Amna Nawaz:

For perspective now on the situation with Iran, we get two views.

Alan Eyre is now at the Middle East Institute after serving in the U.S. government for four decades. He was part of the Obama administration's negotiating team for the Iran nuclear deal, which President Trump pulled out of in 2018. And Miad Maleki was born and raised in Iran, and until last year he was associate director for sanction targeting with a focus on Iran in the U.S. Treasury Department. He's now a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

Welcome to you both. Thanks for being here.

Alan Eyre, Middle East Institute:

Thanks for having us.

Amna Nawaz:

Miad, I will begin with you. Will this U.S. Naval blockade, will it force the Iranians to change course?

Miad Maleki:

I think so. I think it's -- really, with the blockade, the regime now has two options. Come to its term -- come to back to the negotiations table and accept some kind of a, if not a full deal, but some agreement to continue to negotiate, buy some time, or just accept the fact that the economy is going to collapse.

I think domestically the Iranian regime knows that they're more vulnerable than they are on the battlefield. I mean, as a matter of fact, they shot down the Internet for over 40 days. That's about $50 million a day in economic damages that they're taking on, only because they're worried about uprising in country.

So they're taking that hit just to avoid any kind of domestic pressure. They're going to face that domestic pressure soon if the blockade is effective.

Amna Nawaz:

Alan, what do you make of that? You think the U.S. blockade will have that impact on the regime?

Alan Eyre:

Unfortunately, I'm a little less optimistic than Miad is.

I think, even if the blockade is perfectly done and effective, it will take too long to have the requisite effect on Iran, because there's two dynamics here. One is, the global economy suffering because the strait is closed. And the other is whatever pain we can inflict on Iran by a fully effective blockade.

But they have land borders. There's other ways of getting things in and out of Iran. So it might be effective over time, but too long a time frame for it to matter. Secondly, it's escalatory, not just giving Iran more targets to shoot at, but I find it hard to believe the United States is going to try to board, for example, a Chinese vessel or a Pakistani cargo and interdict that and stop that trade.

So I think it's partially performative. It helps put some additional pressure on Iran, but it won't get Iran to accept current U.S. terms.

Amna Nawaz:

What about that, Miad? I mean, the point is here too, does it incentivize them to come back to the table and negotiate or to see through the threats that they made, which is saying no port in the region will be safe if the blockade...

(Crosstalk)

Miad Maleki:

I disagree with Alan on the point that there are alternative ways for Iran to continue its trade.

You can't truck in $160 million a day in import. There's no alternative to Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz for Iran's trade. I mean, you're looking at 90 percent of its economy really relying on the trade that goes through the Strait of Hormuz.

They can't continue to take -- they can't sustain running an economy that, can't import anything, can't export anything. And then eventually they're going to have to drop their oil extraction. And when you drop your oil extraction because you're running out of oil storage, then you're going to have to shut down your wells, and then you're going to have strikes. You're going to have labor strikes.

You won't be able to pay salaries. They have issues with taxation. They can't collect taxes right now because they have shut down the Internet, because they can't produce metals and they can't produce petrochemicals.

So state of the economy is so vulnerable domestically that I don't think anything can replace the export and trade that we rely on through the Persian Gulf.

Alan Eyre:

Well, I think -- again, I think Miad is right, but I think the time frame is wrong.

In the long run, you're right. A fully effective blockade brings Iran to its knees. But like Keynes said, in the long run, we're all dead. And by the time it's effective, the world economy has gone over a cliff because the Strait of Hormuz is closed.

We saw during COVID that Iran can get by, it can eke by with drastically decreased economic activity, drastically decreased exports of oil. So, yes, he's quite right that it's an effective tool, but not in the time frame we need to put pressure on Iran.

Amna Nawaz:

What do you see Alan -- let met stick with you for a moment. What do you see as enough pressure, sufficient pressure to bring Iran back to the negotiating table and also that might get it to accept some of the U.S. demands so far? Do you see anything?

