Thursday, 19 June 2025

Topics: Israel-Iran conflict.

E&OE………

LAURA JAYES: Well, joining me live now is former Australian Ambassador to Israel Senator Dave Sharma. Dave, great to see you. I don't want to ask you to comment directly on American politics, of course, but this does, does show the split in America, doesn't it, about what Donald Trump should and shouldn't do, according to his base. I mean, he came into office for a second time promising, really to remove America from these overseas wars, wanting to end these wars. Now he's on the brink of entering another one.

DAVE SHARMA: Look, I, you know, I've followed that debate. I would just say I think some of those divisions are more exaggerated than real. I mean, I don't think, obviously the United States has not taken a decision - but I do not think the United States is contemplating a campaign like in Iraq or Afghanistan in the early 2000s. I think they're contemplating a series of quite limited operations and strikes targeted against particular Iranian facilities, particularly the Fordow nuclear enrichment plan in a way that I don't think would entangle the United States in another conflict. Now, I don't know what they have in mind, I don't know what the options are they're contemplating, but everything I've seen seems to suggest that it would be a very limited operation.

LAURA JAYES: Yeah, I agree with you on that Dave. But what I think we see among the MAGA crew and now the divisions among the Conservatives, is they see parallels to what happened in Iraq, weapons of mass destruction. That has been described again when it comes to Iran's nuclear program. But the difference was that war was justified, in part as a hunt for, you know, one man, Osama bin Laden, who was behind the 9/11 attacks. Is this where it's different and therefore doesn't require, boots on the ground and therefore a drawn-out conflict?

DAVE SHARMA: Well, look, I mean, I would just point out in Trump's first administration, so in 2020, he authorised and conducted a strike against Qassam Soleimani, who was the commander of the Quds Force within the IRGC. As far as I can tell, his base didn't erupt it and no one thought he was embroiling the United States in another conflict. And as I said, I would expect, you know, if anything happens, this would be a limited operation. But I also note that President Trump is holding out the prospect of a return to negotiations. And part of him putting military options on the table is to extract or impose greater leverage over Iran and try to encourage them to contemplate things that, frankly, they were not prepared to contemplate during the most recent round of negotiations. So giving up the nuclear enrichment program, curtailing their ballistic missile program, stopping their support to armed terrorist groups in the region.

LAURA JAYES: Yeah, the nuclear program is one thing, but Israel is saying that they want regime change there. But who would be ready to take over from the regime? And do you think that is it, is it all possible?

DAVE SHARMA: Well, I don't think that is or should be a goal of this. I mean who the Iranian people choose to lead them, and their form of government is for them. And I think we should have learned at least from Iraq and Afghanistan that you know, the attempts by outsiders to impose a new regime are destined to fail. This can only happen organically like it did in Syria. Now what would take the place though? I really don't know and I've m seen, you know, I think there's a lot of nervousness amongst the Iranian people that you know, what might take the place might well be a more extreme or a more hardline version of the Islamic Republic that exists right now. And I understand those concerns and I think that's why we shouldn't attempt to influence that at all. I mean, what we should be looking after through negotiations or otherwise is our legitimate security concerns about Iran's nuclear program.

LAURA JAYES: Ok, but this is just the latest reason for that exchange of ballistic missiles between Israel and Iran. Of course, this round of conflict is because that nuclear program Israel deemed was getting very close to a dangerous level of success. But a couple of months ago, it was for a different reason. I mean when we look at the conflict in Gaza, in the Middle east more broadly, involving Lebanon, involving Hezbollah, involving Iran, what can we say is Israel's endgame here? We know they want to see regime change in Iran. That's not going to happen quickly. So, do we, should we expect this ongoing intermittent flare ups for quite some time?

DAVE SHARMA: Well look, I don't think the goal of Israel's military operation is regime change. I know that Prime Minister Netanyahu has urged the Iranian people to rise up, but I don't think that is their goal. And I think you quite cleverly highlighted all those conflicts before and what ties them together. Whether it was Hamas in Gaza mounting the 7 October terrorist attacks, Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, has been Iranian influence, support and capacity building. And what changed after 7th October 2023 to my mind was that Israel recognised that their military concept or strategy had failed. That was a concept that, was tied around concepts, was tied around deterrence and containment. And they believed that they could deter and contain Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthis and ultimately Iran as well. Now, having lost, you know, 1200 of their citizens and having had 250 people kidnapped, they simply said, we're not prepared to tolerate a regime that is committed to our destruction, that will support terrorist attacks again, like the ones Hamas conducted on the 7th of October. We need to address the source of this threat and I think fundamentally that's what's changed since 7 October 2023. That has largely remade the map of the Middle East.

LAURA JAYES: When you talk about regime change and Netanyahu in particular, I mean, you can go back not too far, maybe just over a decade where Netanyahu was, was on the record as supporting Hamas to take over the Gaza Strip because they were the, most, well, the best option at the time. So, you know, there's lessons from history here, isn't it? You advocate for regime change, but that doesn't always work out so well.

