Former U.S. envoy reacts to Iran strikes and NATO summit

1 day ago 1

NPR's Scott Detrow speaks with former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Nicholas Burns regarding this week's developments in the U.S.-Iran conflict — and the NATO summit this week.

Transcript

SCOTT DETROW, HOST:

For a second consecutive day, the U.S. has launched new airstrikes against Iran. And in response, Iran fired missiles at U.S. allies in the Middle East. The strikes came hours after President Trump said the U.S.-Iran ceasefire deal was, quote, "over" at a NATO summit yesterday, and also insulted Iran's leaders.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I don't want to deal with them anymore. They're scum. You know what scum is? They're scum. They're sick people. They're led by sick people. And they're vicious, violent people.

DETROW: Here to talk about all the latest is Ambassador Nicholas Burns. He was the U.S. ambassador to NATO under President George W. Bush and led negotiations on Iran's nuclear program. Ambassador Burns, welcome.

NICHOLAS BURNS: Thanks so much, Scott.

DETROW: Let's just start with this. What has your reaction been to the last two days of events?

BURNS: I think it's clear that Iran does not want to honor the ceasefire. The rulers in Tehran clearly believe they have a stronger will than the United States, that they can outlast us. They can actually get a better deal in the Strait of Hormuz, where they're the toll keeper, where they can exact tolls of all commercial shipping. Imagine what kind of power that would give them. I think that's where they're heading. And that's why you've seen the administration push back with these airstrikes over the last couple of days because our American objective has to be - and the Trump administration has been clear about this - the strait has to be open to commercial shipping. It's a vital international waterway, and we can't abide Iran becoming a toll keeper, having this coercive impact over commercial shipping.

DETROW: Do you think that's true? Do you think that despite the fact it's Iran being bombed, it's Iranians being killed, that Iran has more tolerance to wait this out and let this keep going?

BURNS: Unfortunately, the nature of this regime in Tehran is - I don't think they've ever demonstrated that they have a clear interest in the welfare of their own people. But they clearly have an interest in the survival of their regime and the empowerment of that regime. And it's an extraordinary situation, Scott, that the Iranians took extraordinary blow to the military infrastructure and civilian infrastructure in the country, and yet, they suffered through it. They didn't flinch. We're dealing with an exceedingly difficult and often very untrustworthy government in Tehran. And it appears to be a government that's divided. There seems to be one faction that does want a ceasefire of the United States, but the stronger faction is defiant. They think that they're stronger than we are - stronger of will - and so they're testing us.

DETROW: Given all of that, what do you think the best card the U.S. has to play is? Is it airstrikes, like we've seen in the last few days? Is it sanctions? We saw a new round of sanctions on Iranian oil sales this past week. What do you think works here right now?

BURNS: I don't think there're any good options. I think the more likely option available to the president and the administration is do everything we have to do through U.S. naval power to keep the Strait of Hormuz open. Use American military power selectively, as you've seen the administration do over the last couple of days. When Iran violates a ceasefire by attacking shipping in the strait, the U.S. has had these surgical strikes but quite substantial strikes on Iran's military infrastructure.

I think it's important to put economic pressure on what the regime really cares about. They need revenue. And if we can limit that, that might be economic pressure. So I think that's where the administration will likely go. I don't think the Congress or the American people would support a return to full-scale warfare.

DETROW: I'm curious. Given everything you've said, do you personally think that this war was a misfire, a mistake by the U.S. and Israel?

BURNS: I think going back to assess the war, it was a major strategic mistake. Iran is, in some ways, stronger today than it was before. So the war was ill-advised, but there'll be time for lots of questions to be asked about why the war took place on February 28.

DETROW: I want to shift gears here. You, of course, were NATO ambassador at one point. What did you make of what happened in Turkey this week? You know, on one hand, President Trump pretty bombastic, pretty critical of allies throughout the public appearances at the meeting until the very end, when he comes out and just talks about how warm and cooperative everybody was behind closed doors. I was covering that and watching it, and I wasn't quite sure what to make. I'm wondering what you thought.

BURNS: I think there were two major outcomes, Scott, of the NATO summit in Istanbul. One on NATO itself, on its future, and the second on Ukraine. On NATO itself, you know, here's the irony. Again, President Trump can justifiably take some credit for having pushed the NATO allies to spend more on defense, which they needed to do, and they hadn't done for decades. And he just won't take the win because, despite this very good performance by the Europeans, President Trump repeated his claim that the United States should take ownership of Greenland. So I think he ought to be more positive about the progress that the Europeans made and the impact that he has had on defense spending.

But, Scott, there's more positive news on Ukraine. The president had a productive meeting with President Zelenskyy. President Trump said he supported Ukrainian drone strikes deep into Russian territory, and he might even support production of Patriot missile interceptors by Ukraine itself on Ukrainian territory. And I think - let's hope that President Trump will be consistent here and now turn full American support back to Ukraine and not be taken in by these blank promises from President Putin.

DETROW: That is Ambassador Nicholas Burns, former U.S. ambassador to NATO, now a professor at Harvard University's Kennedy School. Thank you so much.

BURNS: Thanks, Scott.

Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts may vary. Transcript text may be revised to correct errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org may be edited after its original broadcast or publication. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Read Entire Article