US continues 'large-scale operations' in Iran – Trump

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. tagline for the show. From the BBC, this is The Interface, the show that explores how tech is rewiring your week and your world. This isn't about quarterly earnings or about tech reviews. It's about what technology is actually doing to your work and your politics, your everyday life. And all the bizarre ways people are using the internet. Listen on bbc.com or wherever you get your podcasts. Hello and welcome to NewsHour. It's coming to you live from the BBC World Service studios in central London. I'm Tim Franks. It is day three of the US and Israel's war against Iran, and this is a conflict which is intensifying and spreading. Tehran and locations around the country have again been rocked by explosions. As pictures came in of rubble-strewn streets in the Iranian capital, of civilians running and smoke choking the air, the Iranian military was also launching pressure attacks on Israel and targets across the Gulf. Indeed, just within the last four minutes, the U.S. Central Command had put out an update saying that six U.S. service members have now been killed in action. Global oil and gas prices have risen sharply. Across this program, we're going to bring you some of the key voices and fascinating insights from across the region, from Tehran, from Jerusalem, from Cairo, from Lebanon, and also out of the US. Let's start indeed in Washington with what President Trump has had to say today, his first comments on the war from the White House. Our objectives are clear. First, we're destroying Iran's missile capabilities, And you see that happening on an hourly basis, and their capacity to produce brand new ones, and pretty good ones they make. Second, we're annihilating their navy. We've knocked out already 10 ships. They're at the bottom of the sea. Third, we're ensuring that the world's number one sponsor of terror can never obtain a nuclear weapon. Never going to have a nuclear weapon. I said that from the beginning. They're never going to have a nuclear weapon. And they were on the road to getting one legitimately through a deal that was signed foolishly by our country. And finally, we're ensuring that the Iranian regime cannot continue to arm, fund, and direct terrorist armies outside of their borders. Donald Trump speaking from the White House. Elsewhere in interviews with U.S. news outlets, the president said that the biggest wave of his offensive was yet to come. and that he wouldn't rule out the possibility of putting boots on the ground. He also said, though, that he was willing to take as long as needs be to complete his war aims. For its part, the Iranian Red Crescent says more than 550 people have been killed so far in the American and Israeli airstrikes. Communications have been patchy inside the country, but we did manage to speak to one Tehran-based man who describes himself as an independent journalist and political commentator. He's Mohammed Khatibi, and he gave me a sense of what day three of the war has been like in the Iranian capital. Many people have left the city, and the city is literally half of the population. The shops are open, essential shops, supermarkets, bread stores. There is no queues in the gas stations, and the strikes continue, but it's not like day one. How do you think people in Tehran have reacted to the death of the supreme leader? Because we did see that there were some demonstrations in support of the regime, but there were also reports of some people cheering and dancing when the news came out. Many people are really angry. You call them regime supporters, but I say ordinary people. They are really angry and they have filled the streets calling for retaliation. And there are some other groups of people who celebrated the assassination of the leader. And these groups are not big enough. And the situation is somewhat under the control of the security forces. There is no big protest and there is no unrest. But I don't think that will continue because the United States and Israel have now started to target police stations, small military bases like Basij bases in Tehran. And I think this is a preparation for an operation by the separatist groups or other opposition groups to carry out unrest inside Tehran. But just looking ahead, what do you think the strategy is likely to be from the leaders in Iran? Do you think that this feels as if it's shaping up to be a sort of almost a fight to the end? So many people thought that if a leader is killed, the state will collapse. But as we are seeing right now, there has formed a three-man council, which has been foreseen in the constitution. After, I think, a few days, there will be an assembly of experts which will choose the other leader. I don't know how his stance will be, but right now the people supporting the late Atullah Khamenei are asking for retaliation never seen before. And they say that the retaliation is not enough and the IRGC and other security forces should carry out bigger operations against not just United States and Israel, but the countries hosting U.S. bases. So can I ask you about that, Mohamed? Because obviously I'm speaking to you because, you