Inauguration Day & Its Global Implications

Inauguration Day & Its Global Implications

Jan. 20, 2025

Host: Hon. Sam Rohrer

Guest: Gregg Roman

Note: This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program aired on 1/20/25. To listen to the podcast, click HERE.

Disclaimer: While reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate transcription, the following is a representation of a mechanical transcription and as such, may not be a word for word transcript. Please listen to the audio version for any questions concerning the following dialogue.

Sam Rohrer:

Well, hello and welcome to this Monday edition of Stand In the Gap Today and this historic and long awaited Monday inauguration day 2025. And as this program begins since we begin here at five, after the hour of noon eastern time already has occurred, Joe Biden and his administration has officially returned to civilian status. Donald Trump has officially received the full authority due the provisions of our US constitution to become the acting now serving 47th President of the United States. And as sweeping and comprehensive, the Trump agenda is including over 200 executive orders to be signed today, undoing as they say, all Biden executive orders and eliminating massive restrictive regulations as well as other items such as the initial roundups of illegals to be deported all theoretically now underway, so was the flurry of bizarre Biden efforts, including granting preemptive pardons to folks like General Mark Milley, Dr. Anthony Fauci and members of the House January 6th investigative committee.

And while the fact of a new administration is clear, the implications are rising out of this new administration. Well, frankly, they’re quite yet unknown and while expectations and hopes by many are very high, it’s very clear, so are the fears of many a major transition is in place that is certain, certainly regarding the many policies they are not. Now because of that, so much of what I routinely share on this program concerns Israel and the Middle East. And because of biblically prophetic emphasis on Israel, the Jewish people, and the covenant city of Jerusalem, I’ve asked Gregg  Roman, he’s the COO for the Middle East Forum to be my guest today. It’s been a while since Gregg ‘s been with me, but he’s previously served as the political advisor to the Deputy Foreign Minister of Israel and worked for the Israeli Ministry of Defense. And in the past I’ve had numerous contributing fellows of the forum as guests here on standing in the gap today on a wide range of geopolitical issues, all of which have had some tie in with Israel and Middle East Forum’s mission, which is to do this quote, promote American interest in the Middle East and protect Western values from Middle Eastern threats.

We’ll build that out a little bit here today, so you better understand that. But the title I’ve chosen to frame today’s discussion is this Inauguration Day and its Global Implications. And with that, I welcome to the program Gregg  Roman. Gregg , thanks for being back.

Gregg g Roman:

Thanks for having me,

Sam Rohrer:

Gregg , as a group, a forum, you’re organized as a think tank where you have really developed an entire stable. I’m going to put that way of fellows who are continually writing and analyzing matters of public policies. They affect the Middle East, but also from the standpoint of your mission protecting American interest and the safety of American citizens. You do that, in my opinion, better than anybody that’s out there. It’s a targeted focus, but you’ve been able to maintain a consistent position and a perspective staying above the temptations, I’m going to say to be owned by one political party or person within a party and still call it the way it is. And I think that’s important, particularly in types of things that you deal with. So anyways, I just want to acknowledge that and thank you here. Lemme start right off. Today at the Trump inauguration today, you and the Middle East Forum folks raised a high level of concern in something by which I fully agree and most people are not even aware. And that is the decision by the Trump team to honor a radical Islamic anti-Israeli Imam to pray at the inauguration now, who was this Imam and what concern does it raise for you and the forum?

Gregg g Roman:

So the Imam in question is who? Sha Hui. He’s affiliated with the Al Islamic Educational Center in Dearborn, Michigan. Your viewers might have a faint recollection of him being interviewed by Sean Hannity on Fox News about 18 years ago, actually when he was in the heels of delivering an invocation at the DNC winter meeting in January of 2007. The main quote here that your listeners need to understand why this Imam is so problematic is when Hannity asked the Imam, will you believe quote, will you admit that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, sir? And then the Imam tried to avoid the question and said, that is your explanation. And Hannity followed up, this is a yes or no question, is Hezbollah a terror organization and Hui replied, no. So we have an organization, Hezbollah, which has murdered hundreds of American servicemen, which is responsible for hundreds of Israeli deaths and even more the suppression of Christian communities in Lebanon and elsewhere throughout the Middle East. One of their supporters is giving the benediction at today’s inauguration. He has history of antisemitic rhetoric, publicly supporting Hezbollah, refusing to condemn it as a terror organization. And I think at the outset, by inviting him to pray at the inauguration, the administration, a mixed message regarding extremist ideolog. Now I don’t think that that’s their intent, but it does risk undermining the administration and its appointments, strong stances against radical Islam and potentially alienating allies that would expect a consistent policy against extremist figures.

