Up next in 10
Simon Marks explains why the situation between the United States and Iran has become significantly more dangerous following Donald Trump's latest announcements. Joining Shelagh Fogarty, he breaks down why the US now considers itself 'back at war' and why he believes there is 'a real chance the conflict could spiral out of control'. Listen to the full show on the all-new LBC App: https://app.af.lbc.co.uk/btnc/thenewlbcapp #shelaghfogarty #simonmarks #hormuz #straitofhormuz #iran #iranwar #donaldtrump #trump #uspolitics #politics #usiranwar #LBC LBC is the home of live debate around news and current affairs in the UK. Join in the conversation and listen at https://www.lbc.co.uk/ Sign up to LBC’s weekly newsletter here: https://l-bc.co/signup
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
Listen, the Strait of Hormuz, I know as I left the studio yesterday
0:05
you were reading that social media post of Donald Trump's about it
0:09
and overnight Iranian cruise missiles hitting two UAE oil tankers in Hormuz
0:14
Yeah, I mean, this is very, very serious now. And what we have also learned is that late last week
0:22
the administration sent a formal notification to Congress that the US war with Iran is back on
0:30
Remember, they have insisted that despite day after day of tit-for-tat military strikes and reprisals
0:35
exchanged between the United States and Iran, that this wasn't a war because there's a ceasefire in place
0:42
and they claim it's been in place since April the 8th. And indeed, one of the reasons why President Trump says
0:47
I'm not required to get congressional authorization for any of this military action is because it's not a war
0:53
We're simply upholding a ceasefire. Well, as he said in Ankara last week at the NATO summit, he now considers the ceasefire over
1:00
He rhetorically tore up that 14-point, page-and-a-half memorandum of understanding that was supposed to set in train 60 days of detailed talks leading to some kind of final agreement
1:13
But the fact that he's gone to Congress now and said, we are back at war, starts, restarts the 60-day clock before he has to go and get congressional
1:22
authorization to continue fighting that war nonetheless i think it isn't it is an indication
1:28
that there is a real chance of this now spiraling out of control because it's not just conflict
1:35
that's taking place between the united states and iran it was also conflict that was taking place
1:41
earlier this week between the saudis and iran-backed huti rebels in yemen and we now believe
1:49
the reports from the website Axios that President Trump gave Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia his blessing for the Saudis to launch those attacks which could upend a four informal truce
2:04
On the Iranian-backed Houthis. Yes, exactly. It's a four-year informal truce that has existed
2:09
between the Saudis and the Houthis, and that is also now at grave risk
2:14
And so anybody who's thinking that the Strait of Hormuz is even vaguely close to returning to normal operations
2:22
especially if you're the current chancellor or the future chancellor or the current prime minister
2:27
or the future prime minister and you're banking on a bit of economic stability I think Donald Trump's got bad news for you. And running alongside all of that is the Israel
2:37
Hezbollah situation, Israel Lebanon situation isn't it? Yes absolutely and of course the Israelis are
2:42
not on board with this memorandum of understanding that Donald Trump signed with the Iranians in the
2:46
first place. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has no real desire to stay his forces and not
2:53
continue to push to try and destroy Hezbollah completely in Lebanon. But they have been engaging
2:57
with Lebanon, haven't they? Yes, correct, absolutely. But also, of course, what he wants to do is topple
3:02
the Iranian regime. And this all comes back to the central contradiction in Donald Trump's position
3:10
Donald Trump's position is there's been regime change in Iran. Three weeks ago, he was saying
3:15
the new regime, you know, the new leaders, they're far more rational than the old Supreme Leader and his ilk
3:22
And they're acting and they're trying to act to the benefit of the entire American people
3:27
And then suddenly last week we're being told they're scum, they're cheats, they're vicious and violent
3:32
And he was saying to Congress, I'm going back to war against them
3:36
So he's all over the place and was really over the place yesterday
3:39
with that proposal to charge per vessel fees on tankers transiting the strait because that was such a gift to the Iranians
3:49
The Iranians have been threatening to impose tolls and service fees on vessels since this conflict began and the Americans have said no one can make any money out of this the Iranians can make any money out of it he even threatened to attack Oman when the Omanis an ally of the United States when the
4:07
Omanis were saying well if the Iranians are going to charge tolls on their side of the strait we might charge tolls on our side of the strait and the Americans
4:14
stamp that out immediately and now here is a an American president desperate for
4:19
an off-ramp to this conflict saying right I'm going to start charging 20
4:23
service fees on the value of goods carried through the Strait of Hormuz on every tanker
4:29
And the Iranians said, oh, well, we agree completely with the President of the United
4:33
States and we're going to do it. And by the way, they said 20% is too high. We'll strike
4:39
a better deal for the tanker owners. Well, let's see if he goes full hawk on this. While I've got you, because you're our Washington
4:47
correspondent, this conversation I'm having this hour with our callers about MP security
4:53
and political violence. I mean, the United States, as we know, in history and present day
4:58
political violence kind of on a whole other level because of guns
5:05
What measures have they taken around politicians' security that we might be able to learn from
5:12
Or is the situation too different? Well, I think the situation is different
5:17
but there are certainly elements of it that are the same. I mean, we have seen horrific attacks on politicians
5:23
from both sides of the aisle, involving gun violence invariably because of the prevalence of
5:29
guns. American politicians have generally always had more security at their disposal, and it depends
5:36
on the individual member of Congress or the individual senator, really, to decide how much
5:41
security to avail themselves of. And senators particularly tend to have a greater phalanx of
5:50
protection than members of the House but that because there only 100 senators and there 635 members of the House So there is a reason why those levels of security change
6:04
I think that Washington particularly is very conscious of this. We've seen several efforts to assassinate this president of the United States
6:12
just over the last few years, including, of course, that effort to try and break into
6:17
the White House Correspondents Association dinner at the Washington Hilton Hotel just a few months ago
6:25
So I think because you have the Secret Service and they are a very visible presence
6:31
certainly on the streets of Washington and certainly wherever senior government figures go
6:36
cabinet officials, as well as elected members of Congress and, of course, up on Capitol Hill
6:41
you've got the Capitol Hill Police Force, which also plays a huge role in terms of providing security
6:47
I think it's more baked into the discussion about whether there should be taxpayer-provided protection
6:57
I mean, political violence has been such a hallmark of the United States, not just in our lifetimes, but, you know, all the way back to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln
7:06
We've had it in Britain, for sure. Going way back, we've had it
7:11
But not on the scale that they've had it in those absolute sort of... is hallmark the right word probably not um assassinations that historic
7:19
assassinations that everybody knows about yeah absolutely so i think that the conversation is
7:23
is slightly more baked in historically into the american narrative uh and and yet you know members
7:30
of congress have completely failed to do anything about gun control even after some of their number
7:36
have been attacked uh by people carrying guns uh and so this is an intractable issue in other ways
7:44
in the United States versus the conversation that's taking place here. Well, you know what I would say to that? If they're not going to do it for
7:48
five-year-olds, they're not going to do it for congressmen, are they? They're just not going to do it, period
7:52
No, full stop. No sign of that changing at all. Thank you very much, Simon. Sorry to
7:56
also throw in another angle on things, but
#news