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

Hello and welcome to NewsHare. It's coming to you live in 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.

This is a conflict which is intensifying and spreading. Tehran and locations around the

country have again been rocked by explosions. This pictures came in of Rubble Street in the

Iranian capital of civilians running and smoke choking the air. The Iranian military was also

launching pressure tax on Israel and targets across the Gulf. Indeed, just within the last four

minutes, the US central commander put out an update saying that six US 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 and 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 ten 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. They were in 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 with the White House,

elsewhere in interviews with the US 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 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 air strikes. 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 Muhammad 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 Basich 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 the 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 and after I think a few days there will be 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 Atollahamani 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 the United States and Israel, but the countries hosting

US bases. So can I ask you about that, Mohamed? Because obviously I'm speaking to you

because 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 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 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 view that the West had 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 Iran 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?

I like the other regional countries. There is a process in Iran which makes that possible,

but with US 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 Pahlevi supports this.

And that was Mahamid Khatibyan, independent journalist and political commentator speaking to

me from Tehran. Israel is also struck inside Lebanon pounding parts of the capital Beirut and 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 is the BBC's Wira 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, pounding 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 estrikes 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 Harun.

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 Avis in Beirut. Dr. Abdul Rahman Bissri is an independent Lebanese member

of parliament from Saeeda in the south of the country. He told me first about the impact of his

ready strikes on his constituency. Since yesterday we were experiencing severe traffic coming

from south of Lebanon to the city of Saeeda either to seek shelter outside the

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's 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 he wants to get involved in this war

between the U.S. 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

Allah 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 Abdul Rahman Bissri, just one line that has come out within the last hour

and that is from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Kamar, saying today that the

straight-of-horn moves 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 populous 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 has, 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 Life from London. You're listening to NewsHour with me,

Tim Franks. 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 U.S. military

at targets in Iran. It's also been trying to repel Iranian missiles in large parts successfully.

But some Iranian munitions are getting through. On Sunday, nine people were killed in the town of

Betshemish from where today the Israeli Prime Minister Bin-i-Min Netanyahu had this to say.

When I stand here in a place that was bombarded by the terrorist 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.

Bin-i-Min Netanyahu is speaking from Betshemish. The BBC's Anna Foster has been speaking to

Israel's head of state president Isaac Hedsog, and she asked him why Israel and the U.S. had chosen

to attack Iran on Saturday while negotiations had been in train between the U.S. and Iran.

On that country's nuclear program, negotiations which some of those involved with said had been

making progress. 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 Iranian 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 JCPOI, meaning way above 20% enrichment, which is a farce and a joke to every 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. What do I'm keen to establish, President Hertz? 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,

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. We are not attacking, not us, not the Americans,

anything civilian. We are attacking places where there are launchers of huge missiles or

there have been civilians. We created a well-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 and besiege by the way. These attacks, let's not forget,

just a few weeks ago, the Iranian regime mode about 32 to 50,000 of those citizens,

just like that, just killed anybody. But we do need to acknowledge the civilian deaths,

I don't want us to move too far away from the point here. But we should not, Anna, we should not

be naive. I don't think we're being naive by asking not everyone to do this. You quoted an expert

on international law explaining why things cannot be done. It's like waiting again and again

for an attack by the Iranian army. 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 four days. 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

has all the laws that has to be immediate and you're not addressing that point. Of course,

I'm addressing it because we have huge amount of proof, which we are sharing, of course,

with our British allies and every other ally. The fact that your base in a criterion 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.

These are really President Isaac Herzog talking to Anna Foster. Anna has 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 shopping 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. Keeping calm. But when we have wars usually, it's around the borders and it's

far here and 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. 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 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 about 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 hard cover 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 playpark 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 that'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.

Anophosta reporting for us from Tel Aviv. You're listening to news app from the BBC.

Welcome back to news app. 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 percent.

Producers, insurers and shipping firms have all been affected by disruption to a key waterway

the strait of hall moves for a broader sense of the impact. News as Regina Vigenathan has been

speaking to the Lebanese energy economist, Dr Carol Nacklay. I'm not surprised to see oil and gas prices

increasing for sure in the markets open 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 as 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 not watching closely to see where the 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 on going

oil and energy prices. I'm watching the entire region because we're talking about, 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 state 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 state 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 a 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,

it's 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 with any matter of days and not weeks, but the

situation today is different. So far, I have to say that even though oil prices increase,

they are still moderate compared to previous crises where we so prices jumping to above

$100 a barrel. And that was the energy economist and CEO of Crystal Energy, Dr. Carol McLean,

since she was speaking to Erbidjini Vidyanath and 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 news 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 and did the

Israeli military spokesman speaking in or tweeting in Farsi has warned people in the Evan

area of Tehran to evacuate on mass. We heard earlier in the program Donald Trump set out for the

first time from the White House since the start of this war, what his rationale and objectives are,

early 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 a rack. 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 nooks. Israel has clear missions as well for which we are

grateful. Capable partners are good partners unlike so many of our traditional allies who ring

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.

Sore of 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 into Pacific region and in order to meet those

challenges, we need to do a lot of domestic reconciliation, unemployment, affordability, lack of

industrial capacity, rebuilding the US 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. 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 present 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

where are 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 was a Reuters-Ipsis poll that suggests that one in four American supports

these. There are ones that suggest maybe slightly more popularity, but not much more than that.

But within that, sir, I'm sorry to interrupt. I mean, that Reuters poll also suggests that actually

55% of Republicans approve of this, only 13% 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 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 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's Arab is headlined how JD Vance lost the foreign policy war.

The Vice President has made a reputation for himself as somebody who would rather that the

US 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 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 US focus on its own industrial development,

pick strategic battles, and see what's really the most important things for the US to do. Is it

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 Trumpian manifestation, has shown itself capable of that kind

of serious strategic rethinking. And that was Sara 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, in decatter, state-owned energy

company, says it's halted production of liquefied natural gas, of which is one of the world's major

supplies, hence the big spike in European gas prices. Added to that, the biggest

all-refinery in Saudi Arabia halted operations after a drone attacks 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, Hassan Sakhi. We're viewing all this with tremendous

sadness, of course, because we had thought that there was a chance for peace to 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

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.

It sounds, I mean, it sounds, Mr. Sakhi, I mean, you're being very diplomatic, which I would expect

to 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 it's the quotas 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, the 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 and 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 you 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 news air 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? They 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 policy, foreign policy

journalist. She now writes among other things, a diplomatic newsletter it's called at Substag.

Does she have a sense that what 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 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 and it seemed like he was a little uncomfortable with what he was reading.

So there 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 of the mission. And, you know, they might not

the U.S. side may not have totally thought it through. I mean, 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 and 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 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 a Hamas target in Qatar and Trump kind of

seized on that to press Israel to and 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're hurting 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, which he,

because a lot of the U.S. 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 all moves have been closed,

according to the 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 know, you've seen the reports that the U.S. only has a certain number of interceptors. And

it's allies who are getting, you know, hit by Iranians also only have a certain number of

interceptors. And they, 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 U.S., the U.S., 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 had a state of the union just less than a week ago, you know, 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% of the people are already against it. Congress, the Democrats,

are extremely agitated that they were not consulted. Rubio, the Secretary of State,

only today talking to more congressional leadership, and then tomorrow they're supposed to

brief the Senate now. 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

bear 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 prepositioned. 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 did an

attack. Marco Rubio and Justin in 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 from this edition of News Air, from Mead Tim Franks and the team here in London.

Thanks for your company.