An Iran Hawk’s Take on the Cease-Fire

**SPEAKER_1** (0:01)
Every year, the Lionel Gelber Prize honors the world's best book on international affairs published in English. The prize is presented by the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto. The 2026 winner is Francis J. Gavin for his examination of how history can help us understand and navigate the complex and confusing world around us. It's called Thinking Historically, The Guide to Statecraft and Strategy, published by Yale University Press. Gavin will deliver the 2026 Lionel Gelber Prize lecture on April 15th, 2026 and you can register to attend online. Visit gelber.munkschool.utoronto.ca for more details on the 2026 Lionel Gelber Prize.

**Ravi Agrawal** (1:02)
Hi, I'm Ravi Agrawal, Foreign Policy's Editor-in-Chief. This is FP Live.
So we've got an additional episode for you this week. I'm recording this on Thursday, the 9th of April. There's been a lot of criticism of the Trump administration for embarking on a war in Iran without congressional approval, and for bombing it without international permission. But there's also criticism from a completely different constituency, the group that says Trump didn't go far enough, that he should have stuck it out and ensured regime change, no matter the cost. That is the perspective we're going to air out on the show today. First, a quick read on where things are at. As many predicted, the ceasefire in the Middle East is proving to be very fragile. As of this recording, there has been disagreement over Lebanon. Iran claimed it was included in the ceasefire. The White House disagreed. Israel was bombing it anyway. And then the European Union came out and said Lebanon should indeed be included in the ceasefire. And now it seems Israel might be open to talks with Beirut, which will likely be about disarming Hezbollah. Meanwhile, we're all looking ahead to the weekend when US Vice President JD Vance will lead a delegation to Islamabad for a meeting with Iranian officials. Pakistan has emerged as a key player for now, but it's worth noting that this is a country that does not recognize the state of Israel. Islamabad has been particularly canny at forging a relationship with Trump in his second term, as FP's reported. One big area of concern for not just the parties in this conflict, but the whole world is what happens to the Strait of Hormuz. Only five vessels traveled through it on Wednesday, which is a slower rate than the previous five days. Hundreds of tankers are waiting to return. The reality is that things are still too unstable to truly commit. There are security concerns and sky-high insurance costs. The longer this goes on, the greater the chance oil prices will spike once more. What is clear is that high-energy costs impact the whole world, but they impact Asia most of all, which consumes 40% of the world's oil and is home to the world's fastest growing economies, so it's going to need more and more oil. One more reason to hope. Progress is made in Islamabad this weekend. OK, on to our interview. A few days before the Middle East ceasefire was announced, there was an interesting op-ed in the New York Times titled Finish the Job, How Trump Can Still Win War in Iran. Of course, Trump chose the opposite path, which was to seek an exit ramp. I wanted to air out the case for why that was wrong. My guest is a longtime Iran hawk and the author of that op-ed I mentioned, John Bolton. Bolton served in the first Trump administration as National Security Advisor. He was ambassador to the UN from 2005 to 2006 Today, he's an outspoken critic of the president. Let's dive in.
Ambassador Bolton, welcome to FP Live.

**John Bolton** (4:29)
Glad to be with you. Thanks for having me.

**Ravi Agrawal** (4:31)
So you think it was wrong of Trump to de-escalate this week. Explain that.

**John Bolton** (4:37)
Well, I think it was wrong. If his objective is regime change, I honestly don't know what his objective really is. It seems to keep shifting. But I think given the closure of the Strait of Hormuz by the regime, by its threats, really more than anything else, and by intimidating shipping and insurance, they've established something that is really, in my mind, a threat, in many respects, equivalent to the nuclear threat they were developing, the terrorist threat they've nurtured over decades, really a direct threat at the world economy. And to walk away with that scenario is still unresolved, I think sets a dangerous precedent. I think our military was working on clearing the Strait. I'm not suggesting it's an easy job. I'm a little surprised it took them this long. We know from Trump's own words, he didn't think it would happen. I don't understand how he could think that. But it's obviously something that needs to be resolved. It has been unacceptable to the United States since Franklin Roosevelt and the King of Saudi Arabia met during World War II to have any country, whether it's an outsider like the Soviet Union or a Gulf country like Saddam Hussein's Iraq, to have domination over the total oil production of the Gulf region. I think that has to remain our objective and it's obviously jeopardized now by what the regime in Tehran is doing.