Ron Dermer on the U.S. Airstrikes as Iran Returns Fire
39:12 Share

The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America, and Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small. The Department of Defense is working with Google to help secure America's digital defense systems, from establishing cloud-based zero-trust solutions to deploying the latest AI technology. This is a new era of American innovation. Find out more at g.co slash American innovation. From the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch.

Welcome to Potomac Watch, the daily podcast of the Wall Street Journal opinion pages. I'm editor of those pages, Paul G. Goh, and today we have a special guest in the wake of the weekend's bombing of nuclear sites in Iran by the United States on the orders of President Trump. He is Ron Dermer, Israel's Minister of Strategic Affairs and a close advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He was also for many years Israel's ambassador to the United States and has been an important figure

interlocutor between the U.S. and Israel during the current conflict. Welcome, Minister Dermer. Good to have you here. Good to be with you, Paul. Word now is filtering out from the administration and background briefings and such that President Trump made his decision to bomb those sites last week.

What do you think was the decisive argument that turned him to do so? Well, the president has been very consistent that he wasn't going to allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. I think he hoped at the beginning of the administration when he sent that letter to the Iranians that he could resolve this issue through negotiations. But I must tell you, Paul, he was very clear throughout these negotiations what he meant.

by a diplomatic agreement. It was a dismantling, effectively, of their program. He talked about several times before he made the decision to strike that we would either take it out ourselves or they'd have to go inside and sort of blow it up from the inside. And I'm sure you've heard that many times. So he was very clear about they're not getting a weapon and also very clear that they're not going to have an enrichment capability, which, of course, gives them the fuel they would need for a nuclear weapon. And I

think he gave time for the negotiations. I think at one point he was optimistic that he might be able to reach an agreement. We were a little more skeptical that the Iranians would agree to dismantle their program willingly. And ultimately, he made the decision that you're not going to get there with a diplomatic agreement. He launched that action, which I think has big consequences, not just in U.S.-Iran relations, but also what it means for the Middle East and what it means for the world. And

And he made the decision to basically only attack nuclear sites, three sites, the two enrichment facilities and one site that was going to be a future enrichment facility, which the Iranians were planning to do, particularly in the wake of the IAEA decision the Friday afternoon.

about 10 days ago, where the IEA Board of Governors voted that they were non-compliance. For the first time in about 20 years, they had a very tough decision against them at the IEA, and Iran was moving towards turning this third side. So the first side is called the Natanz,

We took action against it. That's the main enrichment facility that Iran has, many, many thousands of centrifuges. We had struck that actually on the first night of our Operation Rising Line, which started about 10 days ago, 11 days ago. The second site is the site Fordow, which is that deep underground site, which was also hit. And the third site is this site at Isfahan,

where they're building an even deeper site than Fordow, and they've used that to store enriched materials. Most of the highly enriched uranium actually is stored in that site in Isfahan, which is called 216. Jerusalem Post reported that the president was initially thinking he would only strike Fordow because it's so deeply buried and would require those heavy bonds.

bombs the U.S. had, but that you, in your discussions with the administration, persuaded him to strike Netanz and Isfahan as well. Is that true? Well, I don't want to get into the specific discussions. I'll just tell you how I see it. I think they produced a lot of these mass subordinates, penetrators, and you can talk to people in the administration. It's not a simple thing to put these things together. Apparently, it takes longer than you might think.

And they flew it over. And given the number that were produced, it was very clear that President Trump wanted to make sure that his strike against Iranian nuclear facilities would be pretty comprehensive. And that's why, in addition to Fordow, he went and also did a strike at Natanz. We had probably taken out

about 85% of that facility and rendered it largely inoperable. But obviously, when the United States came in, they made it 100%, 150% inoperable. In addition to that, there was a third facility

Now, that third facility, the United States did not use one of those 30,000 pound bunker buster bombs. What they did is they launched cruise missiles and they basically jammed it up right now. And as we speak now, you have this enriched material enriched to about 60 percent, you know, but many of your viewers and listeners may not know.

that as you enrich uranium, you start with around 3.67%, which is the low level. Then you move to 20, you move to 60. And then 90% is the military grade uranium. So they have 60%, which is very close. And the way this thing works, think about mixing dough. You know, at the beginning, it's really, really hard to do it. And then as you whip it faster and faster, it gets easier and easier. So in terms of the time it takes to get to 3.67%, that's a lot of time.

