Sample Page Title

Subscribe right here: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Overcast | Pocket Casts

Early on Easter morning, President Trump went on a tirade concerning the ongoing conflict in Iran; the Iranian authorities had closed the Strait of Hormuz, and he needed it reopened. “Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you loopy bastards, otherwise you’ll be dwelling in Hell!,” he wrote on Reality Social.

Trump had given Iran an ultimatum a couple of days earlier: make a deal or the USA and Israel would bomb Iran sufficient to “convey them again to the Stone Ages.” The American barrage he promised would goal desalination crops, energy crops, and bridges—i.e., civilian infrastructure.

Because the deadline approached, the president’s posts someway turned extra incendiary. On Tuesday, he threatened: “A complete civilization will die tonight, by no means to be introduced again once more. I don’t need that to occur, but it surely most likely will,” rhetorical territory unseen amongst worldwide leaders in an period of the United Nations and mutually assured destruction.

Hours earlier than the deadline arrived, nonetheless, the U.S. introduced a two-week cease-fire. The information was not such a shock, provided that Trump has made a behavior of issuing harsh threats earlier than retreating, but it surely nonetheless gives a reprieve for Iranian residents. Whereas negotiations befell, Iran would reopen the Strait, and the U.S. and Israel would cease their bombing. Each side declared victory within the deal. However the compact’s shaky basis started wobbling nearly instantly; and within the aftermath of Trump’s threats, America’s standing on this planet had already fallen. On this week’s Radio Atlantic, our employees writers Tom Nichols and Nancy A. Youssef clarify the conflict in Iran after an obvious risk of genocide, and the way no deal can undo the harm of these phrases.

The next is a transcript of the episode:

[Music]

Adam Harris:  That is Radio Atlantic. I’m Adam Harris, in for Hanna Rosin. This week started with President Trump giving Iran an ultimatum: Open up the Strait of Hormuz, lower a deal, or face assaults on civilian infrastructure.

Harris: That was him talking at a Monday press convention.

The subsequent morning, he was much more direct: “A complete civilization will die tonight, by no means to be introduced again once more,” he declared on Reality Social. “I don’t need that to occur, but it surely most likely will.”

[Music]

Harris: Within the hours earlier than his Tuesday-night deadline, the USA introduced a two-week cease-fire whereas the talks play out.

The deal already seems shaky, with Israeli hanging targets in Lebanon and Iranian state media saying the strait is once more closed in response. Talks are set to start in Pakistan this weekend.

However within the meantime, the president can’t take again his phrases, phrases that seem to fulfill the UN definition of genocide and, when uttered by a world chief, are taken as coverage.

To know what comes subsequent, I’m joined by two Atlantic employees writers who observe the navy and international affairs, Nancy Youssef and Tom Nichols.

Nancy, thanks for becoming a member of.

Nancy Youssef: Thanks for having me.

Harris: And, Tom, it’s nice to have you ever.

Tom Nichols: Hey, Adam. Thanks for having me.

Harris: So, Tom, we’re talking on Wednesday. Because the clock was winding down on Tuesday, I suppose a really blunt query: Did you assume he was going to undergo with the threats?

Nichols: I didn’t assume it was inconceivable, however I believe it could’ve provoked a constitutional disaster, which implies that it was a lot much less seemingly than to not occur, as a result of I believe he would’ve needed to order the navy to do issues that the navy, this time, would’ve balked at.

There are studies that the navy is already giving the president lists of issues that solely had navy applicability, which isn’t the identical factor as erasing a civilization. So I didn’t assume it was prone to occur, however as I stated in the piece I wrote that afternoon, when the president of the USA talks, you need to take it severely.

We’re used to Trump saying form of crazy issues and speaking about sharks and his uncle and electrical energy and whatnot. However nonetheless, he’s the president, and the president’s statements are coverage. And so I stated, properly, it’s not prone to occur, however we’ve got to deal with his statements as if it might occur and go from there.

Harris: Yeah, and, Nancy, what have been your sources telling you about Trump’s threats within the lead-up to that deadline?

Youssef: So there was numerous nervousness after that social-media put up proper after Easter by which he threatened the destruction of civilization. And folks have been actually attempting to determine what was within the realm of potential by way of what might be performed.

