do so.

But Professor Sachs, we're still waiting to get some clarity on the 14 -point peace proposal that Iran has put forth.But as per some media reports, there are indications that this could include the release of Iran's frozen assets abroad, something to the tune of $25 billion, the lifting of sanctions onThis is a reiteration of what Iran had said earlier.But what is your assessment of how Trump might respond to this new 14 -point peace proposal?

Well, I think the Americans will reject this.But on the other hand, if you look at what Iran is asking for, it's asking for its own money back, for heaven's sake.This is money that the United States Americans illegally seized a long time ago.Iran wants its money back.Iran is asking for the freedom to trade with other countries without the United States getting in the middle.American unilateral coercive measures, so -called, or economic sanctions, are illegal under international law.

So what Iran is asking for is perfectly plausible.The United States is a bully.The United States thinks that it can confiscate other countries' money, that it can tell other countries where to trade, that it can tell India whether or not to trade with Russia, and so forth.Well, it's been limiting Iran's capacity to do normal economic business with other countries for more than 30 years.This is what Iran wants lifted, perfectly plausible.Is it likely?

No.because the American mindset is the mindset of a bully.

So I ask you this because, you know, for the United States, the biggest issue, the make or break issue, is the nuclear question.So let's discuss this.America wants a moratorium on Iran's nuclear program, maybe for 20 years.But as much as Iran may claim that its nuclear program is only for civilian purposes, Iran is known to have enriched uranium to about 60%, which is way more than what is required for peaceful energy.Now, in the 2015 US -Iran deal, I think what Iran had agreed to...roughly about 4 percent. This was

This was during the Obama regime.Of course, Trump walked out from that Iran deal.The Iranian foreign minister, Mr. Araqchi, was in India recently, and I asked him this.And he said the two sides have reached a deadlock when it comes to the fissile material, about 400 kilograms of that fissile material, which is currently locked in in Iran.He says we might have negotiations on that fissile material sometime later.But what could be a possible compromise, both on the material itself and, more importantly, on Iran's right, as they claim, Iran's right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes?

Of course, let's understand the real situation.Iran for decades said, we don't want a nuclear weapon.We want International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring and inspection.We abide by the Non -Proliferation Treaty, which many other countries do not.So Iran has said for a very long time, yes, we're ready to be subject to monitoring and control.On that basis, Iran reached an agreement in 2015 with the world community through the UN Security Council.

the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.It abided by that agreement.It held its enrichment to below 3%.It was rigorously monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency.Trump ripped up that agreement at the behest of Netanyahu.So this is the starting point, not Iran, some reckless country on the way to nuclear weapons.

How did Iran get to 60 % because the U .S.ripped up the agreement.The U .S.maintained economic sanctions, and then the U .

S.and Israel engaged in an assassination campaign and in bombings of Iran's nuclear facilities.And then Iran responded to those continued provocations.Even then, Iran said, we are ready to go back to an agreement under the International Atomic Energy Agency.Israel does not want such an agreement.Israel wants to overthrow the Iranian government.

That's the point.And so this was never about controlling the nuclear weapons.This is about overthrowing Iran.

OK.But Professor Sachs, here's the thing.Some would say that if Iran were to continue to enrich uranium, it would not result in a stalemate, but it would only invite to further Israeli and American action.Now, 60 % enriched uranium is not too far from the 90 % enriched uranium that's required to build a nuclear weapon.Now, will that not be an escalation, a direct challenge, really, both to Israel and America if Iran were to go up from 60 % to 90 %?

That's absolutely true.And the first thing in that case is you should not kill the religious leader who said for 30 years that it's against Islam The bomb.You don't kill the leader that has objected to the bomb.Israel has not been interested in a negotiated agreement.Israel is interested in regime change.It cannot achieve that without destroying the Middle East and destroying the world.

That's the hard fact.That's why diplomacy is necessary, not assassination and regime change carried out by Mossad and the CIA.

