Since starting this war of choice with Iran, Trump has: claimed victory (not true), said that the U.S. was in active negotiations with Iran (not true), and started positioning American troops around the Middle East (unfortunately true). If we can’t trust the actions of our president, how do we know what is actually happening, and what what source can we trust?
U.S. Representative Jim Himes (D-CT) joins Jen to confirm that the public positions of Iran and the U.S. are miles apart from where they need to be in order to reach a peace deal. Rep. Himes also underscores the extreme human and economic cost it would take for the U.S. to successfully secure the Strait of Hormuz.
Representative Jim Himes represents Connecticut’s 4th District in the United States House of Representatives where he is serving his ninth term. He serves as Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and on the House Financial Services Committee. Make sure to stay connected with the Congressman on his Substack here.
The following transcript has been edited for formatting purposes.
Jen Rubin
Hi, this is Jen Rubin, Editor-in-Chief of the Contrarian. I’m delighted to have back Representative Jim Hines from Connecticut. He is the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee. Welcome, Congressman.
Jim Himes
Great to be with you.
Jen Rubin
So are there discussions that you know of going on about, concluding the illegal, unspecified war against Iran?
Jim Himes
You mean between the Iranians and the United States?
Jen Rubin
Yes, or between the intermediaries and those two points.
Jim Himes
I think there’s a lot of aspiration. I mean, the Gulf states, who you, as you might imagine, since they’re getting hammered by the Iranians, are really hoping for real conversations. But no, I don’t think there are real conversations happening. What you have is an exchange of proposed peace plans that are, you know, a Grand Canyon rim apart from each other.
You know, the Iranians are saying, you need to pay us reparations, you need to let us build as many missiles as we want, and oh, by the way, we’re gonna charge tolls on everybody through the state of Hormuz, whereas, as you might imagine, Donald Trump’s proposal looks nothing like that. So, no, there is… I don’t think there are real conversations going on, and the public positions are miles and miles apart.
Jen Rubin
I’m a bit confused, because Donald Trump said we won, and he said that he was only going to accept unconditional surrender. Usually, when you have an unconditional surrender, you don’t have a protracted negotiation. So are we blowing past the unconditional surrender we won, and now we’re in a prolonged negotiation?
Jim Himes
Well, as you’ve probably noticed, this is the war of many contradictions. So, you know, we desperately need our allies’ help to keep the Straits of Hormuz open, but no, we don’t need them at all when they choose not to give us that help, and apparently we have won this war, and yet there are elements of the 82nd Airborne and a Marine Expeditionary Unit moving into theater. So, this is sort of the war of contradictions, and I think To be serious about this.
Jen Rubin
Yes.
Jim Himes
I think it’s beginning to dawn on the president, maybe just beginning to dawn, and it just dawned on his people long ago, which is that he’s not in charge anymore, and he will retain the capacity to continue to cause lots of explosions anywhere he wants. And we continue to do that, and the Israelis are doing that, but we are not in charge anymore, because the single biggest factor which is affecting most people on the globe, and certainly Americans as they fill their cars up, is the fact that the Strait has been closed for several weeks right now. Oil is at a record high, and gasoline prices in California are hitting $6 a gallon. So it’s beginning to dawn on Donald Trump that he can cause as many explosions and break as many things as he wants, but that the Iranians still have a huge card to play, not just with Americans, but with the world.
Jen Rubin
Reminds me a bit, frankly, of the Vietnam War, when they touted body counts. Pete Hagseth goes out and touts the amount of stuff they have blown up. But what you’re saying is that’s not an effective metric, because as long as the regime is there and has the advantages you pointed out, it doesn’t matter, in some sense, how much stuff we blow up.
