Hannah: U.S. launched a major form of economic warfare against Iran

Channel: Fox Business
Published: 05/17/2019 05:41 PM

John Hannah, former national security adviser to Vice President Cheney, on U.S. tensions with Iran. FOX Business Network (FBN) is a financial news channel delivering real-time information across all platforms that impact both Main Street and Wall Street. Headquartered in New York — the business...

There are some jitters, not the least of which us to concern. What'S going on in the persian gulf we have just learned. The uss abraham lincoln, is moving into position near iran. The president said that he doesn't want war. Of course, no one does the, but you can easily accidentally slip into something like that before my naturalist security adviser to vice president dick cheney joins us right no ...
, i'm happy to say in in the flash. We always talk remotely, but john anna here with us now good, to see it great to be with you nail. So much could go wrong so easily right when you and and we're getting all these reports that each sidemight be miss reading the other. What are you hearing? Well, of course, i haven't seen the intelligence, but i got. I don't really think this is a failure to communicate on behalf of these states. They both know what they're doing what the united states has done is left the nuclear deal and is launched a major form of economic warfare against the islamic republic of iran, and they are slowly but surely driving that country to its knees economically, and i think the Mullahs are looking for any way to get some leverage over the united states to inflict some degree of pain in the only ways that they know how, which is terrorism, which is economic, sabotageof, these ships and the gulf. So you have no doubt you're pretty sure that it would be them or those sympathetic to iran. I have almost no doubt i'm not the president.

We don't risk that, though, let's see i i always look like. If you know, you've got an armada of us ships and soldiers coming your way. Why would you risk rattling the tiger's cage? Well, i think precisely because they see this train bearing down on them that is driving their economy into a ditch and the iranians to their credit, are masters at asymmetrical warfare. It would be, as you say, suicidal for them to ever think about taking on the united states navy directlybut doing things against our allies in the gray zone, just beneath the threshold of something that would actually trigger a us military response. Look at what they've done in saudi arabia on the pumping stations in the us military response to invasion. Rann, no iii think what what trump is engaged in right now, i think, is a prudent demonstration of american might to send the signal to the iranians. Don'T think about doing anything, this is all about deterrence and avoiding war. If, in fact, the iranians were stupid enough to cross a u. s. red line, kill some american troops, for instance, or dramatically ramped up their nuclear program, then i think you're, probably looking at things atlish. Initially from the air to inflict pain on the iranians, but i wouldn't be limited once we start something like that's not a limited event, then you don't know where you go up the escalation ladder. That'S exactly right and i'm convinced the president doesn't want any part of that.

He wants to avoid war and he's determined along with his advisors, that the best way to do that is to send a message of overwhelming military strength. If the iranians were to decide to test us, there's been reports of discord within the white house among its foreign policy aides that john bolton wants to go one way. Many other members of the team want to go anotherand. Just everyone take a chill pill. I mean. Do you know anything about that? I i can't say i've got any direct insight. Listen john bolton is a guy with very strong views, sharp bureaucratic elbows. He wins an awful lot of the policy debates he gets in too, and i think there are a lot of people in washington looking now for it for a chance to undermine john, and i think that this is a lot of washington politics, but i think everybody In the administration is basically on message here that the purpose of this military and deployment here is to deter iran not to provoke a military conflict. Now you said it, that's it. Youdon'T know the intelligence. You can't verify it some earlier in the week that question did and whether it was worth the response that we're getting, i think it started with. We saw some missiles and some iranian vessels, the iranians, know nothing there and certainly nothing offensive and back and forth.

This whole communication a problem it's in the eye of the beholder, but we wouldn't be creating a crisis where there was none. Would we i've never been part of a us government? I'Ve been part, three administration's that that would have done that type of thing. Now i guess i'm asking is it's another weapons of mass destruction? Be careful you know. Well, i think you alwaysneed to be careful about the way you interpret the intelligent, which is important, and i think congress has got a point here why the administration does need to be going to congress and sharing as much as they can. There is a problem here in that i think we've probably had some foreign partners delivering intelligence to us. That may or may not be releasable to a broader audience, but but i do think the administration to the extent it can needs to be transparent with with congress and with the public as much as possible about the nature of the real threats that they're. Seeing here mike, would you add it to the extent of kent? Yes, isee preposition john hannah. Thank you very good, seeing it great to be with you now.

Watch Next