'I was embarrassed': John Kirby calls Hegseth's D-Day speech a 'slap in the face'

[0:00] Joining us now, retired Navy Rear Admiral John Kirby, an MSNOW National Security Analyst, [0:05] director of the University of Chicago's Institute of Politics, [0:08] former White House National Security Communications Advisor as well, and Mark [0:12] Palomaropoulos, MSNOW National Security and Intelligence Analyst and former CIA [0:17] officer. Admiral Kirby, has President Trump miscalculated these negotiations? And is this [0:23] a quagmire? I think he certainly miscalculated just about everything when it comes to this war. [0:29] There was no due concern, as I'm sure he was briefed, about the power and the ability of [0:35] the Iranians to close down the strait. I don't think that he fully appreciated how hard it was [0:41] going to be to, quote-unquote, decimate Iran's military capabilities, and they haven't done [0:45] that yet. And I think they're learning afresh and anew how difficult the Iranians can be at the [0:51] negotiating table or even close to the negotiating table. They are long-term planners. They get into [0:56] the technical details, and they believe they have the leverage right now. So I think there [1:00] has been a series of miscalculations since February, since this war began. And I don't see any [1:07] indication that they are learning from these mistakes going forward in such a way as to try [1:12] to end this war in a responsible way. [1:14] Iran is constantly playing for time and feels like time is on their side. Mark, yesterday in an [1:20] interview, a phone interview with Axios, Trump said that he was going to tell Israel not to [1:25] retaliate. I was closely monitoring your ex-feed. You said that you cannot ever let terrorist entities [1:30] or supporters get the upper hand or last shot, and violence must be met with overwhelming violence. [1:35] You also said Trump was dead wrong to tell Netanyahu not to respond. Of course, it's the day after [1:41] Israel did respond. Now there's a tense calm. But is this all a sign that Trump is losing his grip [1:47] on this war? Well, I think he is losing this grip on this war because, first of all, the Iranians [1:52] know that he wants out of this. And so we have lost that leverage. But, Ariel, you know, the point I [1:57] made in that ex-post was that in Israeli national security doctrine really fundamentally rests on the [2:04] notion of responding to any type of attack. And where we are right now and where President Trump is, [2:09] I think, putting very unfair demands on Israel is the idea that if Hezbollah attacks Israel in the [2:14] north, Israel is not allowed to respond because then Iran will hit Israel. And then what? Israel [2:22] can't defend itself against that type of threat. The linkage of Lebanon to Iran, which I think [2:30] President Trump and the government of Pakistan have actually all put together in the same boat. [2:34] The Iranians want that as well. This is not going to sit well with the Israelis who do have this [2:38] right of self-defense. We also say that the idea that Israel can't respond when attacked, that is [2:46] not the case for when any time the Iranians have threatened U.S. ships in the Gulf. The U.S. has [2:51] retaliated right away. So I do agree with what you said. I agree with Admiral Kirby as well. [2:56] The president has mismanaged this, but he also has basically given a really significant leverage to [3:01] the Iranians. And this is not going to be helpful in the days and weeks ahead. [3:04] So, Admiral, I do want to get your response to that. You know, there is growing urgency that's [3:09] being paid or attention that's being paid to this alleged rift between Netanyahu and Trump [3:14] on the issue of how Israel responds to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Does Iran now see the opportunity to [3:21] defend its proxy as it appears that Trump wants to constrain Israel's actions, as Mark is touching on? [3:27] And what does that dynamic mean for the region? Yeah, they also see opportunities to further cause [3:33] fissure and friction between the United States and our only ally in this war, which is Israel. [3:39] And I think we need to remember, and it has been too easy to forget, as we've been doing this back [3:44] and forth and kabuki dance with the Iranians in Doha, is that the other key player here in this [3:49] negotiation is going to be Israel. They may not be at the table. They may not be in that hotel. [3:55] But they're going to be watching all of this very, very closely. And they have a vested interest in [3:59] them. A nuclear Iran is a national security threat. I agree with the president, and I'm glad that he [4:04] keeps coming back to that point. But to Israel, it's an existential threat. And the way these [4:09] proxies continue to attack Israel, obviously, is something they have to take seriously. And so I [4:14] agree. They have a right to defend themselves. But it just, to me, augurs all the more how important [4:20] it is to factor in Israeli interests here as we continue to try to find a way to negotiate an end to [4:26] this. You mentioned the nuclear quotient here. Mark, I want to play some of what President Trump [4:31] said about Iran's nuclear stockpiles. Let's listen. Will you and would you be open to sending [4:39] in U.S. forces to retrieve the nuclear stockpile? So the official name is highly enriched uranium. [4:46] And I call it nuclear dust because it seems to be nice and everyone understands it better. And it's [4:51] sort of cute. And people picked it up. But the way you do it is, if we make a deal, if we make a deal, [4:58] I know we're friendly. We'll all go together. It'll be our equipment. We'll take it out and [5:03] destroy it, whether it's on site or whether we take it off site. Never did I think I'd hear cute [5:08] and nuclear material in the same sentence. But alas, here we are on a very serious topic. How big [5:13] of an undertaking is it to get the roughly 1,000 pounds of highly enriched uranium out of Iran and [5:19] then destroy it? Well, look, the U.S. military and Admiral Kirby knows this. It certainly has plans. [5:25] We have specialized units in the special operations world who are trained to do this. [5:30] I think the reason the hesitancy from Central Command and others is that there's a really [5:35] significant risk to force if we went through with this. I've heard kind of behind the scenes, [5:39] all sorts of figures in that we would lose American men and women in some type of operation if we did [5:44] it in extremis. If it's done as part of a deal, that's a wholly different matter. But let's just kind [5:50] of put this in the overall perspective on things. The Iranians during the Biden administration and [5:55] during the Obama administration have always made this claim that they're not interested in nuclear [5:59] weapon. And so the idea that somehow Trump is going to take that at face value as part of whatever [6:04] agreement is signed, if it is in the next couple of days and weeks, that's just kind of repeating [6:09] what they've said in the past. It's going to take something rather dramatic and one in which [6:14] President Trump is going to have to make some concessions, particularly on financial [6:18] remuneration, no sanctions relief for the Iranians to get them to ever give up any type, any of the [6:25] HEU. And that's something he's been going to be subject to really withering criticism that why did [6:29] we do this in the first place if we could have had kind of an Obama era JCPOA 2.0 without a war. [6:36] And so he's stuck in this cycle as well. And one of the main criticisms of this operation [6:42] in Iran has been the lack of partnerships and lack of seeking the guidance and cooperation of our [6:50] allies overseas. Admiral, this is slightly a different topic. But on that note, while we have [6:56] you, you know, the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a speech at Normandy on the 82nd anniversary [7:01] of D-Day in which he criticized our European allies for their immigration policies. Let's listen to him. [7:06] Sadly, today, different European beaches are stormed by different dangerous ideologies, [7:19] beaches in Spain and Italy and Greece and Bulgaria. Boats and men arrive. When will European capitals do [7:30] something about that invasion? So considering the fact that, you know, allies weren't necessarily [7:37] consulted when it comes to the war in Iran and then you put this into context, what do you make of [7:42] Hegseth's comments on the D-Day anniversary? Well, number one, Ariel, we are—the United States [7:48] under this administration is in no position to lecture our allies about anything right now, [7:54] given the way we are turning away and turning our back on our alliances and partnerships, [7:58] which has for decades really been the foundation of American national security overseas. But number [8:05] two, it's just disgraceful to be there on the anniversary of the D-Day landings with veterans [8:11] of that amazing operation there and their families. And to turn that into a political discussion about [8:18] immigration, totally inappropriate. And I was embarrassed as an American and as a veteran [8:24] that our secretary of defense would take that opportunity to deliver such an overtly political [8:31] and inappropriate message. I think it was a slap in the face to those brave men and their families [8:36] who were in attendance that day. Admiral John Kirby and Mark Palomeropoulos, [8:40] thank you both for your service to this country. We appreciate you.