The dialog I heard within the run-up to the deadline was that the U.S. wouldn’t be hitting historic websites or civilian infrastructure, however that they’d exit for what’s referred to as “twin use,” issues which can be used each by the navy for navy functions and for civilian use.

However then you may’t simply form of declare “twin use” after which strike. It needs to be proportional. You need to show it. So I believe that was form of the beginning of individuals on the lookout for an off-ramp from the rhetoric that we heard. After which by day’s finish—I couldn’t work out why on the time—you might really feel that issues had form of calmed down by way of the nervousness that I used to be feeling within the morning from sources, however we didn’t fairly perceive why on the time.

And I assumed that possibly it was as a result of even when the navy had gone by way of, which, as Tom famous, would’ve prompted numerous mayhem, even that wasn’t gonna assure the autumn of the regime. So the query I saved coming again to is: What’s the navy acquire that comes with doing these unprecedented strikes?

We’ve seen the Iranian regime survive the decapitation of its management, the destruction of its ballistic-missile and drone functionality—to what extent, we don’t know—the destruction of its navy, largely, they usually have survived. And traditionally, we’ve seen them fairly resilient. They have been in an eight-year conflict with Iraq and survived that. And so I couldn’t perceive how these strikes, had they been carried out, with all the implications related to it, bought the president one of many outcomes that he stated he was in search of, which was the collapse of the regime.

Harris: Yeah, and truly, talking of these outcomes that the president stated he was in search of, proper, you go even again to January and you concentrate on what the president was saying concerning the Iranian individuals, proper—this was to assist them overthrow the regime. And now we’ve got one thing like 1,700 Iranian civilians who’ve been killed within the strikes, together with no less than 250 kids.

What of the Iranian individuals in all of this? What was the administration enthusiastic about these individuals whenever you have been having these threats from the president?

Youssef: Nicely, it’s an attention-grabbing query as a result of this began at 2:30 within the morning by way of presidential statements, which he produced from a Reality Social video, that this was for the Iranian individuals.

Youssef: And I believe there have been numerous Iranian individuals who welcomed it and even nonetheless welcomed it as a result of there was such profound frustration with the regime. We had seen huge protests within the run-up to this in December and January, and actual threats to the sturdiness of the regime.

However over time, not solely by way of the strikes, however by way of the rhetoric we heard from the U.S., I believe we noticed an administration that conflated the regime and the individuals. And we use this phrase form of “hearts and minds,” and possibly persons are fast to dismiss it. But when the target was to get the Iranian individuals to stand up and to problem the federal government, it’s very arduous to get that form of mobilization whenever you’re additionally attacking them and making what they noticed as derogatory feedback about their faith on Easter Sunday and all this stuff.

And so I believe for some Iranians—we heard about actual splits throughout the diaspora—however internally, I believe there was an actual wrestle between those that each discovered themselves caught with a regime that they didn’t need and a conflict that was carried out in a means that they didn’t need.

Harris: On these targets and enthusiastic about this was a conflict that the individuals didn’t need, however now we’ve reached a degree the place we’ve got reached a cease-fire. However I’m nonetheless form of caught on this concept that I don’t know that we’ve ever gotten a transparent definition of why the administration is there.

They’ve stated all of those numerous the explanation why they’re there, and now they’re saying that, properly, the Strait of Hormuz, it’s reopening, and that’s the form of victory, however that was only a byproduct of conflict. So, Tom, Nancy, both of you may reply this one, have they clearly outlined our motive for being there?

Nichols: No. No. (Laughs.) Now we’ve got a really clear motive, which is to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which wouldn’t have been closed if we hadn’t gone to conflict within the first place. In that sense, sure, we created a transparent conflict goal by beginning a conflict.

I believe the essential factor is to return to the primary day of this conflict and to comprehend, no matter what number of instances Trump denies it, this was a regime-change conflict. It was meant to be a regime-change conflict. And we’re seeing that now—there was this piece from The New York Occasions that was very detailed and was form of a minute-by-minute rationalization of how the administration went to conflict.

It was clear Trump stated, We’re gonna hit them actually arduous, after which the regime’s gonna fall. And, boy, how hardly ever do I say this about individuals in Trump’s orbit, however to their credit score, individuals just like the CIA director stated—I imagine the phrase he used to explain that state of affairs was “farcical.”

