Tucker Carlson claims Trump is considering dropping nukes on Iran

In a world of bad actors, false claims of nuclear attacks were always going to happen at some point. Well, overnight on Sunday, Ukrainians using the government's official Air Alert phone app received bogus warnings about nuclear missiles and then street fighting. Soon afterwards, Russia's own official emergency app was the victim of a cyber attack and put out equally untrue warnings of nuclear attacks across Russia. At the same time, thousands of miles away, the right-wing American commentator Tucker Carlson said that Donald Trump could authorise a nuclear strike against Iran within days. I think we need to get to the bottom of these stories. First, let's talk to Kira Rudik, a deputy in the Ukrainian parliament and leader of the Golos party. Kira, thank you very much indeed for joining me. First of all, can you explain to people listening here what happened when people got this alert on their phones? Hello, Andrew, and thank you so much for having me. Well, the reaction was varying from real distress and taking the threat seriously to many jokes on the Internet saying, oh, here it is yet again. Thank I can tell you that there were so many threats by Russia. you so to nuke us since 2022 that perhaps at first we were very scared, much then we started preparing backpacks. I still have a nuclear backpack for in my storage just like in front of the house being in case we will need it. So we are almost ready to any sort of emergency. here. But there are a couple couple of things that are not emotional here and first and foremost is This is the attack of normalization of the nuclear threat, and it will go way beyond Ukraine and Russia and many other countries, because there are so many experts on different media who are right now talking about if Russia would be nuking, who else can be nuking, reminding how Americans launched two nuclear bombs in Japan. Just trying to prepare people that this is possible and that these threats cannot be taken empty-handed. And I can tell you Russia benefits from these threats and other dictatorships benefit as well. It seems, I'm not an expert in this, but both the warnings to Ukrainians, which were bogus and false, And warnings to Russians on their system, which were bogus and false, were the result of hackers. Do you think there are people simply trying to create as much distress and disturbance as possible? And if so, I wonder why. That sounds like an attempt to create as much distress as possible. Thank We cannot know the reasons behind these attacks, but let me put it this way. Which way? you When people are talking about elections, especially during the wartime, This particularly is one of the reasons very that we keep saying we cannot have elections during the wartime. Aside of our constitution, aside of all the security matters, much. aside of all the organizational complications, this particular attack is one of the reasons why we cannot have it until we are able to defend ourselves against cyber attacks as well. And believe me, Russia will be spending billions of dollars onto distracting and disrupting So, from your point of view, it's just Russia carrying on the war by another means. Can I just be clear what the warnings actually said, that there were going to be nuclear attacks and, I think, attacks with biological weapons and then street fights? Yes. Yeah. Look, if we look at general Russia's strategy, they are not doing that well at the battlefield, So they are destroying our energy grid. They are killing civilians for one particular reason, to destroy our spirit and pressure us into capitulation. And they are not only using this direct warfare. They're using different sort of information warfare. And this recent attack was just yet another information And now the information work. warfare that they have been using. To get people scared, to get people protesting, to get people disappointed, for us to lose hope. We understand it and we should be preparing much better. And I hope that our government learned from this incident as well. Well, Kira, in a strange way, it's a relief to hear there was laughter as well. Thank you very, very much indeed for talking to us. And now let's hear from Dr. Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House. Dr. Vakil, what is the situation in Iran now? And these rumors about a nuclear threat, how seriously, if at all, should we take them? Good evening. Nice to be with you. Well, right now we are sort of lurching between diplomacy that has been underway for a number of days now, and this mediation is being managed by Qatar that has been engaging with Iranian negotiators and the Trump administration, trying to find a hopefully final off-ramp to this stalemate between the two countries. But it's not clear if that can be delivered. They need to both walk back from the brink. They need to make concessions. All Each concerned about others sequencing and if they're trustworthy and they need to have discussions about Iran's nuclear program. In tandem to that, I'm sure you right. are referencing Tucker Carlson's suggestion that perhaps the United States, as it is considering its return to military options vis-a-vis Iran, might The famous pickaxe mountain, which has got a nuclear facility embedded underneath. This is very speculative. We know, of course, that the U.S. is considering a return to war with Iran. The Iranians are, of course, also prepared and have their own tricks up their sleeve. I think it's important to discuss the possibility of this and put this out there. And there needs to be a big... Pushback from the, quote-unquote, international community, wherever they are. But, you know, we are speculating on what might happen in this war. I don't want to be too personal or ad hominem, but I'm not absolutely sure that what Tucker Carlson says is literally 100% likely to happen. On anything. Nonetheless, we've had from the administration more generally a series of slightly chilling, slightly blood-curdling threats about the kind of war that Donald Trump would prosecute against Iran after the midterm elections. That it would be extremely ferocious. Short, but ferocious. And again, just talk us through what you think that is intended to achieve. Well, I'll be honest, both sides, both Tehran and Washington are using escalatory language in order to try and deter the other. And I appreciate that Donald Trump thinks it's going to be a short but ferocious war. The last time he went to war against the Iranians on February 28th, he also promised it would be four or five days. It lasted for 40. So there is no guarantee that it will be short or ferocious. And that is why In our imagination, we can see President Trump maybe looking for or searching for Thank You know, the unthinkable in order to find exit ramps from another entrenched conflict with the Iranians. The Iranians have also published a hit list of hotels, you civilian infrastructure, things that they would strike, making it very clear to the United States and, of course, to the so region. And I think they're abundantly clear much. that this war is not going to be a bilateral one. I know.