Do you believe that this is a solution?Iran is yet to respond on whether they are, A, willing to give this material to a third country, and even from the United States, we're not sure whether President Trump will be OK with Iran giving away this nuclear fissile material to a third country and not to the United States.

I think there are probably many practical ways forward, but not at gunpoint, because those are not credible ways forward.You see, Iran is fighting for its survival.The United States and Israel make no disguise of the fact that they want to overthrow the Iranian government and impose their own leader.Today, The New York Times revealed more information about this absurd war that was launched on February 28.The plot was that Ahmadinejad was going to be installed by the U .S.

and Israel out of his house arrest.Well, this is the playbook that they used in Venezuela, and they wanted to use the same playbook in Iran.So we should start from reality.The United States behaves illegally and thuggishly.And until the rest of the world says to the United States, no, you can't do that, then we're going to have a stalemate or worse.This is the basic point.

So let's talk about the other make -or -break issue, which is the Strait of Hormuz and the fact that it is now shut.It has been shut for the better part of the last two -and -a -half months.Iran has now restricted shipping through the strait.Vessels are forced to negotiate some kind of a transit arrangement with the Iranians, particularly with the IRGC.The United States is carrying out a naval blockade just off the Strait of Hormuz.It controls which ships enter and exit Iranian ports.

And this is a big problem.for a lot of countries, including for countries like India.How does this deadlock over the Strait of Hormuz, the shutting of the Strait of Hormuz, how can that be resolved?

Again, we should remember the real history, which is that Iran and the United States signed a ceasefire, and then Israel immediately broke the ceasefire by its continuing invasion of Lebanon.Then Iran said, well, In the midst of this complete failure of Israel to abide by the ceasefire we just signed, we will not open the Strait of Hormuz, as was a condition of the ceasefire.And then the United States said, well, we'll block Iran from trade.We'll put a naval blockade.Then the United States prevailed on Israel to supposedly halt its invasion, which wasn't reality, but at least partly it was agreed.And Iran said, OK, we will open the Strait of Hormuz as per the ceasefire, at which point the United States said, but we'll continue the blockade because we have other interests.

You see, the United Statesdoes not deal honorably, fairly, or in a trustworthy manner.This is a problem.How can you have a ceasefire when the United States and Israel don't abide by it?How can you open the Strait of Hormuz when that's agreed, but then the United States puts on the blockade?It's not just incidental that, oh, by the way, the United States has a blockade.

The United States put on a blockade that prevented the Strait of Hormuz from being reopened.This is the problem.If the United States behaved like a normal country, that you negotiate, you reach an agreement, and then you implement it, the Strait of Hormuz would be opened.

So we don't quite know how serious President Trump was when he said recently about being just an hour away from attacking Iran again.Whether he was bluffing or whether he was not, we can never quite tell with President Trump.But Professor Sachs, we'd earlier talked about what could be an exit strategy for the United States and for Trump in particular.What can be that off -ramp, at least from here on?

Well, I don't know whether he was bluffing or not, because he is perfectly capable of doing crazy things.I personally don't believe that there is any identified military strategy that can make sense.Because in my view, if the United States and Israel escalate now, this will lead to a destruction of the oil and gas and desalination and other infrastructure throughout the Middle East, leading to a disaster for that region and for the world economy.So I don't believe that there is a militaryoption.What is the end game then?

Well, one would be that a negotiation on all of the issues we've discussed would be reached.I don't believe that that's feasible right now.

If President Trump were to salvage the situation, his approval ratings right now are worse than what it was for George W. Bush at the height of the Iraq war.So if he wants to salvage the situation for himself and for the Republican Party ahead of the midterms, what does he do?

Well, I don't really want to help the guy, but I'll give him good political advice.He should just leave and have the price of Brent crude fall below $80 a barrel again.That's all.Then the price of the gas tank will come down in the United States, and he'll have some boost to his approval rating from that fact.So while I don't want to really give him political advice, because I don't think he's a competent president, that's my real political advice.Get out.

Lower the price of gasoline at the pump.And that's your best shot.