However Trump didn’t wanna hear it, as a result of bear in mind, Trump wish-casts; I say this each time we discuss him. He tries to manifest issues into being. He’s like, Yeah, yeah, I do know it’s an issue, but when we simply do it, it can occur—“in the event you construct it, they may come” form of considering. And he launched the conflict, anticipated the regime to fall, and it didn’t.

And when that didn’t occur, all the pieces went to hell. They didn’t know what to do subsequent. So he simply stated, Basic, have you ever bought extra operations right here? [General:] Yeah, we are able to hit loads. Iran is a target-rich setting. We will bomb stuff all day lengthy.

However as I used to show on the Naval Struggle Faculty years in the past: Operational successes with out strategic course don’t get you towards victory.

Harris: And what does the navy do once they don’t have that strategic course and once they’re pulling all of those completely different threads, proper? If it is a regime change, you’re going to do a selected factor for regime change, versus I’m doing a selected factor for liberation of individuals, versus I’m doing particular issues to open up a road that wouldn’t have been closed in any other case. So how do they plan when there is no such thing as a strategic course?

Nichols: That’s not their job. Their job is to plan operations. The very senior navy leaders are speculated to ask that query: Now we have these packages. Now we have these goal units. Now we have these aims we are able to obtain. What’s it you need us to do, Mr. President? The place are we speculated to be going with this?

And within the absence of that, they do operations. They are saying, Okay, properly, we are able to destroy some extra factories. We will blow up some extra airfields. We will take out some extra boats. We will do that each one day, no less than till we begin operating out of ammo.

So ultimately, the individuals which can be speculated to know which can be the form of people who Pete Hegseth has been firing left and proper.

Look, this is likely one of the most war-gamed situations in trendy American historical past. Now we have been war-gaming situations about preventing with Iran for nearly 50 years. They’ve bought tons of operational plans sitting on the cabinets about all the pieces. But when the president simply form of wanders into the sweet retailer and says, Gimme a type of, gimme a type of, and provides me a type of, the navy salutes well and says, Sure, sir.

Youssef: Can I leap in, Adam? ’Trigger Tom made so many nice factors, and I wanna simply construct on a few them.

Harris: Yeah, completely.

Youssef: The firings—we’ve had numerous generals and admirals fired, together with the top of the Military, throughout this battle. Now, normally, when a common or admiral is fired throughout conflict, it’s for the conduct of the conflict. That didn’t look like the case on this occasion; this was private animosity—a secretary who was micromanaging personnel selections within the Military, seeking to put his personal stamp on that service.

And whereas this was largely a conflict from the air and sea, the Military had an essential function. The air defenses that you just heard about, the Patriots and the THAADs, these are Military-operated system. Restocking the munitions that have been used for them, it falls on the Military chief of employees, and he was fired throughout this battle. And so I believe that’s essential to notice, simply the tempo at which these personnel adjustments have been occurring.

The opposite factor I wanna level out is, for all the explanations that the USA gave for conducting this conflict, Iran was very constant all through: They needed to outlive as a regime. They needed compensation for the damages to their nation. And so I believe, to Tom’s level, when one aspect doesn’t have clear strategic goals and the opposite does, no quantity of firepower can resolve that. And what you noticed the Iranians do is take that technique and marry it with an asymmetric-warfare method to remove the benefit that the USA had, with a lot stronger munitions coaching, planes, weapons, ships. And in order that’s the place the technique, I believe, form of—or lack thereof—performed out on the battlefield.

Nichols: Two fast factors—the opposite factor about Nancy’s level concerning the Military: The Military took casualties. We spent numerous time on watching tv concerning the air conflict, however when a few of these bases bought hit, these have been Military people who we misplaced.

The opposite is, this seems so much like Ukraine. It was precisely the identical imbalance of pursuits. [Russian President Vladimir] Putin went in, thought he was gonna simply knock the Ukrainian regime over in a day—or three days or 4 days. But additionally, when that didn’t occur, Putin didn’t have a transparent set of targets. It was simply: throw extra guys and extra our bodies, and blow up extra buildings.

And identical to the Iranians, the Ukrainians had a strategic purpose: survive, and management the territory and the federal government of Ukraine. They usually have, up to now.

