Abdullah Hayek talks impacts of Israel's strikes on Iran

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
My name is John Mounts, filling in for JT in
the situation in the Middle East is looking more and
more tedious. Joining me now is Abdullah Hayak. He is
a season Middle East analyst, bringing his timely, measured and
unique perspective to this high stakes situation. Yesterday, Donald Trump
had the following to say about the situation.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
Well, I don't want to get involved either, but I've
been saying for twenty years, maybe longer, that Iran cannot
have a nuclear weapon. I've been saying it for a
long time, and I think they were a few weeks
away from having one. Iran can't have a nuclear weapon.
Too much devastation, and they'd use it, you know. I
believe they use it. Others won't use it, but I
believe they'd use it.

Speaker 1 (00:39):
So, Abdullah, your contention is that US intervention could escalate
the situation and possibly create a regional conflict that could
spiral a lot of control.

Speaker 3 (00:50):
Thank you, John, exactly. Unfortunately, in the region, the United States,
in terms of military intervention on boots on the ground,
does not have a good track record right now. The
President has been explicitly clear on truth social and social
media that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon, reiterating

(01:10):
his point. For the past twenty years, Israel is under attack. Projectiles, missiles,
and drones are flying all over the region. There is
a very high chance that these drones or missiles might
attack the US military personnel and assets in the region,
specifically in the Gulfs. This all depends on the US

(01:32):
position whether it will become directly involved or indirectly involved,
And I guess the next few days, depending on what happens,
is going to determine that.

Speaker 1 (01:42):
Well, there's a lot of things in between direct and
indirect because you're right, we don't want to put boots
on the ground, and in this day and age of
modern warfare, I don't know that we need to put
boots on the ground. We can do an awful lot
from the air, even from with a drone from the air,
but still be very much involved. We've heard about this
bunker buster that we could fly over in one of

(02:02):
our aircraft that would fly at a very high altitude,
drop this bomb and could penetrate all the way down
to where we suspect that the uranium is being enriched.
But that's still very much US involvement in that could
that destabilize things, or could we make one strategic hit
like that in boom game over, much like what happened

(02:23):
during during World War Two with Japan. Well, I guess
it was two hits, but that end of the war.
Could we make one decisive hit in it be over?

Speaker 3 (02:32):
Unfortunately not John. The four though nuclear side, which you mentioned,
the Israelis have tried to hit twice but have failed
to penetrate it. For certain American munitions would do the
job and it would neutralize it. However, the repercussions of
such a strike would lead to an Iranian retaliation against

(02:54):
our forces in the region. Well, what happened is what
is going to happen exactly in Israel. Israel has invested
heavily in the Iron Dome, Dave Sling, and Arrow anti
missile defense systems, and look what happened to Tel Aviv. Unfortunately,
we have twenty four dead in Tel Aviv. It's been
the biggest strike on Tel Aviv since its inception. The

(03:17):
same would be applied to US personnel in bases and
units in the Gulfs such as aludaid In, Hotel Al Dafra,
and the UAE, and of course the US Navy fifth
Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. All of them would be subject
to Iranian retaliation. So I think the question is are

(03:39):
we willing to take that high risk for eliminating a
nuclear program that might not just be eliminated right then
and there. There's a very high chance that they might
redevelop it.

Speaker 1 (03:52):
And it's not just the risk is for US, but
there's a much greater risk for Israel because the Iron
Dome we hear about it, it's not really a dome,
of course, it's a whole battery of missiles that are
very well programmed to be able to go up and
take out incoming stuff. But at some point they do,
as you point out, they do miss and also those
missiles are not cheap each one of them. It costs
I think, like you know what, a million dollars or

(04:14):
something like that. So every time they fire off three
or four of those are three or four million dollars
just boom, just blown up literally, And that's not an
infinite number of missiles they have. So are we supplying
those How are they getting those things?

Speaker 3 (04:27):
Well, it's US funding. We don't supply them directly. It's
Israeli manufactured. Is really built with US funding. As part
of the US defense that Israel receives annually. You've said it,
the cost ratio for Israeli defense systems versus the Iranian
projectiles is extremely high. It's a very wide gap. The

(04:50):
Iranian drones in specific, but as well as to a
certain extent, the Iranian ballistic missiles are done in a
very cheap way compared to American and Israeli technology, so
they can afford to fire hundreds of them at a
relatively low cost versus what it would cost the Israelis

(05:10):
and Americans to intercept them. So they're winning on that
end for sure. But despite you know, Tel Aviv being hit,
there are also other factors involved in this. First of all,
you have the Kingdom of Jordan right now, in which
these missiles and projectiles are flying over right now as
we speak, because Jordan happens to be in the middle

(05:31):
between them. The same thing goes to Lebanon and Syria
and Iraq. Any minute a mechanical error or an interception
over a heavy populated area could result on these areas
being struck by the shrapnel and the debris. So I
think the whole region is under fire by this because
the same risk of you being the target is also

(05:53):
the same risk of you being on the way of
the target.

Speaker 1 (05:56):
That's very true. Collateral damage is a very real thing
and doing a high ACAC in the Middle East analyst
bringing his perspective to the situation, Abdullah, thank you so
much for joining us on Alabama's morning News