Name: Former Defense Secretary Esper says administration 'made the right call' on Iran strikes
Uploaded: 2026-02-28T23:05:24.000Z
Duration: 10 min 12 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

I now want to bring in former defense secretary in the first Trump administration, Mark Esper.

Secretary Esper, thank you so much for joining us.

Adverbs of degree

Well, it's wonderful to have you here and your perspective.

Let me start off by just getting your reaction.

Obviously, we've seen President Trump amass this huge military presence in the region, and

here we are today, strikes underway that could last, based on my conversations, for days, if not weeks.

Well, you know, I was not surprised that it happened after yesterday when we heard that the US Ambassador to Israel gave his employees their authorization to, to leave immediately the state of Israel.

And we also know that Kushner and Wyckoff came out of the negotiations on Thursday with the Iranians very close, lipped about it, which told me that there was not progress being made.

And I think the President and his team made the right call, and

that is that the Iranians weren't serious, at least not serious enough to give up their enrichment program.

So in my mind, those few things, coupled with the fact that we had reached the apex of our deployment of air and naval forces in the Middle east, you can't keep them there forever, right?

At some point in time, their readiness wears down.

You've got to either use them or pull them back.

And I think the President made the decision, given a number of other factors, some of which he laid out this morning in his remarks, that it was time to act.

Well, given your role as Secretary of Defense, you understand what it is like to think about, draw up potential battle plans, war plans.

Secretary, in this moment, and what is the worst case scenario, as you see it?

Of course, it begins with what's the purpose of the operations?

And I think, as the President laid out, he said we wanted to destroy their ballistic missile capabilities, production capabilities.

So I assume that some of the sites that were taken out, out in Iran, internally to Iran, will contain some of the sites.

And they look familiar to me based on my recollections.

But he also talked about going after their naval assets, and

I assume that was to make sure that they couldn't harass commercial shipping or to mine the Strait of Hormuz.

Interestingly, we haven't seen much of that.

At least the reporting hasn't indicated any strikes along the coastal areas or against the Navy.

We know that Israel went after leadership targets.

That, of course, suggests that they want to go after decapitation.

And then the President mentioned regime change.

And I think here at what he's hoping for is that there'd be enough pressure on the Iranian regime that the people in Iran would rise up once again, just like they did last month.

And maybe the conditions would be set or maybe further on us or Israeli attacks could set the conditions further for the Iranian people to overtake the country, the regime, and

But again, the end game looks a little fuzzy right now.

We've just got to see how this plays out.

Secretary, the President, the administration have indicated they believe it is, in fact, possible to bring about regime change without US Boots on the ground.

Based on your understanding of these military operations, is that realistic?

I understand the president's calling on the Iranian people to rise up, but

it is incredibly complicated to bring about regime change, is it not?

It will depend on the Iranian people at this point in time.

And I hope that we are providing covert means to support them.

I mean, of course, we know we, we provided last month Starlink terminals to the Iranian people to communicate with one another.

Maybe we're providing them other means and assets, but

it's going to be up to them at this point in time.

But look, I'd say beyond that, after Operation Midnight Hammer last June, we had the Iranians on their knees.

Their air defenses were taken down, their ballistic missile forces were spent.

We had set back a considerable amount of time, their nuclear enrichment process, their industry.

In my view, that was the time to demand that Iran allow IAEA inspectors, that's the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, back into the country to get back into those installations to find where that 900 pounds of enriched uranium was, to put cameras back in place.

And I, look, I think the President is right and every president before him as long as I can remember, has said Iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.

So whether or not there is regime change at this point in time, I think it was important to continue to set back their missile defenses, their air defenses, their missile capabilities, and

continue to set back also their nuclear ambitions.

And, and we may have to keep doing that if we don't see regime change.

Can you put this moment into broader context and why the President may have decided to strike now?

How weak is the Iranian regime in the wake of the strikes that you just cited last summ?

Yeah, they're the weakest they've been in 47 years, right, since the 79 takeover.

And of course the American hostages the weakest in that amount of time.

And it's not just their air defenses have been decimated and their ballistic missiles spent, but

Keep in mind that they've lost Hamas in southern.

They've been decimated by Israeli operations in Gaza.

They've been taken down by pretty seriously by Israel.

We know that the Iraqi Shia militia groups have been set back as well.

And really the only force standing are the Houthis in Yemen.

But nonetheless, the point is the proxies that help prop up and defend these Islamic regime have been really taken down considerably.

So it talks about weakness across the board, not just domestically, but

within, with regard to the region and the proxy.

So this is a unique moment in time in the 47 year history of this regime.

Let me ask you, because we did hear from President Trump who delivered a video message earlier today.

We've been playing that throughout the morning.

Do you think though that he needs to come before the American people and really lay out his case in earnest?

Yeah, I think every president benefits by going before the American people and explaining what we're doing, why we're doing it, how long it will take, what the pros are, the cons, the risks.

I mean, the president was right to mention that this is not a risk free operation.

So I think the more he could speak to that to the American people directly, and

I think we're being told he will today, but

also to Congress, both the House and Senate, and, and

then of course have his members of his cabinet go out and do the same.

You know, when we took down Soleimani In January 2020, one of my jobs was to go out and call the respective members of my of the Armed Services Committees and explained to them what we were doing.

And then later we went before the Congress in a closed door session in both the House and Senate and explained the operations and what we were doing.

So I think that's all part and parcel of what, what we do, what, what we should do.

It seems like they plan on doing that as well.

And I think that is those are all the right moves.

I was going to ask you about the operation taking out Qasem Soleimani.