The Chris Hedges Report

The whole world is watching as negotiations begin today in Islamabad, Pakistan between Iran and the United States following an agreement to cease military action for two weeks. The negotiations are based on a ten-point plan outlined by Iran and approved by the United States as a basis for the talks.

Israel has not been invited to the negotiations, which are being conducted indirectly and with a great deal of skepticism by the Iranian team. The outcome of these talks will impact the entire global economy and the fate of millions of people in West Asia, six million of whom have already been forcibly displaced by US and Israeli aggression in recent years.

Chris Hedges discusses the peace talks with former British Diplomat Alastair Crooke, who has participated in past negotiations between Palestinian groups and Israel and who studied the rise of Islamic groups in the region. Crooke explains that the current Islamabad talks are rife with contradictions and are impeded by a failure of the West to understand that the goal of Iran, in the defense of its sovereignty, is “to blow up the existing paradigm” that has plagued Iran for nearly 50 years, which Crooke describes as a “revolutionary objective” that has both financial and cultural elements.

Many factors have led to Iran maintaining a position of strength throughout the recent US-Israeli aggression, which gives it an advantage in these talks. Meanwhile, Israel is in a position of weakness as it fights on multiple fronts with a military in a state of collapse and a population in distress. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces a court case, which could result in his imprisonment, and an upcoming election.

And for the United States, Crooke explains that its miscalculated war on Iran has backfired, leading to the rise of the Chinese Yuan, the decline of the petrodollar, significant losses of its infrastructure in the Middle East and a conflict that, like the Vietnam War, is being fought on difficult terrain for which the US is not prepared. Hedges compares this situation to the Suez Crisis in 1956 that accelerated the decline of the British Empire. When asked if the US is likely to restart the war on Iran, Crooke responds with “What’s really left to the United States militarily to do that would be a game changer?”

In an attempt to justify and garner popular support for the American-Israeli war on Iran, the Trump administration is pressuring its allied nations to join the US in designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as the world’s greatest sponsor of state terrorism. The administration points to Iran’s participation in the Axis of Resistance, which includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine and Ansar Allah in Yemen, as evidence for its position. This raises the question of whether Iran, by supporting proxy organizations, is doing anything differently from what US intelligence agencies have done for many decades.

To answer this question, Chris Hedges speaks with John Kiriakou, a former CIA analyst and counterterrorism operations officer who worked in West Asia. Kiriakou is known for blowing the whistle on the CIA’s torture program, for which he was the sixth person convicted under the Espionage Act. In this interview, Kiriakou makes the distinction between organizations that carry out terrorism and those that are fighting for national liberation from foreign oppressors.

Kiriakou explains that throughout recent history, many countries or organizations backed by the United States have engaged in terrorist acts, and that the US has used the terrorist designation “as a cudgel against countries that we don’t like or whose policies we disagree with,” making the designation lose its meaning.

Hedges and Kiriakou discuss US support for terrorists, including the State of Israel, which Kiriakou calls “an extreme example” of an entity that uses violence, and the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), a “cult” co-founded by Maryam Rahjavi, an Iranian who opposes the Islamic Republic of Iran and who has cultivated strong ties with both Democrats and Republicans in the US.

They conclude the interview with an analysis of the current US-Israel war on Iran and how it plays a part in Israel’s goal to create chaos in the region. Kiriakou laments that the US has missed many opportunities to partner with Iran in curbing terrorism and narcotics production. He warns that the US’ aggression against Iran will likely result in unintended blowback.

In filmmaker Annemarie Jacir’s new film, Palestine 36, one of the most pivotal moments in Palestine’s history is brought to life for the first time through cinema.

In this episode of The Chris Hedges Report, host Chris Hedges speaks with Jacir about the 1936–39 Palestinian uprising against British colonial rule — a mass revolt that laid the groundwork for the modern Palestinian struggle, and also the crushing of Palestine’s organizational infrastructure that culminated into the founding of the Zionist state a decade later.

Jacir explains that this period represents “the beginning of the national movement for liberation in Palestine,” emphasizing its scale and significance as “the first really mass uprising” that spread from “countryside to city” and “across classes.” For her, revisiting this moment is essential to understanding everything that followed, as “it sets up everything for the Nakba in 1948 and the loss of Palestine.”

Jacir explains how her film reconstructs not only the revolt itself but also the conditions that shaped it—British colonialism, offensive attacks on Palestinian labor, and the exploitation of the Palestinian elite’s fractured nature and ambitions for power. In her research, Jacir says she was struck by the extent of that brutality, noting, “I was really… surprised… I’d never really heard about that under the British,” only to later uncover detailed accounts in archival records, including testimonies from British soldiers themselves. In fact, “it’s the blueprint of military occupation that we live today,” she says.

But Jacir frames Palestine 36 as more than a historical drama. It is, she says, about “a moment of real possibility” and the moral choices faced by those living under oppression. Even during production—disrupted by the war in Gaza—the film’s themes felt urgently contemporary. “There is no past and present,” she reflects. “We’re still living the same thing.”

As the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran intensifies, the justifications for its outbreak grow increasingly murky, shifting between nuclear fears, regime change, and regional security concerns. In this interview, Israeli journalist Gideon Levy joins Chris Hedges to cut through the official narratives and examine the deeper ideological forces driving Israel’s long-standing push toward confrontation with Iran under Benjamin Netanyahu.

Levy argues that the war cannot be understood purely through strategy or geopolitics, but instead through a deeply embedded national mindset. “War is always the first option, not the last one in Israel,” he explains, pointing to a political culture that consistently defaults to military solutions while sidelining diplomacy. This helps explain why lessons from past conflicts—from Gaza to Lebanon—have failed to meaningfully alter Israeli policy, even when those campaigns produced questionable results.

At the same time, the human consequences have been dire. As the region destabilizes further, Levy emphasizes the sheer scale of displacement caused by Israeli military actions, noting that “six million human beings…were expelled, uprooted, displaced from their homes.” In other words, the war’s impact extends far beyond its stated objectives, raising urgent moral and strategic questions.

Levy goes on to discuss Israeli society itself. He delivers a scathing critique of the country’s media landscape, arguing that self-censorship have infected Israeli “open” society. Levy says the press voluntarily “made Israel totally ignorant about what’s going on on our behalf in Gaza,” insulating the public from the realities of its own military actions.

As the conflict with Iran threatens to spiral into a wider regional war, Levy remains deeply pessimistic. Without a fundamental shift away from militarism, he suggests, Israel risks entrenching itself in an endless cycle of violence—one whose consequences will ultimately extend far beyond the Middle East.