And then you move pretty fast to 20. You move very fast to 60. And then you move at almost exponential speed, which is why you've seen intelligence briefings and reports where people will say, you know, they can take the 60 percent in a matter of days, turn it into 90 percent enriched uranium. So that site at Isfahan that was taken out with the cruise missiles, the site wasn't taken out. It was jammed up effectively. I think that ultimately what President decided to do and his advisers

I think, decided to do, which is the right thing, to make sure that they completely took action against all three of those facilities. I will tell you something else. When Israel targeted

Iran's military nuclear capability, we did much more than go after just the enrichment sites. In our operation, and we've already completed these attacks, we have targeted their centrifuge manufacturing facilities. In the first minutes of this rising line operation, we also targeted the main scientists in what is the equivalent of Iran's Manhattan Project. They were taken out within minutes in different places simultaneously. And Israel has that capability. And I think we showed it

In Lebanon, we've shown it. In Gaza, we showed it. In Iran, which is, of course, a couple thousand kilometers away. So they were taken out. We also took out other facilities that are involved in Iran's nuclear program. Another key facility is a conversion facility at Isfahan, the same place where that Tusin facility is. There's a conversion facility. And the reason why that's important is once you have the highly enriched uranium, you have to actually convert that

into a metallurgy, which allows you basically to build the core of a nuclear device. That facility was taken out. And that's, I think, also another blow to the system. So it's not just three main sites. They are three sites, two of them being the enrichment sites and the third being the site in Isfahan. There are dozens of sites that have to deal with the nuclear program. And Israel had a target list at the beginning of this war. And we have systematically, day after day, our air force, once we established that

air supremacy, we've been targeting all of those sites. And I think a very effective operation to date, and hopefully that will remove Iran's military nuclear capability. And when they say, well, they have the knowledge, well, the key people who are working it are no longer around. And the history of the program that was all written down in different places, remember that archive we stole a copy of a long time ago, it's not clear they have any of that material again. So they're going to really have to start from scratch.

We are going to take a break, and when we come back, we'll talk to Ambassador Dermer, Minister Dermer, about Israel's assessment of whether or not Iran retains any enriched uranium capacity when we come back. The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America, and Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small.

The Air Force Research Laboratory is partnering with Google Cloud, using AI to accelerate defense research for air, space, and cyberspace forces. This is a new era of American innovation. Find out more at g.co slash American innovation.

Welcome back. I'm Paul Gigo here on Potomac Watch, and I'm talking with Ambassador Ron Dermer, Minister of Security Affairs for Israel. There is some speculation and a little uncertainty over the degree to which the

the sites have been damaged, and in particular, whether or not Iran was able to retain some enriched uranium and maybe even pull it out of one of those sites to another location before they were attacked? What do you know about the degree of what they've been able to retain? Well, our assessment is that they haven't pulled that out. It's not 100 percent, but to the extent that we monitor it, and I think people can

You can say that Israel's intelligence when it comes to Iran is pretty good, given what we've seen over the last 10, 11 days. But we believe that that material was inside those sites in Natanz, at Fordow, and also at the site in Isfahan. Now, I don't think anybody thought that that material would be destroyed in the attack. It's very hard to actually destroy the material. It's one thing when you attack a facility like Fordow, just so that your viewers understand,

There's a whole infrastructure that goes around one of these enrichment facilities about the electricity, the whole network that they set up in order to support the cascades and centrifuges. So that has really been destroyed at forego. And it's a very, very big blow and a comprehensive attack, as President Trump had mentioned. But to get to the actual enriched material, that's a different story. And that's probably the one thing if there's going to be discussions with Iran as part of any agreement.

They're going to have to agree to remove all of these enriched materials. Remember, in the previous nuclear deal, they capped that. The problem with the previous nuclear deal that we don't have to relitigate is that all the clauses, the so-called sunset clauses and all the restrictions on Iran's program were automatically removed after a few years. But they were dealing then with like 300 kilograms of low enriched uranium.