Harris: Nancy, we all know that nobody actually wins in conflict by way of human struggling. Besides, we now have this cease-fire, and I ponder, primarily based on all the pieces you’ve stated right here, is Iran truly the winner of the cease-fire?

Youssef: Nicely, I ought to begin by saying that the cease-fire may be very tenuous. Nearly instantly, Iran introduced that the strait can be successfully shut down once more as a result of Israel, which didn’t imagine within the a part of the settlement that stated that Lebanon wouldn’t be attacked, carried out intensive assaults on Lebanon. So it’s all very fragile as a result of there are three events with three completely different pursuits, and we don’t know the specifics of the deal.

Now, having stated that, Trump, among the many causes he gave is that he didn’t need Iran to have a nuclear weapon. However I believe what Iran found is that they really have a deterrent functionality that’s instantly obtainable to them proper now, that enables them to make income off of it, that enables them to have nice affect over the worldwide economic system, and that was the Strait of Hormuz.

I don’t know that Iran must look to nuclear capabilities as a lot, having now been empowered with some management over the Strait of Hormuz. One of many issues that they’ve stated is that they wanna preserve that management. And so what Iran has come out of this, I believe, is a brand new type of deterrence towards future warfare—not inviting sanctions by way of the prospects of a nuclear program, however fairly form of saying, In the event you punish us, it now impacts the worldwide economic system, or definitely has that potential.

That was at all times form of their nuclear possibility of types, that if it got here right down to the risk to their survival—which this, for them, was—that they’d train that possibility of the strait. And now that they’ve, and I believe, going ahead, we’re gonna see them attempt to proceed to gather income, as they did through the conflict, to rebuild and probably rebuild the regime from the strikes that they’ve endured all through these previous 39 days.

[Music]

Harris: After the break, the turmoil contained in the Trump administration over this conflict and what which means on the battlefield.

[Break]

Harris: Tom, one of many issues that I couldn’t essentially wrap my head round, it was possibly an irony that was actually troubling me on Sunday into Monday into Tuesday, because the president’s threats turned extra hostile, extreme, incendiary—whichever adjective you’d like to make use of there—and that was that he was saying issues that folks clearly recognized as conflict crimes and Congress has not but declared a conflict. And so I suppose, constitutionally, that is nonetheless one thing that’s value asking: Will Congress ever declare a conflict, or does it matter at this level?

Nichols: No, and it doesn’t matter at this level. There’s a few issues to consider and causes that Democrats can be hesitant to declare a conflict as properly. Wartime situations vastly empower a president.

What I believe individuals like Tim Kaine and others among the many Democrats needed was a war-powers decision, to have the ability to rein in Trump by regulation and by budgetary authority from this battle. However now that it’s over—and I believe it’s over for the foreseeable future—there’s no level in it.

Republicans didn’t wanna do it as a result of Trump saved sending them alerts: Cease saying “conflict”; it’s a navy operation, which is a part of the rationale, I believe, that the conflict was by no means fashionable. I’ve by no means seen this occur earlier than, the place a president embarks on a serious navy operation and never solely will get no bump out of it, however truly begins to bleed help over time. Even within the first levels of Vietnam, the American individuals rallied round Lyndon Johnson. That is actually unprecedented in trendy instances.

Harris: Yeah, and also you stated that you just assume that it’s over for the foreseeable future, proper? But when we’re working below the concept the cease-fire is tenuous, what leads you to say that it’s over?

Nichols: As a result of Trump’s complete political physique language for weeks now has been, Get me out of this.

I believe what we noticed, from Easter onward and main as much as these actually feverish statements, was panic and flailing. He misplaced management of the scenario throughout the first week, when the issues he needed to occur didn’t occur.

And ever since then, he’s been attempting to govern markets and wish-cast options and announce issues, hoping that simply by saying them they develop into actuality, like offers: We’re gonna make an amazing deal. They’re begging me for a deal. None of that occurred. And I believe the very last thing anyone needs in Washington proper now could be to have to return into this.

Nancy and I have been speaking at one level about Basic [Dan] Caine’s briefing, which actually gave the impression of a wrap-up. It didn’t sound like a Right here’s the place we’re on the eve of a cease-fire. It gave the impression of a Welp, it’s been 39 days. Right here’s all of the stuff we destroyed. Thanks, and good night.

