Live on Bloomberg TV

00:00As you know well, cease fires in the Middle East are often fragile and fleeting. Israel saying that missiles were launched from Iran. Iran denying that. What do you make of the state and the likelihood of a potential cease fire at this moment? At this moment? The ceasefire is shaky, Danny. And yesterday or several hours ago after just before it went into effect, Iran fired off some last barrages of missiles. There were fatalities in Israel. I think four people at least were killed in one of those strikes and that at least a few of those missiles were fired even after the cease fire went into effect. Well, Israel is going to respond to that, I think, in the hours to come. And it sounds like they feel they have the Trump administration's backing to do that. This often happens as you try to negotiate a ceasefire to a conflict in the Middle East. Everybody wants to get in the last shot. And so sometimes it goes over time and the ceasefire takes a little longer to take hold. But I do think both sides need this. They both need this off ramp. And so I expect within the next 24 hours or so, it's more likely than not that the cease fire will actually take that take place. It kind of speaks to this idea, Ambassador, of of saving face. And from the Iranian side, I mean, you had a president that thanked Iran more or less for its very weak response, giving them early notice. How does Iran at this point, which defending itself for rather nuclear armament, had been something of a domestic policy? What now? How does it show that it hasn't kowtowed to foreign powers? Well, Iran was badly damaged during this strike. A series of strikes over the last 12 days or so, first by Israel, with the strikes on military targets and leaders on missile targets, on their nuclear facilities and on various regime locations. And then the Trump administration, of course, with the big strikes a Saturday night that took did significant damage to three important nuclear facilities. So Iran's been badly hurt. What's most important to Iran is really to preserve the regime. And so what they need right now first is a break. They need to catch their breath and they need to try to do two things, which we need to balance in our negotiations that they're going to try to sustain their ability at some point to resume progress on a nuclear program. It's very important that we, the United States and our partners and allies get into negotiations with them to get them on the other path to give up the enrichment capability that gives them the possibility to breakout to a nuclear weapon. What might make that possible to reach an agreement on is that Iran really needs to provide something to its people. They've suffered, obviously, three years of its misrule. They've suffered during this conflict. And there could be held out sanctions relief that would give the chance for the regime to bring some benefit to a very sputtering Iranian economy. But in exchange, it's going to have to give up that nuclear program. To that point, it is a fractured population already that you're hinting at a brittle hold from the Islamic Republic on governing its people right now. Is there a real risk, Ambassador, that you see something of a fracture, a break that comes from more radical forces within Iran? Well, the regime, as I said, is somewhat destabilized. Certainly, this is not a popular regime. Estimates by real experts tell us that maybe something like 15 or 20% of the public really actually believes in this regime's ideology. The rest are either of different ethnicities or they've been persecuted by the regime for expressing opposition. And so there could be fissures. And if there some kind of organized opposition, there's even a possibility this this leads in the direction of some kind of regime change. But one version of that regime change, as you suggest, could be a military takeover or a coup that brings to bear even the most hardline elements of the of the country's leadership. So there's some risk here. Frankly, I'm hopeful that the Iranian people will find their voice and find a way to insist that they be ruled by a regime that actually respects their human rights, that doesn't want to show aggression against its neighbors and doesn't want to squander the resources of this great country on foreign adventures and ideological crusades. But that's something that's going to happen internally if it happens and the Iranian people are going to have to find their voice to do it. Well, if there is a weakened hold of the Islamic Republic, how does that color what we're going to see in this diplomatic effort going forward? Well, this as I said, the regime has to try to show some strength to try to preserve some of the assets that it wants or that nuclear program was always part of their belief that if they could achieve or the nuclear weapon or at least be on the threshold of it, that itself would be a form of stabilizing the regime and holding off external threats. We've got to try in negotiations with support from our European partners, from our Gulf partners, for example, Qatar, that helped yesterday to negotiate a cease fire, get Iran to understand that its future and the future even of this regime, if that's what it's most motivated by trying to preserve, is better guaranteed, by giving up that nuclear capability that would otherwise lead us potentially back into conflict and pursuing a path that doesn't require conflict with other neighbors that would stop wasting resources on military campaigns, on sponsoring terrorist organizations, and that brings sanctions relief and a return to the international economic community that Iran hasn't really been able to participate in for 25 or 30 years because of their own behavior. That's a tall order. I don't know if this regime, this 86 year old Ayatollah or those still alive who are advising him or those hard line elements still with influence in their system can get there. But that's got to be the direction we try to push that on. Is there a risk that almost the opposite lesson is learned from this, not just from Iran, but from various forces around the world that something like this could have been prevented if Iran already had nuclear capabilities. Does this not fuel others to hurry up and get their hands on something like that? Well, that dichotomy already existed. It's well known as sort of sometimes referred to as the Libya versus North Korea model. North Korea, which inched forward and then eventually did break out to become a nuclear weapons state, is now somewhat invulnerable because they have that nuclear capability. Libya, which had a nuclear program but gave it up through negotiations, ultimately saw the overthrow of their leader, their dictator, Muhammad Gadhafi, and that was that. So that's why some countries and some observers have suggested that a country like Iran or others might find that having a nuclear weapon is this better way toward regime stability than giving it up. That risk was always there. And Iran played on that risk by sitting right on the threshold of nuclear capability. They had. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, ten bombs worth of 60% enriched uranium that they could have enriched to 90%, which is weapons grade, almost any time in just a matter of days or a few weeks. They had been researching how to actually weaponize that uranium if they ever got the decision from the supreme leader to do so, which they had not, but could have done in a very short time if they gave them that decision. And so we were right on that threshold anyway. And so it was necessary either through negotiations or in this case, through military means to push them back from that threshold. But again, you're right that they or others might try to get back on that path and think that's a path to security and and stability. We have to disabuse them and any other actor to try to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons into the hands of those who really can't be trusted, especially if they're highly aggressive states, as Iran has been since the revolution in 1979.

No schedule data available.

BTV Channel FinderWatch BTV in your area

Former US Ambassador to Israel Says Ceasefire ‘Shaky’

More From Bloomberg Brief
All episodes and clips

Bloomberg Technology
The only daily news program focused exclusively on technology, innovation and the future of business from San Francisco. Hosted by Emily Chang.
More episodes and clips