know, you're a journalist, you're a political commentator. But may I ask you just personally how you as a young man feel about that? Because if there is this appetite for retaliation, as you put it, I mean, you know, the US and Israel have very, very powerful militaries. There could be a huge amount of damage inflicted on Iran. I think right now the only ones who are suffering are the ordinary people, civilians like me. But the ideology of the leadership and the people who are fighting now against the United States is simple. They attack the United States and Israel until they either be victorious or be killed. There is an ideology in the Shia Muslims which says that either you kill us and we win, or we got killed and we go to the paradise. This ideology runs in the veins of many of the leaders in Iran. And I think that they don't fear what happened to the leader. And this was a shocking thing for Trump because the point of view that the West has differs from what Iranian leadership thinks. That was why the Iranian leader did not surrender. And that's why I also just wondered what you as a young man feel about that prospect, that idea that this could be a fight to the death? I'm a civilian and I want the war to be ended, but not with surrender because I don't want another country to govern my country, and that's period. I don't want my leadership to be chosen from outside. No one other than Iranians should decide for Iran. Many people are like me and they want to choose and self-determinate, not stated from outside of country by the United States. And do you think that you have the chance to have that self-determination now inside Iran? Unlike the other regional countries, there is a process in Iran which makes that possible. But with U.S. pressure, that can't happen right now because the United States and Israel are pushing for something extreme, in my view. They want to partition the country. It wants to divide and separate the country into smaller states, controllable states. And many Iranians, like me, they oppose it. This is not because of the regime or anything like that. There are many opposition groups who support this idea. Even some opposition groups outside Iran support this idea of unity. Even Reza Pahlavi supports this. And that was Mohamed Khatibi, an independent journalist and political commentator, speaking to me from Tehran. Israel is also struck inside Lebanon, pounding parts of the capital Beirut in the south of the country in response to overnight attacks from the Iranian proxy militia Hezbollah. The Israeli military says its offensive campaign is likely to last several days. From Beirut, here's the BBC's Wirra Davis. From the early hours of the morning, Israel launched a barrage of attacks against Hezbollah positions here in Beirut. Explosions could be heard and felt throughout the day in the Lebanese capital. In some areas, buildings were damaged and streets were strewn with debris. In Beirut and in parts of southern Lebanon, which is also regarded as a Hezbollah stronghold, more than 31 people were killed, according to Lebanon's health ministry. These residents in Beirut's southern suburbs said the Israeli airstrikes came without warning and they fled for their lives. I don't know how we got dressed and escaped. Everyone was screaming in the streets, fleeing, said local resident Fatima Harund. We're very tired of wars, she says. We're really tired. We just want to be safe. Israel has continued to hit targets in Beirut and further afield throughout the day, striking Hezbollah's financial structures as well as senior figures in the pro-Iranian Shia militia, which had earlier fired missiles into Israel, risking a wider regional conflict. That is the one thing other political factions in Lebanon are desperate to avoid after the damaging year-long conflict with Israel. They have condemned Hezbollah's actions, but that's unlikely to placate Israel, which has vowed to continue the strikes. We're at Davis in Beirut. Dr Abdel Rahman Bisri is an independent Lebanese member of parliament from Saida in the south of the country. He told me first about the impact of Israeli strikes on his constituency. Since yesterday, we're experiencing severe traffic coming from south of Lebanon to city of Saida, either to seek shelter at Saida or to move further north into the capital, Beirut, or into northern areas of Lebanon. So the congestion is extremely intolerable. The city is busting with a lot of people and many people trying to seek shelter which is probably not always available It unfortunate that the demand is very high and the availability is extremely low The Prime Minister has said we announce a ban on Hezbollah's military activities and restrict its role to the political sphere. I mean, he has suggested that he's pretty fed up with Hezbollah, deciding that it wants to get involved in this war between the US and Iran? Yes, you see, the prime minister had issued this statement after the cabinet meeting. And you know that the cabinet has ministers from various spectrum of the political scene in Lebanon, Hezbollah and those who represent the closest ally to Hezbollah, the Amal movement. So the fact that the cabinet is still functioning and