Biden energy adviser says "Iranians have a card they never had" with Strait closure

[0:00] And we're joined now by Amos Hochstein. He was a former Biden White House senior energy advisor [0:05] and Middle East negotiator, and he's now managing partner at the investment firm TWG Global. Good to [0:11] have you back here. It's great to be here. So President Trump said current gas prices are not [0:17] very high, but regular gas costs are averaged like $4.05 a gallon. Last time we saw that was [0:24] under the Biden administration when Russia invaded Ukraine. So if you were advising President Trump [0:30] today, how do you make sure this spike isn't long lasting? Well, we're over $4 now because we have [0:39] a real disruption. In the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we had a concern of a disruption that [0:45] never actually happened, and it went all the way up to $5. For the president right now, any continued [0:51] duration of closure of the Straits of Hormuz will have to have a spike in prices. When you have an [1:00] energy crisis like the Straits of Hormuz, it's very slow moving. And then it's like falling off a cliff [1:05] because when you close the Straits, the world still has all the tankers that were on the water before. [1:10] And that could take 25, 30 days to get to their destination. But right now, there are no tankers [1:16] on the road, on the seas to Asia and to Europe. So we're getting to the point now where certain [1:23] countries no longer have any fuel, no longer have jet fuel. Now, those are poor countries and now [1:28] middle-income countries. But that eventually comes to the U.S. So he's got a couple of weeks [1:32] before this can go much higher. But he's got to get a deal quickly. He's got to get a deal quickly. [1:39] So because we are seeing all these economies get hit, I mean, in Europe, they're saying jet fuel [1:45] is only a few weeks. There's only six weeks left or so. Secretary Besant said he expects a price drop [1:51] sometime between June and September. Is that realistic? I think right now what they're doing in the [1:59] administration is saying things further out to say, okay, we'll deal with that in June. If we [2:03] get to June and prices are high, we'll say it's August to November. They're trying to talk the [2:06] markets down. They're talking the markets down. If the Straits are closed, you talked about Europe. [2:11] Certain Asian countries are already canceling flights. They don't have any jet fuel. They're [2:15] running out and probably two to three weeks at most before large parts of Asia. But remember, [2:20] Margaret, when a plane leaves the United States, they can't take jet fuel with them. [2:24] The administration has been saying, we have plenty in the U.S. Great. But if you leave the U.S. [2:29] and there is no jet fuel on the other side. So what happens is the fuel surcharges that Americans [2:34] are going to see that are already starting to see and ahead of Memorial Day in the summer, [2:38] tickets are going to be very expensive. When jet fuel is expensive in the rest of the world, [2:42] it is also expensive here. And we saw Spirit Airlines really struggling under that with the [2:47] bankruptcy issue. Let me ask you about your Mideast experience here. In July 2024, Secretary [2:55] Blinken claimed Iran was one or two weeks away from having enough fissile material breakout capacity [3:01] to eventually make a weapon if Iran had decided to do so. There were indirect negotiations that the [3:07] Biden administration did, but it went nowhere. So when President Trump argues that he did when no [3:13] other president would, is it just simply that the bill was coming due and it fell on his watch? [3:20] I do think there's a certain element to that. And that's why I was supportive of President Trump [3:27] joining in in June to take the strikes that we had thought internally in the Biden administration, [3:32] we may have to take, if there was a second term, we thought that the spring summer of 2025 was [3:38] probably, we may have to be there in the same place. And we did, we did war games. We did some [3:43] practice runs on what it would look like to look into it. And because that may have had to happen [3:48] under our watch as well. But we, he said we obliterated their nuclear program. The question then is not [3:54] about what he did in June. This war we were in now did not attack the nuclear facilities again. This was [4:00] not about the nuclear. So the question now becomes, can you do a deal with the Iranians? And the [4:08] maximum positions that both sides have are right now very far apart, despite all the rhetoric that [4:13] we're, we're almost there, or we are there. But if we're not there, we'll bomb the hell out of them. [4:18] Right. Or who knows who's going to show up or not show up from the Iranian side to negotiate with. [4:23] I thought that was interesting that the ambassador acknowledged that. [4:26] Well, look, Margaret, when you have a negotiation that's being done loosely, right, phone calls and [4:32] no real paper, you get to a point where Iran says Lebanon was included. The U.S. says, no, [4:37] it wasn't. The Iranians say, we're opening the straits because it's completely open. And the [4:45] Americans say, no, the blockade is staying. There's no, if there's no paper, no serious [4:48] negotiation on this, and we're trying to do it really quickly to assuage markets, [4:52] then you get to these misunderstandings. And now we're in a worse position. This is a very serious [4:57] issue. And I think it shouldn't take just three days to do a nuclear deal. It's really, [5:01] really critical. Right. But if the straits are not opened soon, the leverage that they have, [5:07] and my concern is no matter how the war ends, the Iranians