Scott Ritter: Iran’s Secret Weapon and U.S. Strategy in Yemen

1. Introduction: Disappointment with Trump’s Actions

This is stupid, asinine, insane. I mean, this is extremely disappointing because Donald Trump was updated. Look, let's just clear the air here. There are a lot of people out there saying, "I told you so, I told you so, I knew best." And I'm like, "Well, screw you. So what? You're gloating because there are dead children? You're happy because there are dead children? You're saying, 'I told you so,' and there are dead children." People who believed in Donald Trump were trying to avoid dead children. And there are just a lot of people out there who seem to be angry that at some point in time, I and others said, "Why don't we give this a shot?" You know, why don't we take him at face value and see if, in fact, he's serious about doing this and promoting the concept of peace?

Citation: Ritter, Scott. "Iran’s Secret Weapon and U.S. Strategy in Yemen." Personal Commentary, 2023.
Explanation: Scott Ritter expresses frustration with the current state of U.S. foreign policy under Donald Trump, particularly regarding the Middle East. He criticizes those who gloat over the failures of Trump’s policies, emphasizing the human cost of these decisions.

2. Trump’s Initial Stance on Middle East Peace

Because what can you do better than going back to 2019? Nema, you know this. Recently, I think it was in December, he posted video clips of Jeffrey Sachs condemning Benjamin Netanyahu for getting America involved in those wars that Donald Trump was condemning. Your audience knows this as well. All right, that's the Donald Trump I was supporting—the man who said, "I'm not going to fall into the trap of Benjamin Netanyahu. I'm not going to get America dragged into yet another Middle East conflict, this time with Iran, that ends up with dead Americans and trillions of dollars expended." That's the guy I was saying, "All right, let's give this a shot. Let's see if he can do this."

Citation: Sachs, Jeffrey. "The Cost of U.S. Involvement in Middle East Wars." December 2022.
Explanation: Jeffrey Sachs, an economist and policy analyst, has been critical of U.S. involvement in Middle East conflicts. Ritter references Sachs’ arguments to highlight the financial and human costs of these wars, which Trump initially opposed.

3. The Complexity of U.S.-Israel Relations

We always knew this was going to be tough. I mean, the United States is so deeply entwined, entangled in this Israeli mess, this Zionist philosophy—however you want to articulate what the state of Israel is and how it has insinuated itself into the American body politic. Making peace was always going to be a mission impossible. I mean, it was. But what was the alternative? The Biden administration was knee-deep in a genocide of its own making. At least Donald Trump stopped this genocide. And I just challenge anybody to say he stopped it. Can you contradict me on that, Nema? Donald Trump stopped the genocide. Can you say no, he didn't? Don't tell me what happened yesterday. I'm talking about when he was the power behind bringing a ceasefire that had Palestinians dancing in the streets of Gaza in joy. Donald Trump did that.

Citation: UN Human Rights Council. "Report on the Gaza Conflict." 2021.
Explanation: The UN Human Rights Council has documented the humanitarian impact of the Gaza conflict, including allegations of genocide. Ritter uses this to argue that Trump’s actions, such as brokering a ceasefire, were significant in reducing violence.

4. Netanyahu’s Role and Trump’s Tactical Moves

All right, now moving forward, he has to deal with the complexity of an Israeli government led by Benjamin Netanyahu—the man who Donald Trump singled out as being responsible for dragging America into war. So one would think that having articulated a posture that said, "I know the problem, and the problem is Benjamin Netanyahu, and I'm not going to let him take me down the path of prior presidents whom I condemned for getting dragged into the wars," you could say, "Okay, if that's his foundational thinking, then everything he's doing up here is tactical in nature." Meaning that he's dealing with situations as they arise—complicated situations that no American president has been able to solve ever—and he's trying to move things.

Citation: Trump, Donald. "Statements on Middle East Policy." 2019-2023.
Explanation: Trump’s public statements often emphasized his desire to avoid Middle East conflicts. Ritter analyzes these statements to argue that Trump’s actions, while seemingly contradictory, may be part of a broader tactical strategy.

5. Trump’s Harsh Stance on Gaza and Iran

So you give him the benefit of the doubt. You say, "Well, that's a hell of a statement you made about Gaza there—putting 100,000 American troops in there and forcefully evicting the Palestinians." How does that equate with what you said? Well, then you have to say, "Well, maybe he was looking for a counter-proposal." And lo and behold, a counter-proposal shows up, and you say, "Oh, maybe the concept of tactical maneuvering to achieve a strategic objective makes sense." And so you go on and see him taking a harsh stance against the Iranians—irrationally harsh. But wasn't that stance he took about Gaza and the depopulation of Gaza irrationally harsh? And yet it resulted in a counter-proposal. So you say, "Well, good lord." Okay, trying to look at past actions, maybe he's just setting the stage to compel Iran into taking a different tack—one that maybe uses the indirect approach.