the fact that they are still part of the cabinet means that whether there is differences or not, ultimately the policy, the official policy of Lebanon should be the official policy of the cabinet and what's being issued in the cabinet. And that was the independent Lebanese MP, Dr. Abdulrahman Bizri. Just one line that has come out within the last hour and that is from the Iranian revolutionary Guard commander saying today that the Strait of Hormuz is closed. Iran will set fire to any ship trying to pass through. Coming up on the programme, we'll be looking at how the Iranian war or the war with Iran is going down with at least some Trump voters in the United States. I just cannot fathom why we're doing this. And then at a more immediate, small d democratic level. This is a radical break with what was promised by Trump and the kind of populist movement when the Trump Vance ticket ran as the peace ticket. They called themselves the peace ticket, the no new wars ticket. More on that in 15 minutes. Our main headline this hour, as we've been hearing President Trump has said that his war against Iran is ahead of schedule. in his first comments on the conflict from the White House. He says the attack is expected to last several weeks. This is the BBC World Service and live from London, you're listening to NewsHour with me, Tim Frax. We've heard so far from Iran and from Lebanon. Let's head now to one of the other key protagonists in all this, Israel. The Israeli military has been hitting, as we were just hearing, dozens of sites inside Lebanon, but also principally directing its fire alongside the US military at targets in Iran. It's also been trying to repel Iranian missiles, in large part successfully, but some Iranian munitions are getting through. On Sunday, nine people were killed in the town of Beit Shemesh, from where today the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had this to say. When I stand here in a place that was bombarded by the terrorists in Tehran against innocent civilians, you see the difference. The tyrants of Tehran target civilians. We target the tyrants of Tehran to protect civilians. They chant death to Israel, death to America. That's their ultimate target. But I said that they would also target those in between. And if this terrorist regime of the kind we've never seen in the world, If they get nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, they will threaten all of humanity. It's an absolute lie. I spoke myself to people who were in the room. And what they said, give you just one example. The Iranians said, oh, we are willing, of course, to put a lid on our enrichment program and we won't move towards the bomb. But we need all sorts of requirements for all sorts of reasons, from scientific to research to other, which would have brought them to five times. the agreement that was done a few years back, the JCPOA, meaning way above 20% enrichment, which is a farce and a joke to anyone who understands in nuclear enrichment. They are very devious in the way they negotiate. They have a target and an objective. They want to get to the bomb and they want to destroy long term. But what I'm keen to establish, President Herzog, and I don't want to interrupt you, but I know that our time together is limited. And what I'm keen to establish here is what level of destruction in Iran you are trying to reach. There are questions about the legality of this war. Under international law, you can only attack preemptively if you fear an immediate use of force by the other side, which we haven't seen the evidence for that. We are not attacking, not us, nor the Americans, anything civilian. We are attacking places where there are launchers of huge missiles. who have created havoc and death and destruction also in Israel and the entire region. Of course, there are attacks on the command and control centers of the Iranian army in besiege. By the way, these attacks, let's not forget, just a few weeks ago, the Iranian regime mowed about 32,000 to 50,000 of those citizens just like that. Just killed anybody who went to the street. to acknowledge the civilian deaths, so far now I don't want us to move too far away from the point here. Yeah, but we should not, Anna, we should not be naive. I don't think we're being naive by asking what evidence... Well, you quoted an expert on international law explaining why things cannot be done. It's like waiting again and again for another attack by the Iranians. I asked you if you had evidence of an immediate use of force by Iran against Israel. I'll explain to you. If they carried out 20 attacks in Britain or perpetrated 20 attacks in Britain, you think they didn't attack Israel. They've tried to attack Israel from all corners of the earth in the last two years. But do you have evidence of an immediate use of force? But that's not the reason in international law. In international law, you use self-defense when you know that your enemy is perpetrating and planning movement towards a bomb that wants to annihilate you. Because he says, they say, this bomb is in order to annihilate. And President Herzog, the law says that has to be immediate. We need to remove Israel from the face of the militia. You're