We've got a situation right now where Iran has nine bombs worth of high enriched uranium at 60 percent and total between 17 and 18 bombs worth. If you add what they have of 20 percent enriched uranium and three point six, six, seven percent enriched uranium. So as part of any agreement.

that would ultimately remove some sanctions, if that's where the United States is moving, they're going to have to see all of that material removed from the country because Iran doesn't need it. And I think Secretary Rubio said this several times. He said no country needs 60 percent highly enriched uranium that doesn't have nuclear weapons. So it's absurd. They built this huge,

stockpile of enriched uranium and that's what made it so dangerous. Now they have the enriched uranium, but they don't have a capacity in a significant level. I'm not saying there's not this or that centrifuge hidden someplace where they can try to put it together.

but they don't have an industrial capacity for enrichment and they don't have the capacity converted right now into a weapon. And they don't have the scientists actually to start doing it right now. So the blow I think is pretty comprehensive, but you're right to point to the enriched uranium that that still has not been dealt with. And the international community in the wake of this confrontation should come together and insist that this material be removed. And I think it's very clear that,

that we're certainly monitoring all the time where that material is. And I know the United States is monitoring it. And I imagine that the Iranians have gotten a pretty strong message to not try to run away and put that enriched material in different places of Iran because everybody's got eyes on it right now. Well, I noticed that you were bombing, I think, today or yesterday, Israel, some of the roads leading to Fort Ferdow.

which suggests that you don't want them to be able to come in and dig out and get whatever is still there. I guess you're a very keen observer of events. All right. The other thing that's pretty interesting, I think, is going beyond the nuclear sites. And this is something that happened on Monday, according to the reports from your government.

that you have bombed Evin Prison in Tehran, which is the notorious prison that has dissidents and political prisoners. And second, you bombed the police headquarters, the Basiji, so-called Basiji, who have been so

instrument of repression by the regime against the people of Iran. Now, these look to me, what you are doing is attacking the institutions of repression by the regime. And that suggests you are attempting to make it harder for the regime to oppress the people and if there's any uprising to put it down.

A fair inference? Well, like I said, you're a keen observer of events. I will just tell you that Israel does not see itself as being in a fight with the people of Iran at all. And I would tell all your American viewers, I don't think the people of Iran hate the United States. I think the regime hates the United States, and they try to lead a lot of people in chanting death to America, and they see...

The Iranian regime sees America as the great Satan and Israel as the little Satan. But you know that before 1979, Israel had very good relations with Iran. And I suspect that when this regime ultimately goes into the dustbin of history, and I'm sure it will happen, I don't know when it's going to happen, but I believe that Israel and Iran will have good relations again. I believe Iran and the United States will have good relations again. And I think the message

From my point of view, the strike in the prison is this notorious prison, like you talked about. This is, you know, the gulag of Iran. And I think a lot of the people who've been fighting bravely against this regime, who took to the streets many times. You remember 2009 when you had a mass wave of people in the streets? Sure, sure.

We didn't get much support from the outside. And then there were other protests that happened in 2019, and then of course 2022 with Masa Amini when she was killed for not covering her hair and you had people. I mean, this is tremendous bravery because the Iranian regime kills these people, and

You probably have heard dozens, if not a couple hundred stories over the years of people who were in that prison and who were tortured. I've heard them myself. And so I think in taking this action, Israel is saying we're not against the people of Iran. On the contrary, we're against the regime. It subjugates them and has subjugated them for nearly a half a century. And it calls and works for the destruction of Israel every day. Now, what that act

will do, I don't know. But I think it's an important signal to the Iranian people. And from what I've seen over the last few hours on social media, you know, they're trying to shut down the internet in Iran as well. But I think the people in Tehran and outside Tehran, and I would expect that the Iranian diaspora around the world, I think no one shed a tear.

about what happened at that prison. And listen, if a lot of people get out and win their freedom, that would be a great thing. Whether this strike in the prison will ultimately be a Basile day for Iran, I don't know, but I think it was the right decision. And hopefully people will understand it in the right way and realize that even though there are a lot of strikes today in Tehran against military targets, you mentioned the Basij and the IRGC targets and other targets,

of the regime. I hope people understand that our fight is not with the people of Iran, it's with the regime. Now, I should also add, we set out with very specific goals in this operation, and the prime minister laid it out from the beginning of the war. We have two goals that we want to achieve.

The first one was to remove two existential threats. The first existential threat we spoke about, which is the threat of Iran's military nuclear capability. And we discussed all the sites that we've targeted. And the United States came on the top of that and really did things that even Israel can't do. As the prime minister said, what was it? It was Annie Oakley. You know what? What we could do, you could do better. So when it comes to Bordeaux, that totally was the case. Now, that's on the military nuclear side.