Sam Rohrer:

I couldn’t have said any better than you at least a mixed message. And I know from being in office years ago, I mean very clearly people can say, well, for political purposes you need to offer a hand, an olive leaf over here. But when you have somebody that’s actually an official part of an inauguration, a one-time event of singular nature where you are saying, this is the time for change and we’re going to make change, and then you bring in somebody who is an enemy, it says to me it raises questions to me, same as what it raises to you. Just out of curiosity, was any question raised by the team, your forum to the Trump team and did they come back and say, well, we don’t think it’s an issue.

Gregg g Roman:

It was, we didn’t receive a response, but to try to be generous here and chalk it up to having the deal with the matters of transitioning government, I think that this is part of a wider issue, which is Republican figures trying to get more votes in swing states and appealing to certain figures which are met to Republican values. But we can talk about that in the next segment.

Sam Rohrer:

Alright, and with that Gregg Roman, ladies and gentlemen, again, you’re just joining us. Theme today, inauguration day It is and its global implications. My guest COO, chief Operating Officer of Middle East Forum, Gregg  Roman, who’ll be back with me in just a moment. Well, Gregg , let me get right back into where we were on the other side. You may have a few additional things to say if you do just pick up on that. But I wanted to ask you this question before we moved into this area of implications. You had sent out something that you do with your Middle East forum, MEF, I’m going to use that, ladies and gentlemen, MEF, middle East Forum, but you do a dispatch that you call it. And the recent one from last week was one that tied into the theme we’re doing today. We’ve got inauguration, a new president coming and then a potential long list of implications, major things, major issues, some that have been set before this new president perhaps is pitfalls, but they are challenges and this administration will be defined by that. But here’s my general question here first, just kind of interested in what you think about it and that is this, obviously the Trump administration is a lot different than the Biden administration personality if nothing else but policy we hope. But as you look at this new Trump administration, it would be my question, could you identify the one most significant or maybe a couple of that would be there Trump administration policy differences that we can expect toward Israel specifically and the Middle East? Anyways, what do you say?

Gregg g Roman:

I think that the common theme between Biden’s presidency and even going back to when he was vice president under Obama, was to create equilibrium between America’s friends and America’s enemies and America’s friends’ enemies in the Middle East. And that’s the area where I think would define the best way to answer this question. Wherein Obama tried to scale back Israel’s response after October 7th wherein it tried to create parody between Armenia and Azerbaijan where it was trying to cater to Turkish interests in Syria even before the fall of Assad. I think that what Trump will try to do is to back our allies to the hilt, especially those that are with the US block step in our foreign policy. Now, if you look at the way that Biden treated, for instance, the Iran Israel nexus as it related to Hamas’ attack against the Israel on October 7th, 2023, Biden was always trying to get Israel to scale back its response.

If President Trump had been in power at that time, I think you would’ve seen a quicker downfall of the outside regime, the evisceration of Hezbollah a few weeks after October 7th, the ability for Israel to actually go in and not have artificial holdbacks on its dealing with Gaza in the West Bank. And I think the biggest policy difference would’ve been Trump supporting an Israeli attack against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure considering the fact that they were the main sponsors behind the genocidal attacks that took place on October 7th. But now we have a new challenge which is facing us because of the slow degradation of the Shia Crescent that is Iran’s influence from Iran to Iraq, Syria into Lebanon in the south and then excuse me, the north and then in the south it’s support for the TI in Yemen and also it’s support for some transnational Islamist movements in Africa. You now have a north to south axis you have to worry about, which is Turkey and it’s Sunni proxies trying to attack US allies in northeast Syria, starting to fund efforts to support Hamas and also looking at its ability to try to unwind influences that our Gulf allies, Saudi Arabia, the UAE Egypt, not in the Gulf, but still a major Sunni ally of the United States with Turkey potentially replacing Iran as the main actor and Eima allies in the region even though Turkey is part of NATO.