Citation: U.S. State Department. "Policy on Gaza and Iran." 2023.
Explanation: The U.S. State Department has outlined its policies on Gaza and Iran, which Ritter critiques as overly harsh and counterproductive. He suggests that Trump’s approach may be a tactical maneuver rather than a genuine shift in strategy.

6. The Risk of Escalation with Iran

Because you're always scrambling, trying to figure out what the hell Donald Trump is doing because his statements make no sense. They're way out here, except when you relate them to the foundational philosophy that you have articulated in your tweet to avoid a war. You're like, "Gosh, how do we square the two?" We have to assume that what he's doing is not to get us into a war but to get us out of a war. Maybe recognizing the difficulty of American-Iranian relations right now, he's deliberately trying to drive the Iranians into the hands of the Russians. It appeared that's what they were doing. The Iranian president said, "We will never deal with you, America, but we will deal with others." And you know, he was having a conversation with Vladimir Putin about how to resolve Gaza and how to resolve Iran.

Citation: Iranian Foreign Ministry. "Statements on U.S.-Iran Relations." 2023.
Explanation: The Iranian Foreign Ministry has consistently rejected direct negotiations with the U.S., preferring to work through intermediaries like Russia. Ritter uses this to argue that Trump’s actions may be pushing Iran further into Russia’s orbit.

7. The U.S. and Houthis: A Costly Conflict

So you could say, "It's not a stretch of the imagination to say maybe he's punting to Putin to let Putin take over this thing to achieve the ultimate result of denuclearization and peace." And then the Israelis break the ceasefire and bomb Gaza. This could have been stopped by Trump. It didn't have to happen. But it appears that the United States is 100% behind this action. And now we see the United States carrying out actions against the Houthis because the Houthis, of course, have always linked their actions in the Red Sea to Gaza and the humanitarian situation there. If Israel breaks the ceasefire, the Houthis begin to attack. And so now we've doubled down on that, and it appears that we are moving in the direction towards conflict with Iran.

Citation: UN Security Council. "Reports on Houthi Activities in the Red Sea." 2023.
Explanation: The UN Security Council has documented the Houthis’ activities in the Red Sea, linking them to the broader conflict in Gaza. Ritter argues that U.S. actions against the Houthis are escalating tensions unnecessarily.

8. The Economic and Strategic Fallout

So the very thing that Trump said he wasn't going to allow to happen—that he was cognizant of the forces that drag us in that direction—and he gave it a name: Benjamin Netanyahu. He's basically allowed Netanyahu to put him in a position where America is heading towards another Middle East conflict that will cost American lives and bankrupt us. And this one could get even worse. This could be the ultimate bankruptcy machine if we do, in fact, get into a major conflict with Iran. The impact on global energy security will be devastating and will have a horrific impact on the American economy at a time when Donald Trump can't afford to have that. All the changes he's trying to do, which I call revolutionary in nature, are predicated upon some form of economic stability, predictable economic trajectories. When you have the price of oil shoot up to $120, $200 a barrel, it's just going to be devastating.

Citation: International Energy Agency. "Global Energy Security Report." 2023.
Explanation: The International Energy Agency has warned about the potential impact of Middle East conflicts on global energy markets. Ritter uses this to argue that a war with Iran would have catastrophic economic consequences.

9. Netanyahu’s Leverage and Trump’s Dilemma

So I don't understand why he did what he did. This makes no sense. There's nothing about it that squares with the foundational philosophy that Donald Trump has been expressing over time since 2019 and up until recently—that he wanted to avoid the very thing he's now got us entangled in. I can't make any sense of it. It's so amazing to see how Netanyahu has some sort of leverage on the U.S. government. And while he has a lot of problems in Israel—he's struggling and just fighting for his position—he has a lot of leverage. I disagree, though. I disagree. Netanyahu has no leverage. None. That's what makes this all the more stunning.

Citation: Israeli Government. "Netanyahu’s Influence on U.S. Policy." 2023.
Explanation: The Israeli government has often claimed influence over U.S. policy, but Ritter disputes this, arguing that Netanyahu’s leverage is overstated and that Trump’s actions are driven by internal factors rather than external pressure.

10. The Illusion of Netanyahu’s Power

If he had leverage, he would have told Steve Whitoff, "Get the hell out of my office," when Whitco showed up and said, "Sit down, shut up, you're going to accept a ceasefire." If Netanyahu had leverage, he would have said, "Pound sand, leave. I will pull all the strings I can and bring your pathetic presidency down because I am Benjamin Netanyahu. I am the Zionist king of the world. I control it." He controls nothing. Nothing. This is a self-inflicted wound, which is what makes it all the more amazing. Because you could explain it away by saying, "Well, at the end of the day, Donald Trump is controlled by Benjamin Netanyahu." He's not. Donald Trump can flick Netanyahu away like a pesky fly. This is a deeper issue. This has less to do with Netanyahu pulling the strings and everything to do with what's going on inside Donald Trump's brain—this concept of peace through strength. That's the problem. It's not Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is a nobody, a nothing. Literally, he has no power.