On the issue of the missiles, people viewing this conflict on the television screens have seen these one-ton missiles that are flying towards Israel. They're like two missiles.

buses flaming through the air with about a ton of explosives that are landing in really civilian areas. And we've been very fortunate, Paul Gigo, we have a good air defense system, but also we have an extremely disciplined population because we're used to, unfortunately, being attacked by these rockets. So people run to the safe room. We have the sirens go out. We have the air defenses and the combination of many things together enables us to protect lives. And we have lost

about two dozen people since this conflict began. But the expectation, I think, of the other side is there would be many, many more casualties. And it's because we've been so disciplined. Now, we want to deal with this problem because for a country the size of Israel, you've been here many times. We are the size of New Jersey. Now, America is 500 times the size of Israel. Iran is 80 times the size of Israel. Now, when you have a country the size of Israel that would be bombarded

By not 100 of these missiles or 200 or 500, but 10,000 of these missiles that in and of itself can represent a conventional threat to Israel's survival. And Iran was producing around 50 or 60 of these missiles every month.

And it was ramping up the production. This was, if you remember back in October when we took action, we hit a lot of their production capability. But their plan, and the Chinese were helping them in this, was to figure out how to ramp up production early next year to about 300 a month. So it's early next year, 300 a month, which means you're talking about around 3,500 per year. In three years, it's 10,000. In six years, it's 20,000.

Now, everyone is always concerned of a nuclear umbrella that would create a conventional threat. They would use the conventional threat, a country backed by a nuclear umbrella. But the reverse can happen as well. There can be a conventional threat that can allow a country to go nuclear. You know where that happened? North Korea. I mean, why did the United States not take action against North Korea when it was trying to develop nuclear weapons? Yeah, the concern about an artillery attack on Seoul and America.

Exactly. And I think one of their strategies, Iran has many strategies for the destruction of Israel. I'm not being flippant. They have several different strategies to destroy Israel. One of their strategies was basically to turn Tel Aviv into Seoul, to create a ring of fire around Israel, a massive conventional threat. And then Israel.

And they'll have their own conventional threat through these missiles. And then two years, five years down the road, when they have all the elements of the nuclear program in place, they have the Iranian enrichment, they have the long-term missiles and they can weaponize it, then no one is going to stop them because the argument then would be, guess what? If we take action against this, Tel Aviv will be destroyed. Israel will be destroyed. And after October 7th, Israel has sort of turned this tide in not only what we did to Hamas,

for the horrific things that they did on October 7th. And we have really devastated them. But what we did with Hezbollah, which, as you know, two years ago was seen as a major threat to Israel. So we have cut them down to size, essentially decapitated them. And now you're dealing with Iran. What has the axis of Iran done for the last 11 days of this fight?

And the answer is very little. But what Israel has done is there are also dozens of targets in their missile production program because there are many different stages of that production. And we have systematically day after day after day, once we achieve that air supremacy and took out air defenses, we have systematically gone after them.

this missile defense production machine of Iran and set them back very, very significantly. It's not to zero and they still have these missiles. They fired about 10, I think this morning, and they could fire for a few days and they have an inventory of weapons, but they don't have the production capacity that they had before. And I think we set them back on their missile production years. And hopefully we set them back on the nuclear side,

permanent. They have fired today, even as we speak, Iran has announced that it fired some missiles at the U.S. military base in Qatar. So they still retain that capability. Just to be clear for your listeners, that's a short-range ballistic missile capability. The stuff they fired at us and the stuff they fire in Qatar, it's not the same thing. They're firing what are called SRBMs, and they have several thousand of those. They have

of the mid-range ballistic missiles around 2,500 at the beginning of this war and they have fired north of 500. We've taken a lot in the actions that we've had 'cause we've taken out a lot of their missile launchers as well because the missiles don't help you if you don't have launchers. And once we had air supremacy,

We have sort of drones in the sky hunting these missile launchers to take them out. But they still have many hundreds of these mid-range ballistic missiles, the types that you can fire 2,000 kilometers. I think what probably they fired at that base in Qatar are the short-range ballistic missiles that they have a lot of and that are positioned much closer to the Gulf.