Sam Rohrer:

Okay, and I want to go further ladies and gentlemen, stay with us. I want to go deeper into this matter of Turkey because we have to bring that in with what’s happening in Syria and so forth. But Gregg , let me go back and revisit something that you said at the beginning when I first posed this question, you said that the Biden administration was primarily their goal was to seek an equilibrium or something of that type, some kind of parity. Alright, that’s one way to look at it politically, but are you being kind? In other words, is this, I am the person who perceives equilibrium. I want to be fair to everybody. That makes us sound really good to Biden. The other is that the Biden administration and that policy was really not one of a positive balance in the middle, but was one that actually favored the enemies of Israel,

Gregg g Roman:

Right? And I don’t think equilibrium, whether it be an intent or result is a good policy. If your friends in the region are saying that their national security and economic interests are being threatened by forces, whether they be state or non-state actors that are unhinging the balance of what you consider to be good for America, you better oppose those opposing interests full throated

Sam Rohrer:

Don’t.

Gregg g Roman:

If you don’t, you end up with the Middle East the way it is today, which is a failed region because of President Biden’s policies.

Sam Rohrer:

And I would agree with, I thought that’s what you were going to say, but I wanted to make that clear for listeners were probably picked up on it that they didn’t get the idea that that’s the gold model. Equilibrium is the gold model to me. It’s kind of like the whole political thing in the past was if you stand on the middle of the road long enough, you’re going to get hit by traffic on both sides. Choose what side you’re on and then go for it anyway. So what you’re saying is, alright. Now with that being in mind, let me back into it now. One of the issues that you raised in this last Middle East forum dispatch regarding implications was this, one of the greatest implications would be the wars that could define the Donald Trump presidency. And then you listed a number of them. I’m just going to open that up to you right now. What brewing wars from Middle East foreign perspective are the most potentially significant and may well best define what becomes this new Trump administration?

Gregg g Roman:

So the first is off the bat, like I said beforehand, Turkey and Syria against the Kurds. We’ve partnered with Kurdish forces for the past decade and a half in fighting Islamic extremism both in Iraq and in Syria. And it looks like right now Turkey is preparing a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Kurds who were currently guarding 30,000 ISIS prisoners in central Syria. If Turkey pushes the button, I think ISIS may have a second resurgence. The second one we have to focus on is Azure Bajan versus Armenia, the caucuses, Georgia, Armenia, Azure, Bajan. Some of the other stan countries are a natural buffer between threats that the US faces in the Middle East and threats that the US face coming from Russia. And there has to be a steady alignment of interest in those countries. But if Trump is not able to navigate the differences in US posture towards Russia, Turkey and Iran, I think that Azerbaijan and Armenia might cause the ability for Iran and Russia the further link up even more than they are right now as it relates to the Ukraine conflict.

The other two I think that your listeners may not entirely be aware of is China’s proxies wars in Africa. If you look at the billions of dollars that China has invested into African countries that have rare earth minerals, very necessary fossil fuels in other instances, even if President Biden visited Angola, a country that had not seen a visit by an American president in a long time, if ever, I think that Trump has to double down on kicking China out of Africa. And if it doesn’t take place, you could find more American bases being ejected from countries like what happened earlier this year and this year. And lastly, I think that China versus Taiwan an issue that I’m not an expert on, but it’s something where a forceful preemptive US action, perhaps even putting American naval assets in the straits between China and Taiwan. Taiwan would be a good move, especially if China right now is planning action against the foremost strait.