DAVE SHARMA: No, I agree. Firstly, I dispute that characterisation of, Prime Minister Netanyahu's attitude towards Hamas but -

LAURA JAYES: Can you, can you shed some light on that? Because, yes, when you, when you've got hindsight, history, often things are skewed and they're out of context, but, you know, there are quotes on the record where he was, you know, at least vaguely supportive of Hamas.

DAVE SHARMA: Hamas took power in an internal coup in Gaza out of the Palestinian Authority in 2005. Israel had nothing to do with that. You know, they conducted an internal coup, but Israel recognised it was in our interest to make sure that the people in Gaza were not starving, that they had livelihoods. And so, yes, they cooperated with Qatar and with others to make sure assistance went to the people of Hamas. I mean, they, they gave thousands of Gaza work permits every day to come into Israel and to earn money and to send it back. They let through hundreds of trucks each day with humanitarian assistance, with the view that, you know, if the people in Gaza had a stake, and if Hamas had a stake in the welfare of the people of Gaza, they would not be committed to Israel's destruction. Now, clearly, that was a mistaken calculation and we are where we are now, with Hamas having used a lot of that aid to rebuild or build their own military capabilities, conduct the terrorist attacks that they did. But look, I don't think, I don't think Israel is interested in, I mean, sure, would they welcome a new form of government in Iran? Yes, But I think their main interest here is they want a government of Iran, however constituted, that is not committed to their destruction and that does not invest, you know, millions and millions of dollars, in building a nuclear weapon, building a nuclear enrichment program which can only be used for weapons. The level of enrichment we're talking about is only feasible for military use, which supports and finance and creates armed terrorist groups in the region, which creates instability. I think they want to be allowed to live in peace in their neighbourhood. And whatever form of Iranian government allows them to do that, I think they would welcome.

LAURA JAYES: Just one final question here, Dave, because I think, it's important to look at the language more closely. Penny Wong was asked this morning, what would Australia do if the US got directly involved here? Now, I think fairly, she didn't want to get involved in that commentary, but instead the usual language of, we urge, you know, both sides to de-escalate. We urge Iran, blah, blah, blah. She actually said, Iran has a choice here, and that was referring to the nuclear program. The choice being that it should just stop. Is that where Australia should be at? Is that where our foreign policy should stop or she should. Should she be going further?

I think we've just lost Dave. I really wanted to hear the answer, to that question as well. But we have lost Dave Sharma. We'll see if we can get him back.

[news story break in interview]

LAURA JAYES: Happy to say we have former Australian Ambassador to Israel, Dave Sharma back on the line now. you just cut out there. You heard my long question. It's all right. Don't apologise. It's all good.

DAVE SHARMA: I was happy to answer the question.

LAURA JAYES: Please. Did you hear it?

DAVE SHARMA: I did. I think you're asking about -

LAURA JAYES: Yes.

DAVE SHARMA: - Penny Wong's warning to the Iranians. Look, I think, we seem to have reached the right place now. I think it's been, I think the government's initial reaction to this was, a little confounding and all over the place. You know, Penny Wong took a call from the Iranian Foreign Minister before she spoke to the Israeli Foreign minister and these calls for de-escalation and the resumption of dialogue were unanswered from reality. I think what we need to be focused on here is the outcome, not the process. And the outcome we want is an Iran that does not have a nuclear weapons program and does not pose an ongoing threat to the existence of its neighbours. I've asked the question to be achieved through diplomacy. That is good.

LAURA JAYES: Ok. I've asked the question as well. This will be my final one, Dave. There's reports that the US is evacuating staff from its embassy in Israel, which I think is a, a really, worrying sign of what could be to come. I don't know whether Australia has done the same to its embassy staff there, but do you think that is quite a shocking development?

And if the US has done it, surely, we should or have?

DAVE SHARMA: Look, I'm not aware if the US has done it, it wouldn't be unusual in a time of crisis to evacuate non-essential staff. So that would be the partners and family members of diplomatic staff and diplomatic staff that aren't necessary. But clearly this one came out of the blue, so people didn't have a chance to do that. And the airspace is still closed. So, your, exit options from Israel are relatively limited, mainly across into Oman, in Jordan, and then out that way. But look, clearly, I would expect that we would be working closely with the United States and our Five Eyes partners, and we would be seeking to match quite closely, however they are treating their own nationals there. Bear in mind as well, of course, we have, hundreds thousands of Australian citizens in Israel and in Iran, for that matter, who also have very difficult evacuation options at the moment, just given the security situation.

LAURA JAYES: Dave Sharma, great to speak to you as always. Take two as well. Appreciate it. We'll check in soon.

DAVE SHARMA: Thanks so much, Laura.

[ENDS]

‍