All right. And, of course, I think the U.S. will have to decide how it responds to that. We're going to take another break. When we come back, we'll talk to the ambassador about what he thinks will need to happen for this conflict to end when we come back. The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America. And Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small.

The Air Force Research Laboratory is partnering with Google Cloud, using AI to accelerate defense research for air, space, and cyberspace forces. This is a new era of American innovation. Find out more at g.co slash American innovation. Don't forget, you can reach the latest episode of Potomac Watch anytime. Just ask your smart speaker. Play the Opinion Potomac Watch podcast. That is Play the Opinion Potomac Watch podcast.

From the opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch. Welcome back. I'm Paul G. Goh here on Potomac Watch, and I'm speaking with Ambassador Ron Dermer, Minister of Security Affairs for Israel. I wanted to ask you about, in the context of the missiles in particular—

The prime minister has said that Israel is no longer going to tolerate going back to the position it was before this escalation, frankly, before October 7th, which was surrounded by these proxies, threatened by a ballistic missile threat, threatened by the potential of a nuclear threat.

And you've degraded that. But what does this mean going forward? Because does this mean a kind of permanent monitoring where you're going to have to take action every so often? Because you can see if they try to get the S-300 interceptors back, defensive missiles from Moscow, if they try to rebuild their ballistic missile system or they get something from China.

Is this going to require periodic attacks like this? It's actually an excellent question. Well, I would first start with the immediate neighbors of Israel and see how we're conducting ourselves now, because Iran is a country about, it's a very big country, as I said, 80 times the size of Israel and about 10 times our population. It's 2,000 kilometers away. But I think one of the first lessons is,

of October 7th is you're not going to allow a kind of terrorist state to emerge along your border. And so that means that you can't deal with the situation of quiet for quiet. You know, you have a ceasefire. If they don't fire, we don't fire. What our goal will be along our borders is

is to make sure that they do not have the capability. They can't build up a capability to harm us in the future. So in Gaza, that's clearly happening and it's going to happen any day after scenario. In Gaza, the place has to be completely demilitarized. Now look at what happened in the north on our border with Lebanon.

We got to a ceasefire in Lebanon in November, at the end of November. That ceasefire in Lebanon is not quiet for quiet because we degraded significantly Hezbollah's capabilities. Its strategic capabilities in terms of the missile and rockets that it had, we took out a lot of the leadership. But our goal here in Lebanon is not to have quiet for quiet. If you don't shoot at us, that's fine. No, we're not going to allow you

to replenish your stockpiles of missiles and then build this monster on our border again. It's not going to happen. Israel is not going to tolerate it. And in the last eight months, we have enforced that agreement very rigorously. And we had reached understandings with the previous administration, with the Biden administration. And I can assure you that's a floor when it comes to this administration to maintain our freedom of action

in Lebanon to ensure that Hezbollah cannot rearm. So if you take Hezbollah and it was 100% on October 7th, and because of what we did, we, let's say, brought it down to around 20%, we're not going to allow it to go back up to 100% and we're going to keep knocking it down. The good news in Lebanon is there's an anti-Hezbollah force

that has now risen up and President Aoun and the political leadership in Lebanon that doesn't like them. And now you have a kind of internal struggle within Lebanon. I think we're helping. We won't get thanked for it, but I think we're helping Aoun in making sure that Hezbollah cannot rearm itself and build up its, again, its stockpile of arms and its capabilities. And we're continuing to do it

Almost every week there's been action. Now, if they stop doing it and they don't seek to rearm, if they disarm as part of some agreement within Lebanon, which I'm a little bit skeptical that they're going to get there, but then Israel won't have to do those military operations. Now look at Syria. Syria has been a case where before October 7th for about 15 years,

Israel was taking action to prevent Iran from establishing a kind of new Hezbollah-like base in Syria. And we were acting over hundreds, it might have been over a thousand actions to start take out air defenses, different capabilities that the Iranians were trying to put in. And we will continue to do that because we're not going to allow a force to emerge in Syria that could actually threaten us. And we've made that clear to the new government of Syria and here in

How we manage the relations with Turkey and how the United States, I think, helps. You know, I think that Israel is the most important ally of the U.S. in the 21st century, which maybe we'll talk about. But, you know, there's an interesting relationship between the United States and Turkey and how to manage this in Syria, I think, is a challenge moving forward. The good news about the new government in Syria is when we made the

agreement in Lebanon, part of the problem is how are you going to close that border between Syria and Lebanon? Because Iran was using Syria as a land bridge to resupply its proxy, Hezbollah. But because of what happened in Syria, the collapse of the Assad regime and the rise of the current government, that has de facto cut it off.