Sam Rohrer:

Okay, that’s a great overview and about a minute and a half left here in this segment. Let throw this in, that listing that you gave that came out of your listing. And so those are all great. Some of them our listeners may not have considered, but they’re there now conspicuous by its absence, although you mentioned it was Russia and the involvement with Russia in there. Now you talked about the stand nations potentially, if not careful could tie in and strengthen Russia’s hand, but why’d you leave Russia out as a single point of concern?

Gregg g Roman:

I think that Russia absolutely remains a significant factor, especially in areas where it’s losing influence and it’s trying to readjust, for instance, in Chad and Libya, since it’s been effectively kicked out of Syria. But the position of the Trump administration vis the Ukraine or its other influence across the rest of Central Asia is to try to contain Russia now to not allow it to gain any more territory in Ukraine, but to do so through a diplomatic process. I think that the focus on wars that we elucidated, were those not yet fully underway or at a high boil the Russian War and Ukraine. It’s ongoing, it’s known, and I think it’s the position of this administration to try to end the war as quickly as possible. And in order to do so, I think that Russia is going to end up taking in the next four years to lick its wounds and not to pursue another position of aggravation or aggression to continue with outreach. If it does, it will certainly be at the center of this administration’s radar. But I think that right now the position is they’re trying to end it on their terms, even if that might mean the loss of Ukraine’s territorial integrity in the Donbas.

Sam Rohrer:

Interesting. Alright, ladies and gentlemen, again, as perspective Gregg Ruman is my guest today. He’s the COO of Middle East Forum. Gregg, great insights here thus far. When we come back, ladies and gentlemen, I want to continue on in this global implications consideration and have a couple more areas to talk further with Gregg  about. And I do want to go deeper into this matter of the Kurds in particular. He’s mentioned it, but who are they? Most people don’t really know who they are and why they are so important. Well, if you’re just joining us today, we’re right smack in the middle of the program. Thanks for being a part of it on this inauguration day. And obviously I’m not tuning in, I’m not in Washington right now at the event I’m not watching it. I’m with you and special guest Gregg  Roman, who has joined me today from Middle East Forum and they have a website at me forum, FORU m.org.

A lot of information there on a wide range of issues that I think that you would find a valuable item to put into your library of trusted sources to go to. So anyways, I just put that out there. But Gregg , let’s get back into this global implications and certainly the world has been anticipating, well anticipated the November election. The world has been anticipating this January 20 many threats of why it may not even happen. Obviously it was moved inside today, blamed on the weather, but the reality was there were many threats for security purposes and the weather I think was a convenient piece of the equation. And that’s not just my opinion. So there’s a lot of change that will happen now that Joe Biden and his regime is out and the Trump administration is coming in and that this juncture, I believe as we speak, ladies and gentlemen, I think there is only one cabinet member that is officially approved in the Senate was going to try and do that for Marco Rubio as Secretary of State because he was one of them.

And other than that, the other ones still are yet to occur. So there’s a lot of things to happen beyond today. But Gregg , if you look at it and as you consider it from a Middle East Forum perspective, you’ve noted a number of areas for which this administration and advisors must exercise. Great caution. We just talked about one of those wars and things that could really detract and pull a Trump administration in a wrong direction. But another one that you identified is this no repeat of cobble the case against a hasty Syrian withdrawal. Okay, well Syria who expected that really some weeks ago when Assad was forced out. Anyways, I want to get into that, make the case, Gregg , for how Syria could become another Afghanistan.

Gregg g Roman:

Sure. So if we go back to first look at the Kabul withdrawal, Joe Biden put a process in place by setting an artificial deadline to remove all US forces from Kabul. And if you remember that picture of individuals hanging onto the wheels of a C one 30 transport aircraft literally falling onto the airfield as the last American plane left Afghanistan. Not to mention the Marines that died because of an ISIS suicide bombing outside the gate Kabul International Airport, America essentially surrendered to the Taliban when it left. And I understand the arguments against the amount of money that was spent there, the amount of us lives that were lost there, and the ability to have a steady withdrawal rather than one which was under Biden’s watch precipitous retreat. But the issues that we’re facing the US and Afghanistan are not the same as they face in Syria.