not addressing that point. Of course I'm addressing it because we have a huge amount of proof, which we are sharing, of course, with our British allies and every other ally. The fact that your base in Akrotir in Cyprus was attacked for the first time by missiles from Iran, what does it mean? They think you're a friend or a foe. If you're a foe, then everybody should get together and fight these evil forces and break this empire of evil once and for all and bring different hope for the region and for the Middle East and for the future of the world. That's exactly what we're doing. The Israeli President Isaac Herzog talking to Anna Foster. Anna's also been trying to get a sense of what this war is meaning for much of the population of Israel as well as it comes under attack. This is Anna's report from Tel Aviv, which I should warn does include the sound of missile alerts. That was the sound of a missile in the sky that you could hear there. This is one of the busiest chopping streets in Tel Aviv. You can hear the sirens going and this is the first day of the working week and there is absolutely nobody here because these alerts, these sirens are going off. regularly at the moment, once an hour, sometimes more frequently. So people are staying indoors, they're staying close to shelters. This should be a bustling and busy street. And there's nobody here at all. It's usually tons of people outside. All the cafes, there are many cafes. This is what Tel Aviv is for. You know, cafe life during the day and nightlife during night. And it's empty. It happens once a year on Yom Kippur, you know. It's really bad. It's very intense, very, very intense. Do you feel safe? What do you call safe in this country? We're kind of used to it, you know. Keeping calm. But when we have wars, usually it's around the borders and it's far. Here, this time, it's in Tel Aviv. How do you feel about this war? Do you feel that it was the right idea to start it? Or are you unsure? What do you think? Too many areas are not familiar to us. You know, things happen. We just hope that this time it's going to be the end, final. That it's really going to not happen again. Because it's only our second time since we remember wars that it looks this way. And it's crazy. It's interesting hearing you say that, because a lot of people that I've been speaking to aren't saying, I think this war was a really good idea, or I think this war was a terrible idea. People like you seem kind of in the middle. This government, we don't know. There is a lot that is not said. But one thing for sure, those alarms all the time for the children in this country is devastating. It's terrible. That's an interception. I should say we are in hardcover at the moment. We found a place to stand where there is concrete all around us that's giving protection. But those explosions, that is the missile defence system, and it's where they're being caught in the sky high above our heads, and they are exploded before they ever hit the ground. And when one of those missiles hits, this is what it looks like, a building that has collapsed down from the top onto itself. You can see where the fire was burning and everything has just been destroyed. And then as you turn and look around, what is a square? This is a children's play park, actually. There are benches where people sit. And when you look all the way around, the windows have been blown out of almost every apartment. There's broken glass being swept up. And in the middle of the grass, there's a big pile of rucksacks. Some of them have got food in, some of them have got spare clothes and water. because obviously the people who've been affected here are spread across quite a wide area. The impact is devastating. Anna Foster reporting for us from Tel Aviv. You're listening to News Air from the BBC. This is not the future we were promised. Like, how about that for a tagline for the show? From the BBC, this is The Interface. The show that explores how tech is rewiring your week and your world. This isn't about quarterly earnings or about tech reviews. It's about what technology is actually doing to your work and your politics, your everyday life. And all the bizarre ways people are using the internet. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back to NewsHour Global oil prices have risen sharply in response to the conflict in the Middle East The cost of European gas soared during the day by more than 50 Producers, insurers and shipping firms have all been affected by disruption to a key waterway, the Strait of Hormuz. For a broader sense of the impact, NewsHour's Rajini Vaidyanathan has been speaking to the Lebanese energy economist, Dr. Carol Nackley. I'm not surprised to see oil and gas prices increasing, especially when the markets opened this morning. But this did not start suddenly today. We started seeing an increase in prices as soon as the world started to hear about the American military buildup in the region, in the Middle East, which is the biggest producing and exporting region for oil and gas. And what we saw is the American military buildup was the biggest since the war in Iraq a couple of decades ago. So definitely the market has been preparing for a worst