(Crosstalk)

Alan Eyre:

I don't think that's in our bag of tricks.

I think pressure works best in complement with negotiations. We have enough pressure to bring Iran to the table. Iran wants to come to the table. But once they're at the table, for Iran, this is an existential battle. And so there are certain red lines, just like the U.S. has red lines.

If what's most important for the U.S. is the nuclear issue, there's a deal to be had. Unfortunately for President Trump, it's a lot like the JCPOA. And that's one of the reasons why he doesn't want to do it. But what's more important than any possible nuclear deal is, again, largely for time reasons, the strait has to be opened as fully as possible, as quickly as possible.

Amna Nawaz:

Do you see Iran accepting any of those demands, or does the U.S. need to rethink them, when we're talking about giving up the right to enrichment, opening up the Strait of Hormuz?

Miad Maleki:

You know, I think if Iran accepts those 10 demands that President Trump put before them, then, on that day, I would say that there was a regime change.

I think the 10 demands that we put before them, if they accept all 10, then I would say the regime changed, because they really changed what the principles of these regimes, not supporting these terrorist proxies, the enrichment of uranium that they have been, really they have invested close to three -- hundreds of billions of dollars in the nuclear enrichment program.

If the Iranians accept all 10 points, then it would be a really different regime that it is we're dealing with. That's why I don't think they're going to accept the 10. I think, with this regime, you can't get a deal that would serve our national security interests.

And I think, with blockade, we have an opportunity to either really see a regime that will change its behavior, which I would say regime change, or really a collapse in Iran's economy, which is going to lead to an opposition movement.

Amna Nawaz:

Alan, do you see -- where do you see the U.S. line that might exist for the resumption of military operations here?

Alan Eyre:

I think it's all -- I mean, President Trump has already said that he might do limited strikes.

I think, for domestic political reasons, he's loath to do that because it will spook the markets and lead to further economic price rises. But he's clearly exasperated. He's only got one gear. And that's increased pressure. And that's not working.

So I don't know what the next step is. I mean, unfortunately, this administration, U.S. administration, is both unwilling and unable to do serious, sustained negotiations. So a diplomatic solution is even harder for that reason.

So, yes, I -- it's hard for me to find a way out of this mess.

Amna Nawaz:

Miad, we should point out, as we speak here, Vice President Vance has been on FOX and he's repeatedly saying that the ball is in the Iranians' court. What do you see the Iranians doing in this moment?

Miad Maleki:

You know, I think we just -- I think, at this point, they're just trying to think how they can cause some increased costs on the blockade, whether it's going to be some asymmetric operations against tankers that are in the Persian Gulf, going after some of the oil refinery or oil facilities in the Gulf.

They're probably in the planning phase, because they understand this blockade is going to lead to economic collapse internally. It'll be really the end of the way that their economy is set up right now.

And back to Alan's point, I think the diplomatic approach with this regime is just not going to work at this point. I think there's nothing but pressure that you can really focus on to bring this regime to either accept some of the terms you're putting before them or really just let the Iranians take the government back.

The regime that killed 40,000 -- I think the numbers are much higher, 40,000 innocent Iranians in 48 hours, it's not a type of regime that you can make a peaceful deal with. They shut down the Internet for 47 days. Who would do that?

I mean, you cut the entire population out of the international communication systems. I don't think anything other than pressure would work with this regime at this point.

Amna Nawaz:

Alan, I will give you the last word here. Miad says no chance of any diplomatic deal to get out of this. You say?

Alan Eyre:

I think that's very unlikely too.

Again, it's a peculiarly American misconception to think that every problem has a solution. We shouldn't have entered this war. There was no need to. It was unnecessary. And, at this point, I think we should be looking not for the ideal solution, but just the least bad solution.

Amna Nawaz:

Alan Eyre, Miad Maleki, very good to see you both. Thank you so much.

Alan Eyre:

Thank you.

Miad Maleki:

Thanks for having us