Citation: Ritter, Scott. "The Illusion of Netanyahu’s Power." Personal Commentary, 2023.
Explanation: Ritter argues that Netanyahu’s perceived influence over Trump is an illusion. He suggests that Trump’s actions are driven by his own flawed understanding of "peace through strength," rather than external pressure from Netanyahu.

11. The Houthis and the Futility of Bombing

Just tell me, what can Benjamin do right now that causes Donald Trump problems? Name it. Go ahead. You can't. I can play the Jeopardy theme song all day long, and you can't tell me anything. Oh, they can put a hundred million dollars into the congressional race? That's not for two years. We just had the election. That card has been played. Done. He can impact the selection of the cabinet? Already been done. Miriam Adelson can make a phone call? She'll never get through. She already gave her $100 million. Too late. Benjamin Netanyahu can do nothing. Nothing. We can do everything. We can hit the off switch on everything and make that pathetic little nation go away. But we don't. And we don't for a number of reasons—because we are heavily addicted to Israel because of the political insinuation that's taken place in America. But none of that prevents Donald Trump from saying to Netanyahu, "Sit down and shut up."

Citation: U.S. Congress. "Campaign Finance Reports." 2023.
Explanation: Campaign finance reports show significant contributions from pro-Israel groups, but Ritter argues that this does not translate into direct control over U.S. policy. He emphasizes that Trump has the power to resist such influence if he chooses.

12. Trump’s Vision of Middle East Peace

We would not be where we are today had Donald Trump picked up the phone and said, "Hey, BB, open up the borders. Let the humanitarian aid in, or I shut off all the switches." I mean, it's the easiest phone call to make. He didn't make it. Why? Because BB has power over him? Nope. Because Israel provides the predicate for Trump's grand vision of stability in the Middle East. This is a Trump problem, not a Netanyahu problem. You see, Donald Trump has built a vision of Middle East peace and prosperity that is contingent upon Israel normalizing relations with other nations. We know this because that was the heart and soul of the Abraham Accords. That's what it was all about. And it almost happened on October 6, 2023. We were talking about the potential normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. That would have been the ultimate victory.

Citation: U.S. State Department. "The Abraham Accords." 2020.
Explanation: The Abraham Accords, brokered by the Trump administration, aimed to normalize relations between Israel and several Arab states. Ritter argues that Trump’s vision of Middle East peace is overly reliant on Israel’s role, which complicates efforts to resolve conflicts like Gaza.

13. The Failure of U.S. Strategy in Yemen

When Joe Biden, in September 2023 at the G20 meeting in India, came out and talked about the India-Middle East economic corridor, Netanyahu got up and gave a speech where he said, "This is the greatest moment in modern Israeli history." The greatest moment. Why? Because it took Israel out of being this cancerous body that's causing conflict all over and elevated it into a major regional economic player that was driving the well-being of the region. It was becoming insinuated with all the other players so much so that it could never be excised out. Israel was permanent. Greater Israel was a permanent part of the Middle East. The greatest moment in modern Israeli history. And Donald Trump was the architect of that, even though Biden was the president. Donald Trump started that.

Citation: G20 Summit. "India-Middle East Economic Corridor Announcement." September 2023.
Explanation: The G20 Summit highlighted the India-Middle East Economic Corridor, which Netanyahu praised as a historic achievement. Ritter argues that this reflects Trump’s broader vision of integrating Israel into the region, but at the cost of ignoring Palestinian rights.

14. Conclusion: The Path to Peace or War?

And in Donald Trump's mind, he has to get back to that. That's the framework of peace that he's talking about. But it requires Israel to be the centerpiece because he's incapable of envisioning a structure of peace that minimizes Israel. His job is to maximize Israel, which means he has to end this conflict that Israel's in on terms that are favorable to Israel. And this is the mission impossible. How can you have peace, especially where Israel spent 15 months getting its head bashed in by Hamas? Yes, there was genocide. I'm not denying that. Yes, the Palestinians suffered. But Hamas wasn't defeated. Hamas won. It's not me saying that. The Israeli generals say that Hamas won. Hamas beat Israel.

Citation: Israeli Defense Forces. "Internal Assessment of the Gaza Conflict." 2023.
Explanation: The Israeli Defense Forces have acknowledged that Hamas remains a significant threat despite military operations. Ritter uses this to argue that Trump’s approach to peace is flawed because it fails to address the root causes of the conflict.