case scenario, which is happening today. And this morning, we saw the prices increasing. And we're not sure whether we have seen the end of it because lots of scenarios are still unfolding and becoming clearer. And we are really now watching closely to see whether energy infrastructure is going to become the next important targets for retaliation from the Iranian side. And just tell us what countries you are watching, because we're seeing many Gulf states being hit in retaliatory strikes in terms of looking and monitoring how that might impact ongoing oil and energy prices. I'm watching the entire region because we're talking, I mean, of course, you do have Saudi Arabia, the biggest oil producer. You have Qatar, the biggest gas producer. But they all rely heavily on the Strait of Hormuz to get their oil and gas from that region to the rest of the world via tankers. And therefore, when the war is taking place and the Iranians are threatening or they are closing part of the Strait of Hormuz and some oil tankers are being attacked, That is going to cause major disruptions to available supplies to the global market and putting more pressure on prices. That said, if we see now energy producing infrastructure in countries such as Saudi Arabia being seriously attacked and damaged, then we are going to see further upward pressure on prices because they are the biggest producer in that part of the world. Let's talk about Saudi Arabia then, because it's temporarily closed its largest refinery after a drone strike. So how much will that single incident actually impact prices? It all depends on how long the refinery is going to be closed for and whether the Saudis are able to replace whatever production comes from that refinery with something else. So we are now in a mode of wait and see. But mind you, a few years ago, a Saudi refinery was also attacked and that was resolved immediately within a matter of days and not weeks. But the situation today is different. So far, I have to say that even though oil prices increased, they are still moderate compared to previous crises where we saw prices jumping to above $100 a barrel. And that was the energy economist and CEO of Crystal Energy, Dr. Carol Nackley. And since she was speaking to Virginia Vaidyanathan, the commander of the IRGC has said that any ship that attempts to get through the Strait of Hormuz will be set on fire. This is NewsHour, live from the BBC World Service with me, Tim Franks. And while I speak to you now, the Israeli military has said that it's begun a new wave of strikes on Tehran. Indeed, the Israeli military spokesman speaking in or tweeting in Farsi has warned people in the Evin area of Tehran to evacuate en masse. We heard earlier in the programme Donald Trump set out for the first time from the White House since the start of this war what his rationale and objectives are. earlier in the day, it had been the turn of the US Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, to deliver in his own signature rapid fire delivery, his sense of how this war would unfold. This is not Iraq. This is not endless. I was there for both. Our generation knows better. And so does this president. He called the last 20 years of nation building wars dumb. And he's right. This is the opposite. This operation is a clear, devastating, decisive mission. Destroy the missile threat, destroy the Navy, no nukes. Israel has clear missions as well, for which we are grateful. Capable partners are good partners. Unlike so many of our traditional allies who wring their hands and clutch their pearls, hemming and hawing about the use of force. America, regardless of what so-called international institutions say, is unleashing the most lethal, and precise air power campaign in history, all on our terms with maximum authorities. No stupid rules of engagement, no nation building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win and we don't waste time or lives. Saurabh Amari is US editor of the British news magazine Unheard. He also describes himself as a Republican voter and a supporter of Donald Trump. In which case, why has he also been writing that he has reservations about this war. Well, I should say I'm an American of Iranian heritage. And in a sense, if the war works out the way that President Trump promised, it would actually be good for me somehow. I'd get to visit the old country. It's a democracy. But it's as an American that I think this is a bad idea because I believe that for the United States, the future challenges and opportunities don't lie in West Asia. They're in the Pacific region. And in order to meet those challenges, we need to do a lot of domestic reconsolidation, unemployment, affordability, lack of industrial capacity, rebuilding the U.S. military's industrial capacity rather than wasting what little munitions we have right now. So with all of that in mind, I just cannot fathom why we're doing this. And then at a more immediate small D democratic level, this is a radical break with what was promised by Trump and the kind of populist movement beginning in 2016. And then in 2024, when the Trump Vance ticket ran as the peace ticket, the no new wars ticket. But countering what you're saying about the idea that this is a war that was, you know, perhaps not necessary to wage at this time. Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense, has said, look, this is I mean, in terms, he said, we did not start this war. But under President Trump, we're finishing it. And what he meant by we did not start this war is he was talking about how Iran over the last 47 years of the Islamic Republic has attacked Americans. and American interests, and also because of what he perceives as the threat of the nuclear program and the ballistic missile program. He's not wrong. This is a nasty anti-American regime. The question is, was Iran an imminent threat to the United States? And were there other means for dealing with an Iranian regime that is unquestionably unpleasant and nasty, short of waging a war for, quote unquote, Iranian freedom, I mean, we're back to very kind of terrible outcomes that the American people are telling him they don't want. Right now, there is a Reuters Ipsos poll that suggests that one in four Americans supports these. There are ones that suggest maybe slightly more popularity, but not much more than that. But within that, sorry, I'm sorry to interrupt. I mean, that Reuters poll also suggests that actually 55 percent of Republicans approve of this. Only 13 percent disapprove. disapprove. So I wonder, I mean, you describe yourself as a Trumpian convert. I just wonder whether actually it is you who are out of step. 55% of Republicans approving of a US military action 24, 48 hours after it's been launched. That's a horrific polling number in terms of whether or not the rally around the flag has been achieved compared to even the Iraq war. So then you add the fact that as a Republican, as a conservative, I would like conservatives to win a national electorate. And, you know, it's not just about what the Republican base thinks. The MAGA base will just go along with whatever Trump hands down. And that's that's who they are. But the reason that President Trump wins national elections is because he plays for the middle. He plays for those so-called Obama to Trump voters who twice elected him. A lot of them are working class people who are not committed Republicans. They went along with him because he, for example, described the Iraq war as a catastrophe, as a disaster, because he broke with Republican orthodoxy, not because he upheld it. Your column for Unheard, Saurabh, is headlined how J.D. Vance lost the foreign policy war. The vice president has, you know, made a reputation for himself as somebody who would rather that the U.S. did not get entangled abroad. What do you think he's going through at the moment? It's not off the record information. It's a well-known divide within the Trumpian orbit between those who call themselves restrainers. They don't want an expansive policy, as well as those who see themselves as prioritizers, who think, look, there's a world of limited resources. And in that world of limited resources, we should focus on China. That's kind of where more I am personally. That's one group. And on the other are the hawks. And it's the hawks. And really, President Trump should be counted as one of them. It's, you know, it's really him driving it. Who wants something else? Has it made you reassess your opinion of Trump? Yeah, I have to say, unfortunately, it's made me reassess at a fundamental level whether the right can be a force for having the U.S. focus on its own industrial development, pick strategic battles and see what's really the most important things for the U.S. to do. Is it really West Asia or is it elsewhere? Is it the Chinese challenges? I just don't think the Republican Party, including in its Trumpy manifestation, has shown itself capable of that kind of serious strategic rethinking. And that was Saurabh Amari speaking to me from the US. This is a war that, as I've mentioned, has already spread and intensified. Military strikes out of Iran have been reported on a major gas plant in Qatar. Indeed, Qatar's state-owned energy company says it's halted production of liquefied natural gas, of which it's one of the world's major suppliers, hence the big spike in European gas prices. Added to that, the biggest oil refinery in Saudi Arabia halted operations after a drone attack sparked a fire. There's certainly dismay among Gulf Arab countries about Iran's missile attacks. What about the feeling more broadly in the region? That's a question for the Assistant Secretary General of the 22-member state Arab League, Hosom Saki. We're viewing all this with tremendous sadness, of course, because we had thought that there was a chance for peace through dialogue, through negotiations. Now that military action has taken place, we were surprised that Iran took a hit at all the Arab states near to it. And that was really a very unfortunate development, a severe lack of good judgment. And I think if it continues like that, it will create a huge wedge or an additional wedge between the Arab states and Iran. Do you think it's right that the US attacked along with Israel? It is not up to me to describe this action, but usually when you have a situation where negotiations are ongoing then it would be right to also presume