Harris: I used to be watching that press convention on Wednesday morning as properly, and there gave the impression to be two completely different postures that have been coming from Caine and Secretary Hegseth. Am I flawed in that? ’Trigger Basic Caine did appear as if he was wrapping issues up.

Harris: However Secretary Hegseth saved going again to this concept that, Nicely, the rationale why we’re on the cease-fire and the rationale why this deal got here is due to the president’s threats.

Harris: As a result of he’s proven that he’s keen to go there, and he’s nonetheless keen to go there.

Harris: Type of leaving that possibility hanging on the market felt like a special factor than what Basic Caine was saying.

Nichols: Yeah, in fact that’s what Pete Hegseth’s going to say, as a result of whereas this conflict has been happening, there’s been one other drama happening on the Pentagon: Pete Hegseth’s frightened about his job.

And in the event you marvel why the secretary of the Military got here out in latest days and stated, I’m not quitting; I’ve no plans to resign; I’m not getting fired, so far as I do know, that’s Dan Driscoll, and he has been floated because the almost definitely alternative for Pete Hegseth.

So each time you see Pete Hegseth, simply assume that each one he’s doing is talking to Donald Trump and saying, Please hold me in my job.

Harris: Nancy, one of many issues Tom talked about was the deference that Republicans have had, historically, to the president during the last a number of years, in each phrases in workplace. However some members of his personal occasion, proper, had develop into vocally vital of his threats in latest days. What are they saying now that this cease-fire has gone into impact?

Youssef: I believe that you just’re listening to aid. All through these statements, it was notable to me, sure, there have been Republicans that spoke up, however the silence that occurred all through, significantly after the president threatened to destroy a rustic’s civilization; the silence after Hegseth, in a type of press conferences, talked about “no quarter,” after which, days later, U.S. service members have been flying an F-15E over Iran and needed to escape as a result of the Iranians shot it down.

There was numerous actually bombastic language that occurred all through this conflict. And once more, I believe Tom’s proper by way of the viewers that always Hegseth is talking to, however it’s heard world wide. And it was hanging to me that we didn’t hear the form of pushback I believe that possibly some would’ve anticipated, given the impression on the battlefield. You could possibly really feel the discomfort in that silence, but it surely wasn’t sufficient to problem the president’s assertions, and that was hanging to me.

I must also observe that there was a willingness to form of help funding within the conflict, which, on the time, the president was asking for $200 billion. I believe the query going ahead will probably be whether or not they proceed to help the navy by way of the finances. The president’s asking for $1.5 trillion. A lot of that may go in the direction of rebuilding a few of the harm that occurred to ships—we noticed the united statesGerald Ford, the latest plane provider, caught on hearth throughout this battle—the restocking of munitions, significantly these air defenses.

There’s a price, and I believe the Republicans will probably be confronted with form of whether or not they’re keen to pay for it actually after which by way of political prices, provided that the president had campaigned on the promise to not go into these sorts of wars on this area particularly.

Harris: Yeah, and even, proper, contemplating his guarantees not to enter wars in these areas particularly and different ways in which the president has form of gone again on issues that he stated through the marketing campaign, alongside the form of more and more erratic, of types, habits that he has been exhibiting, Tom, proper, there have been calls from notable right-wing figures for the twenty fifth Modification to be invoked. After all, that’s the most nuclear possibility there and possibly probably the most concerned possibility. However these of us have been former representatives, of us like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Joe Walsh, Adam Kinzinger, however you ended up getting of us like Alex Jones. Is there a degree the place the form of extra mainstream a part of the occasion begins to push again if the president’s habits turns into much more erratic than it has been in latest weeks?

Nichols: Boy, that could be a nice query as a result of what would represent extra erratic than beginning a conflict half a world away with a rustic of 90 million individuals after which threatening to erase their civilization from the planet?

I believe what you’re seeing, although, is Republicans, fairly than rising in opposition or enthusiastic about the twenty fifth Modification, they’re doing a way more time-honored Washington custom” They’re going to the press, they usually’re ratting one another out. They usually’re distancing themselves from the president.

That entire report concerning the resolution to go to conflict, mainly, you had all people within the room saying, Nicely, I didn’t assume it was a good suggestion.

Harris: Yeah.

Nichols: The one man who will get thrown below the bus in that entire account—and he’s thrown below the bus by all of his colleagues—is Pete Hegseth.

