New York Times columnist Tom Friedman told CNN’s “Smerconish” that he would love to see the Islamic Republic in Iran replaced by a Democratic regime, but letting Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu get credit for succeeding at overthrowing it like this might not be worth it.
“Nothing would improve the region more than the replacement of this regime in Iran,” Friedman said. “The problem is I really don’t want to see Bibi Netanyahu or Donald Trump politically strengthened by this war because they are two awful human beings.”
“They are both engaged in anti- democratic projects in their own countries. They’re both alleged crooks. They are terrible, terrible people doing terrible things to America’s standing in the world and Israel standing in the world,” Friedman said about Trump and Netanyahu. “So I really find myself torn. I want to see Iran militarily defeated, but I do not want to see these two terrible people strengthened.”
Here’s what he suggests: “Iran gives up its more than 950 pounds of nearly bomb grade highly enriched uranium and in return, the United States gives up on regime change. Both sides would then agree to end all hostilities and that’s it. No more American and Israeli bombing, no more Iranian and Hezbollah rockets, no more Strait of Hormuz blockade, and for darn sure, no U.S. troops on the ground landing in Iran.”
Tom, I recognize the events are very, very fluid. I wonder if that’s still your opinion, or are we too late for that kind of a deal?
THOMAS FRIEDMAN, THE NEW YORK TIMES: You know, that was written while the war was still going on, Michael, it’s probably too late for that simple a deal right now. The Iranians have recognized the leverage they’ve gained from getting control of the Straits of Hormuz effectively. And so there’s clearly going to have to be some arrangement that addresses that as well.
SMERCONISH: The enriched uranium has dropped in and out of things that the President and Secretary Rubio have discussed during this course of time. But after you published that piece on Truth Social: “There will be no enrichment of uranium and the United States will working with Iran, dig up and remove all of the deeply buried nuclear dust.”
Yesterday the president said this from the tarmac at Andrews: “No nuclear weapons, number one. You know, I think it’s already been regime change, but we never had that as a criteria. No nuclear weapon. That’s 99 percent of us.
SMERCONISH: Maybe you played a role in elevating it again on his agenda. But how do you see a possible solution given how events have transpired?
FRIEDMAN: You know, Michael, this has really become such a wicked problem that there’s not going to be an easy one that doesn’t involve Trump eating a full plate of crow and maybe the Iranians to some extent as well. The only stable solution has to be to go back to the situation in the Strait of Hormuz before the war where you had simply free passage for everybody.
And that is going to be, I think, the most critical point from an American point of view. We will give up on regime change. At the same time, though, the Iranians are going to insist, you can be sure of this, on at least the right to continue to enrich uranium. That will drive the Israelis crazy and some on Trump’s right in America as well. That’s not going to be an easy one to resolve.
And then there’s Lebanon. Iran is insisting on its right to support Hezbollah in its — in effect occupation of Lebanon. Israel will resist that. So, you know, one of the problems here is that there are so many moving parts. It’s such a Rubik’s Cube that to find the perfect equilibrium point is going to be really challenging.
SMERCONISH: You’ve written yourself that you would welcome regime change. The president claims that there’s been regime change, there’s been leadership change, but there hasn’t been regime change. True.
FRIEDMAN: Yes, there’s been some leadership change. Obviously, certain people have been killed. But this is the Iranian regime. It goes right down to the mayoral level. All the institutions are the same.
Yes. I find myself, Michael, in a situation where I really want to see Iran defeated militarily because this regime is a terrible regime for its people in the region. And nothing would improve the region more than the replacement of this regime in Iran with one was focused on enabling its people to realize their full potential and integrating peacefully with other countries and stop occupying Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.
So I’m all for that. The problem is I really don’t want to see Bibi Netanyahu or Donald Trump politically strengthened by this war because they are two awful human beings. They are both engaged in anti- democratic projects in their own countries. They’re both alleged crooks. They are terrible, terrible people doing terrible things to America’s standing in the world and Israel standing in the world.
And so I really find myself torn. I want to see Iran militarily defeated, but I do not want to see these two terrible people strengthened.