that those negotiations could go the full way and should yield the results that they should yield But it sounds, I mean, it sounds, Mr. Zaki, I mean, you're being very diplomatic, which I would expect a diplomat to be. But it sounds as if you are maybe a little bit disappointed that the US chose war over negotiations. It is a feeling that negotiations were not given a full chance and we would have liked negotiations to continue. Iran, as you have mentioned, has now widened its response to this by sending missiles and drones towards Gulf Arab states. The AFP news agency has quoted, I don't know who it is they are quoting because it just says diplomatic chief. But the quote is that Iran has no hostility towards Gulf Arab countries. presumably the argument is that what they're trying to target are US military bases. Do you take any reassurance from that? Not at all, not for the least. This is an ongoing war. What counts here are not diplomatic expressions. What counts here are actions. And in the actions, we have seen time and again throughout the past three days, civilian targets being hit by Iranian missiles or drones. This is not what we would have expected at all from a neighbor of those countries who have very strongly defended a negotiated outcome. But now they have made this bad judgment call, and I think it may have an effect on the overall situation. What effect? If this situation continues, I think Iran will have a lot to explain later and will have to bear consequences on what it has been doing. When you say bear consequences, you're not talking about the possibility of military action from those Gulf Arab countries, are you? It's a sovereign decision for each member state, but they have said that there can be consequences to such Iranian actions. We do not want to add fuel to the already existing fire, but that is such a tense situation that we would like to see cooler heads prevail. May I ask, as a veteran observer of the region, whether you think, actually, this could be an opportunity. This could be a new, better time for Iran, or whether you think, and lots of people are warning about this, that actually what could follow is more instability. Can I just ask if you have a sense of which way this may turn? When you say an opportunity, I beg to differ. It is not a good, positive, healthy opportunity that we're taking. It is an opportunity presented through blood shedding. And this is not what we are seeking at all. If the Iranian people want to change their ruling system, their ruling regime, it is up to them. It is their will. Otherwise, it will be a change from outside. And we have seen many times the outcomes of such attempts and the outcomes are often dramatic, both to the region and to the people involved. Hossam Zaki from the Arab League. This is NewsHour from the BBC World Service with me, Tim Franks. All the signs are that this war is only just beginning. Indeed, we're just hearing out of Tehran from the news agencies there, Reuters and AFP saying that explosions have been heard once again late at night in Tehran. All the protagonists say that they're in it for as long as it takes. You expect them to, I suppose. But how long can they sustain hostilities and to what ends? There do appear to have been some shifting messages, at the very least, out of the Trump administration over the last three days. Laura Rosen is a veteran foreign policy journalist. She now writes, among other things, a diplomatic newsletter. It's called At Substack. Does she have a sense that, given what Don Trump has had to say at the White House today, that the American war objectives are now clear? You know, it seems like it's still a bit muddled and why it has been so hard for the Trump administration to come up with a mission statement until today is unclear. You know, you saw Trump do a few dozen short interviews with the media over the weekend, seemingly kind of testing out different arguments without making a proper case. And even today when he gave one at the White House at a military medal of honor ceremony, you know, without taking any questions, he was reading from a teleprompter. His demeanor was quite tired and it seemed like he was a little uncomfortable with what he was reading. So there does seem to be a lot of discomfort still. And I think, you know, I was trying to think about what the reason that might be is. And I think that Israel may be leading a little bit more here than the Trump administration in terms of the mission. And, you know, they might not, the US side may not have totally thought it through. He does, as you were suggesting, I mean, often sound a little less high or sort of superpowered in terms of his delivery when he's reading from a teleprompter. But I mean, he did say, look, we're after destroying the missile capability of Iran, annihilating their navy, stopping them from ever getting a nuclear weapon, stopping sponsoring militant groups in the region. I suppose, you know, in a sense, he he will retain the right at a certain point to declare we've done enough. I think that's right. And, you know, do you remember back in the fall when Israel struck Hamas target in Qatar? And Trump kind of seized on that to press Israel to end