Because these people in Syria, they may not like Israel, but they hate Hezbollah and they hate Iran. And they're still smuggling. There's still things that happen and we have to act. But it's a different situation than the one we had when Assad was there. This is the short version of the answer. Now we're getting to Iran, which is your real question. Are you going to have those levels of attacks all the time? I think the problem is much greater there. But look, we're determined to not allow a threat to emerge.

At what point do we take action? That's going to be a decision that Israel's government is going to have to make in the weeks and months ahead and then establish that policy moving forward. When it comes to a nuclear threat, you know where that leads to and it's clear. What you're talking about is what will happen if there's any threat. I mean, Iran, again, it's a big country. It has a military. It's going to build up certain capabilities. At what point do we say,

that that is significant enough that requires us to take action from 2,000 miles away, reestablish air supremacy, and do this. And we're just going to have to see how that's going to work out. But right now, the goal is very clear. Remove those two existential threats. And right now, I think the regime, for the first time today—

is really being targeted directly. The targets that were chosen today were kind of regime targets to make it clear to them that we're just not going to tolerate the rocketing of our cities. And is that another way of saying, if you do not stop and stand down?

then we are going to continue to target regime institutions and maybe regime officials. You're a very keen observer of events. Okay. So I guess that leads to the question, where does this end in your view? I mean, you have some of the Europeans and the UN, as they always do, saying this needs to stop.

But where do you think and where does the prime minister think this ends, at least in the near term, this conflict? Well, look, if I knew that this or that action that Israel would take in the days ahead would bring this whole regime collapsing down, I mean, action from the air,

then I would be for it. I'm speaking on a personal level. I would be for it because I think that ultimately the way that you resolve the threat of Iran is that this regime goes down. But I'm not sure that that happens. And I think ultimately those who need to deal with the regime are the people of Iran.

Now, when they went out in the streets in the past, you know this, they did not get any support from the outside world. And I think here it's incumbent on President Trump, and he's doing it already, and really the bold action he took

in this operation, a Saturday night, but also in even just the last 24 hours or so, the statements that he's made, what was it, make Iran great again. I think it's important for him to stand on the side of the people of Iran. And I think it's important for European leaders to do that. I mean, to say that I'm disappointed in European leaders would mean that I have expectations of them and I don't.

But I think that they have put themselves, as they like to say, on the wrong side of history. They should be standing with the people of Iran. What the leaders of Europe should be doing now is calling into their offices Iranian dissidents.

who have suffered from this regime, they should, each one can get somebody who was in that notorious prison and have them in their, you know, chancellery or prime ministers at 10 Downing Street, at the Shams al-Assay, they could have them all there. And I think that would send a signal to the people of Iran. And then to say Israel should not target this or that regime target, it's a mistake. Now,

What the prime minister said is that's not our goal. We have not set out on a goal of toppling the regime. Could that be a consequence of Israel's action? Maybe. Would it happen in two weeks or two months or two years? I just don't know the answer to that. I think Iran has had some four revolutions or so in the last hundred years.

And usually these require some sort of force from within to do it. And I know the people of Iran have a tremendous amount of courage and bravery because they've been out to the streets time after time, even though they're risking their lives. Will they decide to take advantage of this moment? I just don't know the answer to that question. Would I be thrilled?

If the people of Iran seize control, of course I would be thrilled. And I would be thrilled first and foremost as an Israeli, because we have a regime that calls openly and works actively for our destruction of the one and only Jewish state and has made that their calling card for almost a half a century. You know, I said, we're the little state that they want to get rid of and then ultimately to take on you, the great state. So I think that would be a great day for the security of the region.

But beyond that, also, I would say your listeners or your viewers should remember, they threatened all of Israel's Arab neighbors. On October 7th, Iran controlled four Arab capitals. They controlled Baghdad effectively. They controlled Damascus through Assad. They controlled Beirut through Hezbollah. And they controlled Sana'a through the Houthis. Look at where they are now. Assad is not there. Hezbollah has been cut down to size.