The opposite factor that’s occurring—and this goes again to the dialog you have been simply having with Nancy about budgets—do the Republicans actually wanna go on the market in a couple of months? As a result of, simply to again up for a second, the financial harm from this conflict goes to reverberate now for months. And I believe numerous Republicans on the market are saying, I can’t actually do something concerning the twenty fifth Modification, however I don’t wanna run on a 40 % protection finances enhance whereas the president’s saying we are able to’t fund Medicare.

So I believe there’s numerous bother for Republicans due to Donald Trump, however I don’t assume he goes anyplace, and I believe that’s truly worse for Republicans. As a substitute of turning into the gas for extra Republican victories, Donald Trump has develop into a large millstone, an albatross across the necks of Republicans now.

Harris: Yep. As he’s, in your phrases, proper, an albatross across the neck of the Republicans, I nonetheless come again to this thought that that is simply the second 12 months of this administration. And so even when we’ve got the form of changeover in Congress, if Democrats reclaim the Home, there are nonetheless a number of extra years of a Trump administration. And I’m form of left to marvel, the place can we go from right here, Tom, Nancy? The place can the U.S. go from right here by way of its popularity? Now we have turned conflict crimes right into a bargaining chip of political coverage.

Nichols: I believe if the Democrats win in November, his presidency’s successfully over. And I believe that may make him fully bananas, and he’ll say and do even crazier and extra harmful issues that may hurt the popularity of the presidency and the USA. However I additionally assume that he’ll now be extra constrained in what he can do, particularly—I can’t imagine that we’re even considering of this, as a result of this was inconceivable a couple of months in the past—particularly if he loses the Home and the Senate. But when he loses the Home, which you don’t ever wanna say something’s inevitable, however appears inevitable, then I believe you get crazier rhetoric, however extra accountable authorities within the quick time period.

Youssef: I believe on a worldwide scale, what we noticed from this conflict is one other area that’s form of reconsidering its relationship with the USA from a safety perspective. Within the run-up to this, you’ll do not forget that the president threatened to assault Greenland, and also you noticed the form of shocks of that undergo Europe by way of might they rely on the USA as a dependable companion. Throughout this battle, he threatened to depart NATO as a result of they wouldn’t come to the protection of the strait after which later stated that we didn’t want NATO, as a result of we don’t want the oil and we don’t care concerning the strait. So once more, there was form of a pressure there.

The Gulf states had actually pinned their safety on their relationship with the USA. That they had bases all through the area as a result of they thought these bases can be a safety assure. Because it seems, it made them an even bigger goal. That they had constructed protection relationships with the USA, hoping that that might result in safety, and once more, it ended up making them a goal. Now, there are a couple of choices for the Gulf by way of how they have a look at options, however I do assume we’re gonna see them begin to diversify in gentle of how these previous 39 days have gone.

And so I believe probably the most speedy takeaway is we’re gonna see one other consequential a part of the world actually reassess its relationship with the USA, given the occasions of those previous 39 days and the way the conflict has performed out and the impression that has had on them and the U.S. response to that.

Nichols: One attention-grabbing factor right here, I believe, is we’ve frightened so much about terrorism and payback and all these different issues that you need to fear about whenever you embark on this sort of conflict. However Nancy’s level concerning the Gulf states—the Iranians could resolve to play good with Europe and the USA to maintain us occupied elsewhere, however actually take it out on the Gulf states and make it clear: Don’t ever do that once more. You selected poorly. It’s potential that the Gulf states must be extra frightened about that even than we do.

Harris: Yeah. Nicely, there will probably be so much to look out for within the coming days and weeks. Tom, Nancy, thanks for becoming a member of me.

Nichols: Thanks.

Youssef: Thanks.

[Music]

Harris: This episode of Radio Atlantic was produced by Rosie Hughes and Jinae West. It was edited by Kevin Townsend. Rob Smierciak engineered and supplied unique music. Sam Fentress fact-checked. Claudine Ebeid is the chief producer of Atlantic audio, and Andrea Valdez is our managing editor.

Listeners, in the event you benefit from the present, you may help our work and the work of all Atlantic journalists whenever you subscribe to The Atlantic at TheAtlantic.com/Listener.

I’m Adam Harris. Hanna will probably be again subsequent week. Thanks for listening.