STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
There's a difference between tactics and strategy. Tactics are your short-term moves, like deploying a particular weapon or attacking from a particular direction or choosing to attack on a particular date. Strategy is your long-term plan to achieve some larger goal. And with that in mind, we've called Retired Vice Admiral Robert Harward, who served in the United States Central Command, which oversees operations in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf. He's now at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America and is in Abu Dhabi in the region. Welcome, Admiral.
ROBERT HARWARD: Thank you. Good to be with you.
INSKEEP: OK. So the tactic we're hearing about is a new round of attacks on Iran after the midterms. Looking at it from the outside, is it clear to you what the strategy would be?
HARWARD: Well, I think more important, as you said, starting with your end state. And I believe you've heard from the president, you've heard from the vice president, you've heard from the secretary at state at various times in their careers - before they were the current administration and while they are in the current administration - various components of the end state they want.
First and foremost, the end of any nuclear program and the guarantee that they will not try to reconstitute that.
Number two, opening the Straits of Hormuz or at least recognizing the international waterway and acknowledging they'll take no control or expect any fees for the flow of commerce to go through this international waterway.
But just as important are their strategic missiles and drone programs, which the president had always articulated was the shortfall in the joint cooperative plan of action that President Obama signed.
And then finally, funding the surrogates - Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis. All of those are critical objectives to ensure that you have stability and security in the region for the long haul and all to undermine our more strategic adversaries, be it Russia and China.
INSKEEP: There was a minute there where it appeared that the United States essentially wanted regime change in Iran. Is that on this list? Should it be on this list? Does it have to be on this list?
HARWARD: Well, what I would say for - to meet all of those objectives, you would need a government in Iran that acknowledges and complies with all those objectives and basically renounces the Islamic Revolution that they've been - their policy and agenda for the last 47 years. So, yes, I would think that would be part of the agenda. And if that's the case, your strategy can be much broader. It can be long term, much less short terms. And I think you're seeing this strategy of financial strangulation along with political, and as we've seen - and we're standing by for - military actions could achieve those objectives.
INSKEEP: Oh, if you're saying the goal is regime change, your strategy needs to think in terms of years instead of months or weeks or whatever. And you might choose different tools than an attack on November 4, for example.
HARWARD: I would say that if your objective is a government in Iran - and again, that's been part of the issue. Who are the people who we can talk to who are willing to capitulate on those objectives? So if you're going to call it regime change, that's fine. But it's a government in Iran that agrees to all those objectives.
Now, you could take a short-term approach, which may involve a lot more kinetic activity, and that could including (ph) going after civilian infrastructure. And when I mean that, I mean, energy sources - the ability...
INSKEEP: Yeah.
HARWARD: ...To refine gas. So people can put gas in their cars, which would then undermine the government internally, which would be a very sound strategy. That's how would - you could leverage that military power or military targeting to support those objectives.
INSKEEP: Just got about 20 seconds left, but Chris Murphy put that on the table, the possibility of attacks on civilian infrastructure. Is the blowback so severe that that might not be worth it?
HARWARD: Well, there's - it depends on the impact and what the Iranians would do. And I think in this case, where they're doing financial strangulation, I think hitting those targets would not be wise until the Iranians have instituted strikes on other infrastructure.
INSKEEP: Oh, in order to justify a response from the U.S.
HARWARD: Exactly.
INSKEEP: Retired Vice Admiral Robert Harward. Thanks so much.
HARWARD: Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
