WikiLeaks logo
The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...

The Global Intelligence Files

Search the GI Files

The Global Intelligence Files


Agenda: With George Friedman and Robert Kaplan on Iran

Released on 2012-10-12 10:00 GMT

Email-ID 3921009
Date 2011-11-11 14:36:09
Stratfor logo
Agenda: With George Friedman and Robert Kaplan on Iran

November 11, 2011 | 1317 GMT
Click on image below to watch video:

In the wake of the latest IAEA report on Iran, STRATFOR CEO George
Friedman and special guest Robert Kaplan discuss potential threats to
world oil supplies from the Persian Gulf, and U.S. President Barack
Obama's limited options.

Editor*s Note: Transcripts are generated using speech-recognition
technology. Therefore, STRATFOR cannot guarantee their complete

Related Links
* Iran's Nuclear Program and its Nuclear Option

Colin: Few will be surprised by the latest report from the International
Atomic Energy Agency on Iran. Its finding that the Tehran regime has
computer models that can only be used to develop a nuclear weapon has
triggered a new wave of speculation on the prospects of an Israeli
strike. But there may be other more pressing concerns as U.S. forces
leave Iraq.

Welcome to Agenda with George Friedman, and joining also this week is a
special guest - the writer and defense expert Robert Kaplan.

The obvious question as we move to a point where Israeli bombers can fly
in clear skies over Iraq, or soon will be able to be, is this "high
noon" for Iran?

Robert: Not necessarily, because just the fact that they are moving
closer to developing a weapons capacity for their nuclear material does
not mean that they can miniaturize, put it on a warhead and send it
somewhere. It could be a long way from that. Of course it is a much more
acute threat for Israel than it is for the United States. You also have
to consider the possibility that so what if Iran has three or four
nuclear weapons with no air defense system, relative to what the
Americans can do. But what does that mean? Isn't the 100 nuclear weapons
in Pakistan a much greater threat? Or would the Saudis respond by
parking Pakistani nuclear weapons in Saudi Arabia, thereby fusing the
South Asian and the greater Middle East crisis into one? There are a lot
of questions out there and they will continue to play out. But this is
nothing particularly new at this point.

Colin: So George, there's all this talk of an Israeli strike, and we've
heard it before, is it just rhetoric?

George: We are at a critical point. The critical point is not about
nuclear weapons. The critical point is that the U.S. is completing its
withdrawal from Iraq. We've seen recently the arrests of Sunnis in Iraq
by the Maliki government and the Iranians are increasing their power.
The balance of power is shifting in the region. The United States and
Israel both want the Iranians to pull back and as has happened several
times before, they increased the drumbeat of the threat of nuclear
weapons in order to create a psychological situation where the Iranians
would reconsider their position. The problem that you have here is that
the Israelis really don't have the ability to carry out the kind of
strikes we are talking about. They certainly have nuclear weapons if
they want to use nuclear weapons on some of the facilities near Tehran.
The more interesting question is do they have the ability to carry out
the multiday attacks on multiple sites with a relatively small air
force? The answer is they may be but they cannot deal with something
else. What if the Iranians respond by putting mines in the Straits of

Colin: And this is critical, isn't it, because 40 percent of the world's
sea-bound oil goes through the Straits. The Iranians have the longest
coastline along the Straits of Hormuz and along the whole Persian Gulf.

Robert: The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps navy, which is separate
from the Iranian navy, is developing a very impressive asymmetric
warfare capability of suicide boats that can ram into everything from
merchant tankers to destroyers. Keep in mind in this "hot house" media
environment where the world is all together, simply pinprick attacks on
destroyers of other nations will garner incredible media news. It will
seem to be an attack on an American Navy that has been inviolate since
World War II in fact.

George: This is really crucial, that the psychological effect is
substantial. But the effect on markets in this case is substantial. If
the perception was that the Iranians have the ability to mine the
Straits or some other way threaten these extremely expensive tankers
that are up to a billion dollars including their cargo, which has to be
insured, could really be threatened. The price of oil would rise
dramatically and stock markets would tumble in a situation where Europe
is in a major crisis and the financial system of the world is shaky. If
we suddenly wound up with $200, $300 or $400 for a barrel of oil, the
global landscape could be reshaped forever.

Robert: Keep in mind that personalities enter into this a bit. Israeli
Prime Minister Netanyahu has been seen for years and even decades in
fact seen as a very flawed personality in and of himself, regardless of
whether you agree or disagree with his viewpoints. As we enter into a
presidential election season in the United States where even someone
like President Obama would be forced not to criticize Israel publicly,
the Israelis thinking cynically - and all governments think cynically -
would say this is a window of opportunity for us to bomb Iran, with
fewer American domestic repercussions.

George: That may be but it's very important that there is one domestic
American repercussion. If the oil is cut off, the effect on the United
States would be enormous and Israel will be blamed for a massive
recession or depression.

Robert: But as I was saying, Netanyahu has the kind of personality where
he would risk that.

Colin: This will be a catastrophe given the situation that could evolve
in the Persian Gulf. What kind of advice is Obama's defense department
giving him? Given that he is a man of great caution, I think what would
you expect him to be doing?

George: I think it is very clear what they are saying to him - bluff. He
is going out very publicly, which you don't do if you are planning a
major attack, and very publicly bluffing.

Robert: The U.S. Defense Department does not have the appetite for war
with Iran. Remember, all Iranians, not just the regime, supports Iran
being a nuclear power. Ten years from now we might have closer relations
with Tehran than we have with Riyadh. The last thing we want to do is
alienate even the Iranians who are sympathetic to us. Iran is a crucial
country. It fronts not just the oil-rich Persian Gulf but also the
oil-rich Caspian Sea. No other country does that. It has a window onto
Central Asia, which no other country in the Middle East has. So it's
enormously important. We are playing for high long-term stakes with
Iran, which may be a future ally of the United States.

George: We have to also recognize that with their increased power in
Iraq, with the probability that the al Assad regime in Syria - Iranian
allies - can survive, and with Hezbollah in Lebanon, we are looking at a
situation where Iranian influences could stretch from the Afghan border
to the Mediterranean. This is an enormously dangerous situation and it's
not really about nuclear weapons.

Robert: Afghanistan to the Mediterranean approximates the ancient
Persian empire of antiquity. Remember, Persia - Iran - as a linguistic
cultural force extends from Alawite Syria eastward right up to the Indus
River in Pakistan.

Colin: George and Robert, we need to leave it there. Thank you very
much. That is George Friedman and special guest Robert Kaplan ending
Agenda for this week.

Click for more videos

Give us your thoughts Read comments on
on this report other reports

For Publication Reader Comments

Not For Publication
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
(c) Copyright 2011 Stratfor. All rights reserved.