Jim Himes
Yeah, yeah, well, I wouldn’t say it doesn’t matter. I mean, you know, to give the military their due, I do suspect that they have sunk the Navy. That’s no small thing. But what they haven’t done is gotten rid of the many thousands of small boats that the Iranians have that can carry mines into the Strait of Hormuz. And they’ve broken a lot of missile launchers. There’s still some that are daily attacking Israel and the Gulf states, so you know, militarily speaking, they’ve actually achieved, an awful lot, but to a really angry regime bent on retribution, until you clean out every last missile and every last drone, which I’m not sure we can do. Remember, an awful lot of the damage is being done by drones. You know, you can celebrate, you know, you can put up video games and celebratory videos and, you know, stuff that would be consumed ordinarily by 12-year-old boys, but, you know, there are still… you know, millions of people in the Gulf, in Israel, and frankly, even further afield, whose lives are very much in danger. And of course, again, you know, Americans fill their gas tanks every week, and they’re looking at those numbers and saying, wait a minute, tell me again why we’re doing this?
Jen Rubin
It seems that after the, at least so far in the Ukraine war, the administration should have figured out that we’re in an era of drone warfare that can be cheaply manufactured in people’s garages, you really can’t, as you say, clean out everyone. Do you think they are surprised by this? Do they have a plan to address the drone warfare?
Jim Himes
Yeah, well, no, they don’t have a plan to address the drone warfare. The Russians can’t do it. You know, our Pentagon is just beginning to… to think about how you do that, right? I’ll tell you, Operation Spiderweb, which was several months ago when the Iranians actually hid drones in box trucks and destroyed huge numbers of Russian strategic nuclear bombers. That caused our Pentagon guys, who are ordinarily pretty loathe to move quickly and change, to say, holy smokes, everything I have you know, bombers at bases in Ohio, aircraft carriers, are very much at risk. So, to their credit, they’ve really woken up about this question of the new warfare, but, the more salient question is that 3 weeks ago, when Donald Trump decided it was a good idea to join the Israelis in the war.
Did his people get through to him about how asymmetric this could be, right? You may have two aircraft carriers in the region, and Iran may have zero, but they only need a couple of boats and a bunch of drones to keep the Straits of Hormuz closed. My guess is, and I always resist trying to climb inside Donald Trump’s brain, but my guess is that he just saw another victory the way he thought Venezuela and Maduro was a victory, another victory like the bombs that we sent down ventilation shafts at the Iranian nuclear things, and he said, oh, it’s going to be just like that. And of course, it is not.
Jen Rubin
The Israelis have also been hit, perhaps more than, at least publicly, we expected. To your knowledge, again, without any classified information, have… do they have a problem with interceptors? Why is it that Iran is still, wrecking such havoc on Israel?
Jim Himes
There’s no question that they and we have a problem with interceptors, and it’s pretty simple math, right? You know, the drones that they’re using are $40,000 or $50,000, a Patriot missile, which will use several to try to take down a drone, is $2 million. So you, you know, you see the math problem there. Oh, and by the way, the drones can be built very rapidly, many, many hundreds per month, and a Patriot, or the advanced weaponry that the Israelis use for the various defense programs they have, you know, those don’t get rebuilt very quickly.
So, yes. Now, what I don’t know, and I’m not sure anybody knows. is exactly when that math turns really ugly for the Israelis, or quite frankly, for the Gulf and for our troops in the region, right? But there is a moment in the not-too-distant future where we have to start saying, we’ve got to let that missile throw it through, because it’s not going to hit, you know, a very high-value target, because we just don’t have the interceptors. So that… it’s a matter of math. That moment is coming. It’s just a little unclear exactly when that moment arrives.
Jen Rubin
Is there any feasible military plan that wouldn’t involve, considerable damage to the United States, considerable casualties, that would militarily open up the Strait of Hormuz? Or do we need a negotiated resolution?
Jim Himes
Yeah, there really isn’t. I mean, not one that the American people are willing to bear. You know, remember, this war started out as one of the least popular wars in history. It’s now opposed by roughly a narrow majority of Americans. And, you know, is it theoretically possible that you could secure the Straits of Hormuz? It is theoretically possible, but you would put… probably tens of thousands of people on very ugly mountainous terrain there, and conceivably those are defensible positions, but remember, you need to go pretty deep into Iran, because you need to secure a perimeter to protect the guys who are, you know, on the coastline there.