now have a card they never had before [5:12] in practice. In theory, we knew they can close the straits, but they never did. [5:17] And now for the foreseeable future, they have this card against us and against their neighbors. [5:23] Why do you think President Trump isn't deploying his top diplomat and his national security advisor? [5:29] Why aren't we seeing Secretary of State Rubio leading on this? [5:32] I mean, that's a mystery that I think many in the region and around the United States are asking, [5:37] why is this not being run by the Secretary of State, who's also his national security advisor? [5:41] Maybe the Secretary of State doesn't believe that this is the right approach. I don't know. [5:45] You have to ask him if you can get him to answer that question. [5:49] We would love for him to join us. [5:50] I'm sure you would. But that's a real mystery. Look, Vice President of the United States is- [5:55] But does it show, you know, when you're going to the negotiating table, [6:00] the Vice President going is important because the last two times [6:03] Wyckoff and Kushner showed up with the Iranian delegation, the talks fell apart. In fact, [6:08] they ended in bombing. So you need someone who wasn't there the last two times it failed, right? [6:12] And you need someone who is senior enough that the Iranians believe speaks for the President. [6:17] So I think that it's important that the Vice President or someone go. [6:20] I think it would have been great if we can get to a point where you have preparatory talks [6:23] and you send the Vice President at the end of the process in order to break the logjam. [6:28] Stay with us, if you would. I do have to take a break. But I have more to finish on this topic [6:33] with you, Amos. We'll be right back with a lot more Face the Nation. Stay with us. [6:37] Welcome back to Face the Nation. We return to our conversation with former Biden advisor, [6:47] Amos Hochstein. I want to pick up on Lebanon. You brokered that 2024 ceasefire in Lebanon. [6:53] On Friday of this past week, we saw the President announce 10 days of pause [6:58] to halt the fighting between Hezbollah and Israel, which is basically linked to the big deal he really [7:05] wants to get to with Iran. What do you make of this truce? [7:11] So a few things. One, I'm glad to see that the fire is halted, even if it's a pause. [7:15] The worrisome part is that it was seen as a ceasefire that was brokered by Iran [7:20] by insisting on a Lebanese ceasefire before they would show up to talks in Pakistan. [7:25] That's a disaster because the one thing we have always been emphasizing, Iran does not control [7:32] Lebanon. It has none of their business what happens in Lebanon. Hezbollah has been unmasked [7:37] in this conflict over the last couple of years as not really a Lebanese fighting organization or [7:43] terrorist organization as they claim, but rather they said we are doing this at the behest of the [7:48] Iranians. And so allowing the Iranians to dictate terms is not a good thing. However, [7:52] direct talks between Israel, even at the lower level, at the ambassador level, is a good development. [7:58] Most of the Lebanese people want to see a lasting ceasefire. Even if they don't want to see a peace [8:03] agreement, they want to see end of conflict. But we have to have a serious effort here. There's such a [8:08] great moment of opportunity. It will not be a moment of opportunity if Israel is occupying a [8:14] significant part of Lebanon to re-establish a buffer zone. That won't work because ultimately that will [8:20] help Hezbollah re-establish its political footing and their narrative. So we have to get to the [8:25] table, make sure Israel withdraws from Lebanon, stop the fighting, and give the actual help to [8:32] Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah. They cannot do it on their own. [8:36] Which is what I asked Ambassador Waltz on that. Can they do that? And to be clear, [8:40] the Israelis have said not only that they're going to stay in southern Lebanon, but also take some of [8:44] the territory that they had seized after Assad fell in Syria. So it's a serious negotiation that [8:51] has to take place. This is a tactical victory for Israel that will lead once again to an overreach [8:55] that will lead them to lose more ground. I want to ask you, as a Democrat, there was this [9:01] extraordinary vote this past week in the Senate. 40 Senate Democrats tried to block a U.S. weapons [9:06] and sail to Israel. And that adds to this growing rift we have seen between your party and Benjamin [9:13] Netanyahu. Do you think Democrats are going to come to regret this break in the alliance? [9:18] So I hope that it's not a break in the alliance. I think this, what it really demonstrates, [9:24] is for the last several years, Prime Minister Netanyahu has sacrificed Israel's interests in the [9:29] United States. The most important asset Israel has is not its military or its intelligence. It's the [9:36] relationship, it's the special relationship with the United States that has been bipartisan for so [9:40] many decades. He has destroyed that because he has decided to become not just part of the Republican [9:46] Party, but he's decided to become just an appendage of Donald Trump. And so every Democrat now sees if [9:53] you want to be Trump, great. If we're anti-Trump, then by de facto, we are against you. I think this is a [10:00] lot to do with Bibi Netanyahu and his extremist right-wing government and not to do with Israel. Look, [10:06] you have half of Israel is voting against Bibi. So I think this Democrat should be aligning with [10:13] Israel, not with Bibi. But I think this is a very big wake-up call this week, that vote. [10:17] Significant vote. Amos, thank you for your insights.