Baghdad is now have greater degrees of freedom than it did in October 7th. And the Houthis are still a problem that has to be taken care of. So this would be, I think, a great victory, not just for Israel, if the Iranian people won their freedom, but I

also think the Arab world, the threats to the Arab world would be very different. But beyond that is somebody who supports freedom. I was born and raised in the United States. And look at the struggle of the people of Iran for their freedom. And I think if that happens, it changes the whole region because most of the security problems, maybe 90% of the security problems in the Middle East were really for decades have stemmed

from Iran and from its proxies. You had that Iranian octopus, its terror tentacles. And what Israel did in our actions is we've turned those terror tentacles in arms into T-Rex arms at this point and cut them down to size. And now we're going after that head. And I think if the people of Iran ultimately take down this regime, I think it definitely is a completely new Middle East. But even this operation itself and cutting them down to size as we have is

And here, President Trump's action was critical. I actually think it helps us turn the page on a lot of war and terror and move towards peace and to get back to what we were doing at the end of Trump's first term with the Abraham Accords, where in four months, you know, after 25 years of not having a peace agreement between Israel and the Arab state, the last one was 1994 with Jordan. We were able in rapid succession to get a peace with the United Arab Emirates, a peace with Bahrain,

Sudan came into it. Morocco came into it. There is no reason why under a U.S. leadership umbrella, why the Israelis and Arab allies of the United States cannot continue that process without Iran threatening them. I think this process can happen much faster than people think. I also think that with Trump, it can almost have a reverse Afghanistan effect. That's what we wrote the other day. It's his game to reverse Afghanistan. I apologize.

Exactly. So this is something that I myself had spoken to the president about many months ago, last actually right after he was elected, because in my view, that triggered many different events internationally. And maybe it wasn't the only trigger, but it was one of the things that encouraged a lot of bad actors around the world. Because when there was a vacuum of American perception of a certain weakness or a vacuum of leadership, others fill that void. And

My optimistic scenario, and I believe it could very well happen, and obviously I hope it does, is that when the United States employed this power and what the president did in his decision to strike those nuclear facilities, I think it sends a very strong signal to powerful enemies and less powerful enemies and to America friends as well.

And I hope it will mean that the United States will have to actually deploy less power over the coming years because he's established a certain credibility. And that credibility, I think, is going to affect him in many, many theories. You saw that with the Reagan administration at the beginning of its term when it was able to employ very judiciously power. And I think

it set the table for a lot of the good things that happened later. I think the same thing could happen to President Trump. And it would also not surprise me that a lot of people who want to pivot, was that pivot to other regions of the world, that this will enable that to happen from a position of strength, not from a position of weakness. And here, Israel's role

is also critical because what happened a couple of nights ago had never happened before in the history of U.S.-Israel relations. It probably happened with you in Great Britain. It did happen with you in Great Britain and the Allies during World War II with the cooperation and how closely you worked together to employ power. We did certain things. You did certain things. But we were actually focused on the same objective and would not

surprise me that as the U.S. focuses resources and efforts elsewhere, that Israel becomes more and more important as an ally in a region that will still be important for U.S. interests. And I believe that the faith and confidence

that the United States military, who did a great job, but the U.S. military, their confidence in Israel, given what we have done since October 7, not just in Lebanon, but now in Iran, I think that's going to affect judgments a long time in the future. And certainly when President Trump and Vice President Vance and Secretary Rubio, when they see what Israel has done, I think they will have more confidence in

In our ability to be a very faithful, reliable ally, Alexander Haig, the former Secretary of State, he once referred to Israel as an unsinkable American aircraft carrier in the heart of a region that's important for U.S. interests. And I think we've shown ourselves to be a pretty powerful aircraft carrier who shares American interests, shares American values, and wants to work together on making America

the Middle East, a more secure, more peaceful, more prosperous place. And I think that's going to affect the U.S.-Israel alliance for many, many years, maybe decades to come. All right. I think we will leave it at that here. Thank you, Minister Dermer. We really appreciate your coming in here on Potomac Watch. The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America, and Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small.

The Department of Defense is working with Google to help secure America's digital defense systems, from establishing cloud-based zero-trust solutions to deploying the latest AI technology. This is a new era of American innovation. Find out more at g.co slash American innovation.