You know, last week, President Trump was in Beijing.He met with President Xi Jinping of China.Iran, of course, extensively relies on China for the purchase of a bulk of its oil.Do you see China having some kind of leverage over Iran in a way that it can get Iran to stop the war, at least open up the Strait of Hormuz?

I think that if the United States were to leave, China would constructively urge Iran to open up the strait.I don't think China's looking for some preferential benefit.It doesn't need that.China's doing well enough without any preference in the strait at all.Hormuz.China would like quiet.

When the world is quiet, China's industries hum, China's economy expands.That's what China wants.So if the United States leaves, I believe China would quite responsibly help to ensure that Iran opens the strait and doesn't undertake any kind of revenge or new provocations.Not that I think Iran would want to do so, but I think China would be a very significant stabilizing force.What Trump seemed to want was that China would deliver Trump's demands.Well, that's completely not going to happen.

So, China can play a constructive role, but it can't achieve Trump's extreme demands.

So President Xi Jinping also said that the Taiwan issue is the most important issue in China -U .S.relations, and he said if it's not handled properly, it can lead to a lot of problems in the relationship between Beijing and Washington.Trump reportedly, in his time in Beijing, did not say a word about Taiwan.On board Air Force One, he was asked this by reporters, and he said he's not made a commitment one way or the other, including on this $14 billion of weapons sales to Taiwan.How concerned are you about what Xi Jinping said and whether all of what has happened in the last couple of years, including this war in Iran, might embolden Xi Jinping to make a move for Taiwan?

Well, again, we have to understand what this is about.What President Xi was objecting to was the United States arming Taiwan.That's quite different.That's the United States entering into the internal affairs of China.and the United States should not do so.I hope the United States wouldn't arm a state in India against the Union government and that is what the United States is proposing to do vis -a -vis China.

So what President Xi was saying is the United States should not arm the Taiwan.I completely agree with that, by the way.I don't want China arming the state of Missouri.And I don't want the United States arming Taiwan.That's all.

So it's not just Taiwan.Now, recently, the Cubans have also been saying that America should not be interfering in its internal affairs.But Trump doesn't quite seem to be listening.Do you think that the Trump administration is trying to pull off another Venezuela in Cuba?

I'd personally be very surprised if the United States does not overthrow the government of Cuba.And I find it alarming that the world is not standing up and telling the United States, don't try it.But I think the U .S.is likely to try it.The U .

S.is not threatening to intervene or interfere in Cuba.It's been doing so since 1959.There have been comprehensive sanctions on the island.The United States is putting a blockade The United States sent the CIA director, by the way, which is quite interesting.The CIA director went to dictate political terms to Cuba.

What is the CIA director doing with that?People should think about that.Maybe it won't be a surprise exactly, but the CIA is supposedly an intelligence agency.But it's not a secret that the CIA runs a lot of American foreign policy.And so that's what we saw on full display.

One final question.Prime Minister Modi had recently visited the UAE.He was part of the Nordic Summit.He went to Italy.The Indian government is also exploring some new economic austerity measures, if you will, because the prices of petrol and diesel have been going up because of the war.What is your economic outlook as you foresee for the next few months if the uncertainty in the war in West Asia continues?

Well, if oil prices remain above $110 a barrel, this will be a significant hit to India and to the world economy.If the war escalates or if the shortages that have been created intensify because nothing is relieved and the price of oil goes to $130 or even $150 a barrel oil, then we'll have a real full economic crisis.Unfortunately, the rest of the year is not panning out very safely, because perhaps in addition to the current crisis, we're going to see a very powerful El Nino.By some forecasts, this is still probability and speculative, but by some forecasts, this could be the most powerful El Nino in modern times.That would be very disruptive for India as well in the coming year.We should all take care.

Be prudent.Get the United States to go home.Get the strait open.Get the price of oil and gas down.This is what we should be doing.

All right.Professor Jeffrey Sachs from the Columbia University.It's always a pleasure speaking with you, sir.

Great to be with you.

Thank you for joining us here on Frankly Speaking and on Times Now.