In fact, Syria is a much more dangerous place with a lot more national security threats to American interest in the region and its allies. And I think that considering the American force posture in Syria right now, the presence of a few thousand American soldiers on the Syria Iraq border at Altoff base in Jordan, and even with the US peacekeeping mission, which could be on the Golan heights, you will be able to reduce, if not completely minimize American casualty counts while still having us skin in the game. As it relates to emerging threats to our national security apparatus, the first, as I mentioned in the last segment is tenths of thousands of ISIS prisoners. We do not want to see an ISIS resurgence and our presence there acts as a backstop to the Kurdish guards that are looking over these extremist individuals. The second is a power vacuum.

If Russia, Turkey and Iran are ready to fill the void with local allies that they have, if we abandon the Kurds, this would undermine American strategic aims. And I think more than anything else beyond ISIS, beyond our strategic position there, there would be a loss of American credibility signaling to the world, not just to the Middle East, that the US is ready to cut and run, hurting trust in American defense commitments from Europe to South America to Southeast Asia. And it’s like Lindsey Graham wrote in his forward to the Afghanistan Inspector General Report, it’s better for us to have our military forward deployed to make sure that we deal with the battles in the regions where they start and not wait for them to get to American Shores. That’s why I think it’s vital that we maintain a presence in the Euphrates backing the Kurds and keeping the rest of the region in check until it erupts leads to the loss of US allies and then poses a threat to our interests beyond the region.

Sam Rohrer:

But Gregg , isn’t it complicated by the fact that it was with US air cover and assistance that both the Al-Qaeda with I believe some involvement with ISIS, the distinctions are very minor when reality, but they were the ones that were on the ground and helped to bring down Assad, so we’ve already been helping the an enemy. Can you add some clarity to that?

Gregg g Roman:

Sure. So it was American air cover that was focused on ISIS elements in the east of Syria. The path that HTS Har, which is basically Al-Qaeda light, the Turkish backed forces in the west of the country came down a highway to Damascus and that was not with US coverage. So you have to really think of Syria as two distinct geographic entities, one in which 30% of the country is controlled by the Kurds US friends and the other 70% of the country, which at the time prior to Assad’s fall was split between Sunni Al-Qaeda, empathetic Jihadi and Iran’s backed forces, which was the Assad government. Now 70% of the country is ruled by jihadis that do not have a favorable opinion of America. And it’s better for us to keep that split rather than give Syria and all of its resources, including transportation corridors from the rest of the Middle East into Turkey and then possibly onto Europe between the Kurds and the Sunnis. If we keep that split America’s having a buffer against a full jihadi control of Syria,

Sam Rohrer:

Well, alright, I could go so much deeper with you on that, but at least thank you for a little bit of clarification on it. Whenever I travel to Israel, one of the things I hear there is everything here is complicated. Everything here is complicated. Well, what you just described in Syria is doubly complicated by the appearance of it and sounds to me as if it’s a balance that’s going to be very difficult for anybody to try to maintain, but that being the case, I’d said we’d go this way. I want you to complete this segment. If we need to carry it over, we will. But you’ve talked the Kurds, our listeners are familiar with the Kurds, they’ve heard about them, but who are the Kurds? Why are they friends of the United States? Why does Israel view them as friends and why does Turkey now want to commit genocide against them?

Gregg Roman:

The Kurds themselves are a distinct ethnic group spanning not just Turkey and Syria, but also Iraq and Iran. They’ve long sought autonomy or independence from these host countries, but they have been basically shooting themselves in the foot because of internal political disagreements between the four types that are across those four countries. They’ve supported Western interests, they cooperate with Israel and they see their shared interests in maintaining regional stability to be in lockstep with US interests. Now the problem is that Turkey, under these Islamist leadership of Tiwan views most Kurdish movements in Syria and in Turkey as so-called terrorist threats. There are rhetorical hostility at times borders on genocidal rhetoric. And if you look at Erdogan’s vows publicly to eradicate Kurdish fighters, he’s made the intent clear that he seeks to wipe all Kurdish power away from where they currently are backing the US in Syria.