Oh, and by the way, there’s not much you can do to protect against short-range drones, so is it technically possible? Yes, but probably at great cost. Now, one thing, and I should give you the disclosure here, I’m not a military expert, but you know, there was a lot of talk a week ago about how we were going to extract the uranium. Which is in at least 3 different sites, buried under… thousands of tons of rubble cemented over by the Iranians in the middle of their country? That, I think, is not… I mean, when I heard people talking about that, I just thought, there is no way, you know, you’re gonna put hundreds of thousands of troops down with, you know, heavy equipment to dig out the uranium. The point being, obviously, that both of those missions, one, I think, is impossible, would result in massive casualties to the United States. I just… I don’t know that the American people are there.
Jen Rubin
I guess the fundamental problem here, for many Americans is, they don’t know who to believe. The Iranians certainly are not trustworthy people, but the administration has been caught making stuff up so often that it’s very difficult for the American people to figure out what’s going on. How do you, talk to constituents? How do you talk to your colleagues in order to figure out what you should do next? For example, should you really entertain a request for $200 billion, or $50 billion, or any billion of additional weaponry, and what would that be used for?
Jim Himes
Yeah, yeah, and you raise a really interesting point, because we live in a world, as you know very well, where facts don’t matter much to people’s opinion, especially to louder political people’s opinion. And so, you know, surprise, surprise, most Republicans support this war, even though, by the way, even though, literally 6 months ago, the president was saying, I’m great because I’m not going to get us into Middle Eastern war. But the flexibility of MAGA is such that if Donald Trump does it, you remember that hat. Donald Trump is always right. You know, a lot of people really believe that. And, so, you know, they’re pretty flexible in their thinking about this.
And, yeah, on the other side, too, you know, the Democrats, for reasons probably good and bad, are generally opposed. Here’s the thing. There’s no arguing, with dignified transfers of dead servicemen coming off of airplanes in Dover. That’s just… that is not a fact that your heart or your soul can ignore. And again, you know, when gasoline prices are $1.50 higher than they were, yesterday. or last week, that’s a very real thing, and that’s why this is such a politically perilous moment, for the president and for, the Republicans generally. This is the, you know, like it or not, and I’ve always sort of been sad about this, because gasoline prices, candidly, are not something the president has much control over, but that is a huge determinant of how people act in the voting booth.
Jen Rubin
Does Congress have any ability at this point to influence the president’s thinking? Your Republican colleagues keep voting down one, war powers resolution after another. They seem to be all on board with writing checks continuously. Is there anything Democrats can do, or a small group of Republicans can do, to kind of bring this down to reality? And figure out a way of resolving this?
Jim Himes
Yeah, I’m not sure that’s the path that’s gonna do it, right? I mean, let’s imagine that we pass a war powers resolution in the House. Possible. We were trying to get one on the floor this week. Let’s imagine two weeks from now we do, and it passes. you know, now you’ve got the Senate, and even if the Senate passes it, and the President vetoes it, I mean, that’s a very long and torturous path. I think what kicks in a lot faster, and if you could get one of my Republican colleagues on this show, and get them to be honest, is the politics of this.
Again, high gas prices, and it’s not by the way, I keep focusing on gas prices, and that’s because I don’t have farms in my district, but, you know, something like 20% of the world’s fertilizer is now hung up in the, in the Persian Gulf, it comes out of Qatar, and, you know, farmers right now are paying extraordinary prices for fertilizer. Plastics, all sorts of downstream things are going to get much more expensive. And again, remember, this is the president who is very explicit about his promises. Prices are going to come way down, so far down, you’re not going to believe how cheap they are, and I’ll never get involved in a Middle Eastern war.
And now he got us involved in a Middle Eastern war, and prices are really a lot higher. So I think it’s going to be the politics. And here’s the rub. You know, again, it’s back to the first thing we were talking about, you know. Donald Trump may wash his hands of this and sail the Navy out and stop and say, we won, but, you know, he doesn’t control the outcome here. You’ve got a really angry Iranian regime that is going to do everything they can to make sure this never happens again, and so I’m not sure he’s got a button that he can push that causes that strait to reopen.
Jen Rubin
Exactly, the enemy gets a vote, and this is probably why all those presidents didn’t go to war, against Iran. ask the question a slightly different way. Your Republican colleagues, may be flexible, as you put it, in public, but they read polls, too. They can see what they’re headed for. Do they have any kind of political survival mechanism that kicks in at some point, or are they just gonna… Pardon the expression, but go down with the ship, in November, because they didn’t have the nerve to stand up to Donald Trump.