the Gaza war to get a ceasefire. And I think he hasn't yet settled on what the moment might be when he presses Israel to end this. But when he's talking about four to five weeks, as you heard in the last couple of hours, you know, he's supposed to go to China in the beginning of April, the end of March, for an important meeting for him with Xi. because a lot of the US economy and a lot of the things Trump's voters are really focused on have to do with China. And so I do think that he'll want to see this wrapped up before he goes there. Do you think he's likely to feel a certain amount of economic pressure, given that, I mean, we've already seen oil and gas prices rise, the Straits of Hormuz have been closed according to the Iranian military. And, you know, For all the criticism that we heard from the Assistant Secretary General of the Arab League, I mean, it is possible that some pressure could come to bear on the U.S. to wrap this up reasonably quickly from those Gulf Arab countries? I think he's sensitive to economic issues. And I'm not sure that's the first thing. I do think that you've seen the reports that the U.S. only has a certain number of interceptors and its allies who are getting hit by Iranians also only have a certain number of interceptors. And I know the Pentagon, according to reports, is extremely concerned about that supply running out. So I think, you know, he has a few different clocks pressuring him. And I think the economic one is one of them. But I think the Pentagon may be laying on him before that to look for a way to end this. On that, Laura, I was just wondering, I mean, there are obviously mixed messages about just the sort of the imbalance in the capabilities here, or at least differing messages. I mean, there is no doubt that the US and Israeli military are far, far stronger than Iran. But one reading that I've read in a few places is that actually the Iranians, you know, they can really cause some headaches, particularly for the Americans, by sapping their anti-missile defense systems, especially, you know, trying to shoot down loads and loads of drones, for example. Could that be a factor, do you think? You know, Trump did not go to the American people, you know, before this. And he really didn't even at his State of the Union just less than a week ago. You know, he just said a few lines about Iran there. He has not really made the case to the American people for why we're doing this. The polling shows, you know, 60 percent of the people are already against it. And Congress, the Democrats are extremely agitated that they were not consulted. Rubio, the Secretary of State, is only today talking to more congressional leadership. And then tomorrow they're supposed to brief the Senate and House. But, you know, they really have blown off Congress almost entirely. So there's not a lot of public support and they haven't done anything to get congressional or public support. So, you know, and Trump was already, you know, I think he was kind of riding high after the Venezuela mission. He clearly wanted a Venezuela type, you know, one day, two day thing in Iran. And the Pentagon, I think, told him that they can't do that. But I think Trump might have gotten overconfident from that, that he could do something quickly and maybe the Iranians would come back to the table. And that does not seem to be what they're assessing two days into this. And that was Laura Rosen, the veteran foreign policy journalist speaking out of the US. And in the past hour or so, the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, has been giving this update to reporters. There's two reasons why now. The first is it was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States. The orders had been delegated down to the field commanders. It was automatic. And in fact, it bared to be true because, in fact, within an hour of the initial attack, the missile forces in the south and in the north, for that matter, had already been activated to launch. In fact, those had already been pre-positioned. The third is the assessment that was made that if we stood and waited for that attack to come first before we hit them, we would suffer much higher casualties. And so the president made the very wise decision. We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces. And we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties. And then we would all be here answering questions about why we knew that and didn't act. Marco Rubio, and just within the last couple of minutes, the U.S. Department of State has called for Americans immediately to depart more than a dozen countries in the Middle East. That's it for this edition of NewsHour. From me, Tim Franks, and the team here in London. Thanks for your company. This is not the future we were promised. Like, how about that for a tagline for the show? From the BBC, this is The Interface, the show that explores how tech is rewiring your week and your world. This isn't about quarterly earnings or about tech reviews. It's about what technology is actually doing to your work and your politics, your everyday life. and all the bizarre ways people are using the internet. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.