Now, the Trump administration can maintain a limited but consistent US presence and Kurdish regions supplying them with defense resources, intelligence and logistics without being called upon to fight directly for them. And parallel to that, they can keep up a steady stream of diplomatic pressure against Turkey to avoid direct assaults on Kurdish held areas. This would prevent a radical power vacuum and at the same time address the concern I had made prior by upholding trust with a longstanding ally. If you back the status quo, keeping the Kurds safe in their areas without backing any ambition for them to get independence, I think that’s a policy way to get good equilibrium and not to upset the region.

Sam Rohrer:

Well, effectively that’s the way it’s been for a long time, right? I mean the Kurds have, I think they probably would love to have an independent state, but you’re saying that doesn’t have to be the case for which they’re lobbied, but keeping them in a position where they can continue to defend themselves against Turkish type people who would like to commit genocide. That seems like the most simple and basic things that we ought to do. Finish some thoughts on that, then we’ll go into the break here.

Gregg Roman:

Sure. The US does not have to bend the knee to the genocidal machinations of a Turkish dictator in order to maintain its security interest in the region. And you can back the Kurds for their defense needs without giving them political support for independence. It’s a strategy that’ll work in a way that’ll protect our interests and keep the region in check.

Sam Rohrer:

Ladies and gentlemen, okay, these are just some items, again, implications. These are not small issues, none of them that we’ve talked about. Middle East Forum folks, Gregg Roman, who’s with me today on their website forum.org. You have a lot more information when we come back. I want to go a little bit deeper into Turkey and then we’re going to talk about the peace treaty in Israel. Well, Gregg , we’re going to go into our final segment now, and I have these two questions I want to complete. One, your comment on this peace treaty between a Moss and Israel, but let’s go back to Turkey just a little bit here. You’ve already given plenty of comment. We’ve talked on many other programs about how we envisioned when the sod first left, we set on this program that what we believed would be the case that we would see Turkey emerge as the stronger entity.

And we’ve talked about how Erdogan views himself as setting up and Reinstituting the old Ottoman Empire. He’s made his alliances with Hamas replete. He has come out directly against Israel. So any regard, what is it about Erdogan that makes him and or Turkey such a serious concern? Put it that way, and do you envision that in this void coming out of Syria something as the power base continues to shift, do you see a stronger Turkey as in stronger than Iran was before? Do you see Turkey actually supplanting the influence of Iran, or do you see both of them perhaps linking arms together and having a more formidable enemy of Israel than existed before the fall of Assad?

Gregg Roman:

Well, first on Erdogan and then on Turkey, Erdogan started his political career in the 1990s ending his reign ruling over Istanbul by going to jail for four months because of his Islamist tendencies in ideology, he’s championed Muslim brotherhood ideology and grown more and more hostile to Israel and also other American allies. Over the past 23 years since his rise as president of the country, he’s trying to overshadow Arab states and his anti-Israel rhetoric. Now Turkey, the country itself has a military which is much stronger than Iran. Iran and Turkey have deferring agendas, one in which Turkey seeks Sunni supremacy over the Middle East, whereas Iran was seeking Shia supremacy. But they can cooperate tactically against Israel and the Kurds, and you might have a point where Turkey and Iran deepen an alliance and pose a strategic threat to Israel and the rest of the region. The bottom line is, is that Erdogan’s ideology and Turkey’s Islamist shift can make it a major regional adversary both against US interests, moving away from NATO alignment and also going further to try to bridge ties with Tehran to divvy up the Middle East. I’m extremely worried about it, and I think the one thing the US can do is to keep a minimal force presence and a very strong diplomatic posture as relates to Erdogan’s vision to rekindle the Ottoman Empire.

