Third Iran-US war would be different, but who blinks first in a stalemate? Experts ask

[0:00] okay well let's bring in our guest mohammed al masri is a professor of media studies at the doha [0:04] institute for graduate studies and a political analyst he's with me in the studio and abbas [0:08] aslani is a senior research fellow at the center for middle east and strategic studies as you can [0:12] see he's over in the iranian capital tehran welcome both of you abbas could i start with you [0:18] obviously we're seeing costs spiral globally oil prices are through the roof i mean there are real [0:24] concerns in governments particularly in east asia about how long this standoff is going to last it [0:29] boils down to a couple of central issues iran's latest formal proposal conveyed by pakistan we [0:36] understand is three stage um the talks of completely removing nuclear discussions from the table until [0:44] the naval blockade the u.s naval blockade is lifted so look if we put no nukes aside for the time being [0:51] what is the one tangible concession iran could offer that wouldn't be viewed by the irgc [0:59] as undermining iran's national sovereignty uh neve we were seeing that there was a deadlock between [1:07] iran and the united states following the talks in islamabad that's why tehran tehran tried to somehow [1:14] separate issues and untangle the progress in the pro in a from the process from a uh that then formula [1:22] that's why iran tried to focus on the most immediate issues that matters to iran and the united states as well as [1:29] the region uh that could be ending the hostilities in the region which has you know uh made uh in [1:36] addition to iran and other countries in the region somehow concerned about the consequences of such a [1:42] scenario and uh also reopening the strain of hormones you know for those even beyond the region who are [1:50] worried about the you know long-term you know uh deadlock in this process that consequences will be more [1:56] consequences will be more visible in the weeks or months to come so this is something you know the [2:03] most immediate or challenge that can be you know addressed by the two sides iran and foreign minister [2:09] engaged in renewed discussions uh in islamabad then he traveled to musket and russia in order to [2:16] uh see if they the atmosphere could be moving toward a you know direction that they can somehow settle [2:25] those that are within reach and accessible and if there could be a kind of let's say potential agreement [2:32] or a momentum this could also contribute to uh future likely uh negotiations on remaining issues [2:40] however the future talks were not guaranteed but at least they could you know address those who were [2:47] somehow uh important for the both sides and this could bring a kind of resolution but so far we have [2:55] not been seeing a promising sign from the united states as we are speaking i think uh the chance of a [3:02] military escalation is uh as much as a let's say diplomatic resolution or even much higher than that and [3:10] everybody is having an eye on let's say a military escalation as well do you agree with that mohammed [3:16] do you think there's any kind of appetite from both sides to go back to a full-scale kinetic war [3:21] given this standoff at the moment i don't think there's an appetite necessarily uh but there's also [3:27] not an appetite for a prolonged stalemate and that's that's the problem i know which side is going to [3:34] is going to blink first i really think that the trump administration believed and still believes that [3:40] the iranians are on their their last legs and that they're on the verge of surrender that they're [3:44] on the verge of a massive oil storage crisis uh reports suggest that none of that is accurate [3:53] that perhaps this is just a massive misreading by the trump administration and if it is then we could [3:58] uh have a very prolonged uh standoff here and um i think that's not um that's not uh palatable for [4:07] the the americans nor for nor for the iranians and i think that's what increases the likelihood that we [4:12] are going to uh be you know go back to a military confrontation uh at some point um turning back to [4:19] you abbas i mean these are rather ominous signs i mean return to full-scale war because we face a [4:26] diplomatic standoff seems in many ways like a failure surely the iranian people are not going to be happy [4:32] with the prospect of their towns cities bridges infrastructure being hit day and night uh in [4:42] addition to the rhetoric we have been hearing from the two sides or let's say the talk of talks we are [4:49] seeing that the military posture of the united states in the in the region is intensifying and whether that [4:57] is aimed at creating leverage or a move toward real you know escalation and resuming the hostilities [5:05] i think is a serious question but the quality size and amounts of that military presence and [5:11] arrangement in the region by the united states as well as israel that you know in the case that you [5:18] know far exceeds the amount of you know just a psychological warfare and it could be a let's say an [5:25] attempt moving toward let's say resuming the attack against iran however there might be some [5:32] hesitations on the u.s side because the consequences in the days or weeks to come could be also significant [5:39] for the uh us and its allies and the global energy market so that's why i think they are making [5:45] discussions and the united and israel is trying to convince the united states in order to uh continue to [5:52] the talk the attacks against iran and this is a serious scenario and iran uh you know despite sending [6:01] its foreign minister for discussions in the region is also preparing for such a scenario and that we [6:08] might be witnessing a kind of let's say a regional war again but this might be somehow different from the [6:16] previous wars iran you know fought two wars in the past the second was different from the first one [6:21] and the third one might be different from the both of the previous ones and this indicates that [6:29] you know the fight for creating leverage in order to somehow the us trying to make iran concede but [6:36] on the other side iran trying to somehow consolidate its strategic asset like the straight-off hormones [6:43] with new protocols is yet continuous and some are saying that that's not a matter of if but when this [6:51] conflict starts uh abbas mohammed raises an interesting point about uh about israel um our [6:58] focus has been very much on um diplomatic efforts in pakistan obviously the israelis were not present [7:03] there that's not to say there wasn't a degree of input but behind the scenes what calculations do you [7:08] think are going on in israel at the moment as this standoff continues do they as abbas is suggesting [7:15] prefer a scenario where there is a return to a conflict within iran itself oh i don't think there's [7:22] any question uh i'm of the belief that it was israel that was a primary driver of the war i think they [7:28] wanted uh a regime change and i thought that they calculated that they could achieve that in in short order [7:34] uh that was obviously uh wrong that was a misreading um but i think short of that their next uh best [7:43] outcome uh would be state collapse in in iran so i'm quite confident uh in saying that the israelis [7:50] are working behind the scenes on convincing the americans to go back to war so that they can uh perhaps [7:57] still achieve uh regime change as unlikely as that prospect is uh but if nothing else then uh cause uh the [8:04] collapse of the the society or as they've said publicly uh set iran back uh many decades they've [8:11] talked repeatedly about bombing iran into the stone age so there's no question that israel has an [8:16] interest in in escalating uh but that you know that discussion kind of dovetails with the this [8:21] discussion on the nuclear file um you know the iranians um have already made compromises on on that front [8:29] and um it's the israelis that have insisted on this very hard line uh zero enrichment uh policy which [8:37] from the iranian uh perspective uh doesn't really make a lot of sense it doesn't jive with with [8:42] international law and international norms but the israelis have been able to convince the trump [8:48] administration to adopt that very hard line policy okay well good to hear from both of you abbas [8:53] asalani uh in tehran senior research fellow at the center for middle east strategic studies and [8:57] um hamad al-masri professor of media studies at the doha institute for graduate studies thank you both