Former US Defense Secretary Mark Esper Talks Strait Of Hormuz
07:59 Share

This is an iHeart Podcast. For enterprise organizations, managing all your food needs is a tall order. But with EasyCater, you get a single workplace food vendor with the tools and resources to make it easy, giving teams across your organization an easy way to order from a huge variety of restaurants, all on one platform. All while consolidating your corporate food spend so you can control costs, streamlining billing and payment and simplifying reporting.

Easy Cater, your business tool for food. To learn more, visit easycater.com slash podcast.

Bloomberg Audio Studios. Podcasts, radio, news. Stunning events over the weekend. America's attack on Iran, years in the making. A stealth 36-hour long operation named Midnight Hammer. Pilots drop some of the largest bombs in their arsenal on Iranian nuclear facilities. Joining us now to discuss is the former U.S. Defense Secretary, Mark Esper. Mr. Secretary, welcome to the program, sir. We'd love to lean on your experience.

the work to execute an operation like this one and your early high-level assessment of its success? Well, good morning. Look, it was clearly successful in terms of the execution. Our aircraft were able to make it in, drop, what, 14 GBU-57s. The submarines launched T-LAMs from offshore. We were in, out with impunity. Nobody was hurt. And

And I just I think it speaks to the skill and professionalism of the United States military. And now I think what we have to do is two things. First of all, get a good battle damage assessment. And that will take a few days. And maybe even then we'll be incomplete until we get inspectors on the ground. And then secondly, we're all waiting to see what Iran's response will be. And there are very various predictions. You guys have been talking about it, what there may or may not do. But that's what we're all waiting for now. If you're advising the president right now, what

What would you say to him in terms of what to expect in terms of Tehran's retaliation?

Yeah, look, I think there are a range of things they could do. You know, they could, first of all, use Shia militia groups in Iraq to target our people and facilities there. Secondly, much like they did during my time in early 2020, they could launch a salvo of missiles against U.S. forces in the Middle East. And there are a couple dozen bases there with over 40,000 U.S. service members that they could go after. Third, there could be sales here in the United States and globally, or they can go against American officials in

as they did a couple years ago and try that. And then they could go after shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, which I think is unlikely. But to me, those are the range of outcomes that they may pursue here in the coming days. In 2020, when Qasem Soleimani was struck with that drone strike, we did see retaliation, but it was telegraphed through back channels to the U.S. administration. Do you think we could see Iran take that same approach this time around?

Yeah, I think what they have to do is calibrate this so that they do enough for domestic consumption, feel like they've satisfied the military, they've struck back, tell the Iranian people they've struck back, but not so much that President Trump

really ups the ante, climbs that escalation ladder and really hits them back fairly hard. Within hours of the missile strikes at El Asad, we had Iranians on the phone privately reaching out to us saying they were done, they had no more, they wanted to stop fighting, etc. And that was, of course, long before we knew that American service members suffer concussions and TBI. But nonetheless, they'll do a lot of back chilling because, look, they can't go much further. This is a

They're being dismantled, their leadership, certainly the military side is being taken apart. Their nuclear sites have been pummeled. And so the question is how much longer can they go on? How can they even decide on some sort of retaliation or strike against the United States if the Supreme Leader is reportedly hiding in a bunker, he's in his late 80s, and he has no access even to electronic communication?

Yeah, look, that's the big question is who's in charge? How complete, how effective is the chain of command right now? Are there instructions left behind to the IRGC or to the missile forces to launch attacks? That may explain why they haven't responded here in the 24, 36 hours.

since the U.S. strikes on Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. There's one theory out there, Secretary, that this could potentially reignite some of the efforts that Iran has made to achieve nuclear status because that is the only deterrence, and especially with the 400 kilograms of enriched uranium missing in action. How concerned are you about that reality going underground and really having the Iranian officials expedite those efforts?

Yeah, look, you bring up a good point that I was going to raise. There's still 900 pounds of 60 percent enriched uranium that's fairly close to what they would need for 10 nuclear weapons out there that we don't have control of. We don't know where it is. The IAE doesn't know where it is. So, first of all, we have to track that down. Secondly, we don't know to what degree the Iranian infrastructure has been destroyed. And even if it has, it's just a matter of time before they rebuild. Now, that at this point probably looks more like years.

than anything else than months. But nonetheless, until there is a fundamental change in the ambitions of the regime or a fundamental change in the regime itself, this is likely an ambition that will grow back over time, arguably more energized than before because of what has happened here in the last couple weeks. There's a larger point, Secretary, that other people have been making this morning, which is that it is a deterrent to, say, Russia,

to China showing what the U.S. military can do and is willing to do in the face of some sort of red line that gets crossed. Do you see it that way or do you see other nations seeing the need to become nuclear or having some sort of deterrent that really takes this potential outcome off the table?

You know, deterrence is based on two things, capability and will. And I think everybody has understood the United States military has the capability to do a lot of things. I don't think anybody ever doubted we could do what we did with regard to B-2 stealth bombers entering Iranian airspace and dropping these bunker busters. I think what is different here is President Trump has shown the willingness to do it.

despite domestic voices coming from both the right and left saying he shouldn't do it. So I think in this regard, it's more of his willingness to take action, which probably caught Russia's and Beijing's attention. Well, this is one criticism of the previous administration. As you know, Mr. Secretary, the failure to provide a satisfactory deterrence

in key waterways in this region. And I'm thinking more of the Red Sea over the last few years. As we think about the Strait of Hormuz, can you just share with us what you learned about the best way to provide a deterrence and to prevent the disruption of those waterways?

Yeah, well, look, I think sending a clear message, first of all, is important. But secondly, and I say this in light of the fact that the Iranian parliament yesterday voted that Iran should close the Strait of Hormuz, I think there's going to be a good argument if they strike back to take out the Iranian Navy, particularly those elements of the Navy that could shut down or obstruct

or hijack shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. So you could sink the mine layers of the Navy. You could go after the swarm boats that tend to come up upon cargo tankers and take them ashore. You could knock out...

Iranian missile batteries on the coastline. So I think to me that would be the top of my list if Iran tries to shut down the Strait or takes more aggressive action would be to take that card out of their hand because everybody is concerned about shutting down the Strait of Hormuz. And yet, even though it would fly in the face of their own interests, they continue to threaten that. - Difficult to answer the next question, sir, but just a final question. Do you get the sense that American involvement in this operation is over? Or do you think this might be ongoing?

I think it's to be determined based on how Iran responds. I think President Trump's instincts have long been, since the time I worked with him, he does not want to get involved in wars. He doesn't want this to go on and on and on. I think if Iran shoots missiles and they're largely feckless, I think we stand back. We probably continue to support the Israelis with munition and intelligence and defensive equipment.

air defense capabilities. But I think in terms of continuing strikes, we probably step back at that time and then urge a negotiation. By the way, a negotiation between Iran and Israel that's going to have to include a return to the nonproliferation regime and inspectors and verification mechanisms on the ground in Iran. That's absolutely critical. A deeply thoughtful conversation, sir, and we appreciate your time. The former U.S. Defense Secretary, Mark Esper. For enterprise organizations, managing all your food needs is a tall order.

This is an iHeart Podcast.