Sam Rohrer:

I would also assume that part of Israel’s hesitancy about leaving their presence now that they have some presence in the southern Syria,

Gregg g Roman:

Right? And I think that that creates a strategic buffer for Israel to be able to track what’s going on in Damascus, and I don’t see them leaving that area anytime soon. The other thing to worry about, by the way, is Turkey’s proxies threats against Syria’s minorities, Christians, Aloise, Druze, we already mentioned the Kurds. There’s a moral imperative there to make sure that Turkey is not able to cleanse these individuals as well,

Sam Rohrer:

Right? I think that’s all a great point. I think I probably need to have you back, Gregg , for those things, build those out further in our future program. But let’s complete and stop have you comment on this. I’ll get it out here in just a minute. And that is this peace treaty pun Hamas and Israel, the one to which Trump said earlier, if you do not agree to return the hostages, there will be hell to pay. He said. And so now there’s the political thing. Biden says, well, I’m the one who caused this, and Trump said, I’m the one. So there’s this political nonsense that’s going on. Who gets credit for it? Is this peace treaty actually something to which Israel, because I’ve heard some say that really it’s not in their best interest. Is it in their best interest? And how long do you think this may last?

Gregg g Roman:

I would call this more of a hudna, which in Arabic is a temporary ceasefire rather than any sort of long-term peace. At the end of the day, Israel realizes, and I think you and your listeners realize as well that Hamas’ core ideology is committed to Israel’s destruction. This is a few week reprieve from being able to attempt to stop their fighting against the Jewish state, and it’s unlikely to endure. The thing is, is that Israel will be threatened by this. Hamas will use this lull to rebuild its military to re-arm, to try to find new smuggling routes back into the Gaza Strip. And while Israel might see short-term benefits in terms of retrieving hostages, the deeper conflict will remain and get even more aggressive. I think that the Trump administration’s posture is forceful in terms of its rhetoric, but real peace requires Hamas to abandon its ideology, abandon its arms, and to give up on trying to destroy the Jewish state. So this agreement is precarious at best.

Sam Rohrer:

Alright, and that’s how I would tend to view it too, because of the reason that you just said when they swear and their allegiance to Allah that they must exterminate all of Israel in the Jewish people. It does not seem to be any kind of a basis or hope there for any kind of a lasting agreement that only comes by strength. So therefore, that’s why I said I wondered if it really was truly in the interest of Israel. Now, only a couple minutes left here, but I view Trump as being in a difficult position somewhat of his own doing. Perhaps on one hand you don’t want war on the other hand, that’s all these people understand over there, the enemies of Israel. Anyways, your prognostication for what I’m going to see in the months down the road here, particularly as it comes to the Middle East,

Gregg g Roman:

I think we’ll see a realignment of America’s allies, both Israel and its Gulf allies giving Iran an ultimatum, abandon its nuclear program or face the full wrath of the US Gulf Israel Alliance against its nuclear sites, and potentially even the possibility of selling its regime. All of its main pieces on the chessboard have been essentially removed, and there is a clear line of sight between Israel’s Air Force bases, any Iran’s nuclear facilities without any enemy radar giving Iran a heads up to be able to either detect it or after Israel’s strike against Iran back in the fall, any anti-air missile systems to defend against it. So Trump will address Iran in the next few months. The way in which he does, so I think will be with the goal of eliminating its nuclear program.

Sam Rohrer:

With that, Gregg , I think that’s a great response, and ladies and gentlemen, I’m just going to throw in as we complete that, is that you now have Turkey, Sunni, Iran Shiga, you’ve got this alliance there in Middle East against Iran, but now you’ve got Sunni Turkey. Well, I could see those guys wanting to develop their alliance in a stronger way. Anyway, there’s a lot that is yet to happen and unfold as we watch what takes place in the Middle East. So all of us, as we are observing and looking at this inauguration day, we need to continue to pray for those who are assuming new positions of authority, that they would fear God, fear God, and not think that just some political machinations are going to all of a sudden bring peace out of an area where enemies have sworn the death of Israel and the Jewish people. So there’s a lot happening, much to be aware of, much to be prayer of. But Gregg , thank you so much for being with me today. Great insight on a lot of things. I appreciate it, and I would love to have you back in some of your team in the weeks ahead. So again, his website, ME forum, MEForum  me forum.org is the website. A lot of information that’s available there. Thanks for being with us today. Be with us tomorrow and I’ll visit you again here, live on Wednesday.