Jim Himes
Yeah, super interesting question. You know, I’ve watched these guys, sort of, in a dark way, admiring their ability to take political pain. And just recently, it started back in November, when, you know, the Republicans got their clocks cleaned everywhere, and I do mean everywhere. And all of a sudden, you saw a little bit of fear in the eyes of my Republican colleagues. But on the other hand, they look at, you know, take my rather famous colleague, Dan Crenshaw, right?
Dan Crenshaw’s the former Navy SEAL who, you know, was wounded and wears an eye patch, he’s very well known. You know, he voted with Donald Trump 95% of the time. And that 5% got him a primary, Donald Trump supported his opponent, and Dan Crenshaw will not be in the next Congress, because he lost his primary. So, you know, my view is it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of people, but let’s understand how intense that, you know, rock and a hard place situation is, because the president, if you cross him, he will end you. On the other hand, if you stick with him, you know, there’s a good chance you’re not coming back.
Jen Rubin
Let me switch gears as we wrap up. I don’t know if you’ve been in an airport lately. I’m trying to avoid them, quite frankly, but the president has made a terrible situation, either worse or done something completely irrelevant, which is send a bunch of ICE people to stand around and watch the lines. Do you sense there was a flurry of activity that your Republican colleagues, again. are interested in some kind of resolution, there was a plan to fund everything but ICE, now everyone seems to be backing off from that. What’s your sense of where we’re going?
Jim Himes
Yeah, yeah, great question. I think that that’s ultimately where we go. You know, there was a plan, and I think it was actually pretty… starting to get a little firm over in the Senate to, yes, fund everything except ICE, and then the Republican theory was that they would fund ICE on a party-line vote using a vehicle like reconciliation or whatever. Fine. Fine, look, I, there’s a deal just sitting there to be done, right? I mean, here’s what you know what we’re asking for. We’re just asking for… ICE agents to behave like state troopers and police officers. No, you don’t get to bust down doors without a warrant. No, you don’t get to wear a mask. You’re gonna wear some identifying ID and body cameras.
These are not hard asks. We just want them to ask act like cops, right? Which is what they are. And so, you know, that is not a crazy ask, and my Republican friends realize that, you know, they have lost the immigration issue in the political minds of the American people because of what happened in Minneapolis. So I do think the deal is there for the taking, and I do think it’s really important that we do that deal. You know, I just hate this stuff where, you know, we sit in our offices with our staffs. And the lunchroom downstairs, and, you know, thousands of TSA agents, or thousands of Social Security employers, or thousands of, you name it, aren’t getting paid. That’s dirty pool. And look, both parties have done it for a long time, and we just… at some point, we’re gonna need to take that off the table as a legislative point of leverage.
Jen Rubin
Absolutely. And last question for you. Are you concerned at all, that people will think that Mark Wayne Mullen is, somehow, the savior, a much better person, he’s gonna fix all of that, or do you think this is, here was the old boss, here’s the new boss?
Jim Himes
You know, it is such a weird world that I live in, because I never imagined there would be any world where I would feel in any way good about Mark Wayne Mullen being a Cabinet secretary, but he’s a hell of an improvement over Kristi Noem. And by the way, I served with both of them in the House, and I don’t feel good at all about Mark Wayne Mullen at DHS, but I do feel better than I did when Kristi Noem was there. I mean, and I won’t start characterizing their personalities, but You know, look, let me say this for Mark Wayne Mullen.
He’s a character. He’s a character, and I really worry about some of the things that I might… that he might do. But I will say this for Mark Wayne, and it’s been reported. He has an instinct to negotiate across party lines, and you know, okay, let’s take that. Let’s take that. So, anyway, it’s a weird answer. No, I’m not happy, but I’m happier.
Jen Rubin
There you go. Well, the proof will be in the pudding, won’t it? We’ll see if he can broker this kind of deal. Thank you so much, Congressman. It’s always a pleasure, sobering, but a pleasure, to talk to you. So, thanks so much for making time, we really appreciate it.
Jim Himes
Thank you, Jen, thanks for having me.
