At the Water's Edge

Dan Driscoll just resigned as Army Secretary after eighteen months — the shortest tenure in the role's modern history. That alone is a story. But he's the latest name on a list of more than 80 senior military leaders forced out or sidelined since January 2025, a purge with no precedent in the post-WWII era. This week, I connect Driscoll's exit to the Washington Post's report on four-star commands refusing to sign off on the Secretary of Defense's war plans, the collapsing trust inside the Pentagon's command climate, and a defense industrial base that still can't field a new weapon system fast enough to matter. Solo breakdown, no guest — just the pattern, laid out plainly. Get the full slide deck behind this episode on Substack: https://substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg

Six months into the Iran war, the exchange of fire over the Strait of Hormuz just restarted. Professor Robert Pape returns to break down why the U.S. strike on Larak Island and Iran's retaliation against Jordan (and reportedly the UAE) aren't tit-for-tat — they're a denial strategy straight out of his book Bombing to Win. We cover the Army Secretary's resignation, the 82nd Airborne's extended deployment, whether a division-level operation into Iran is still physically feasible, and what the November 3rd–January 3rd window could mean for how this war plays out. Read Pape's real-time analysis at The Escalation Trap (escalationtrap.substack.com) and send questions for his audience Q&A to [email protected].

We're Not Leaving: What the 82nd Airborne's Year-Long Extension Tells Us About the Iran War The 82nd Airborne Division exists to deploy anywhere in the world within 18 hours. This week, its command team told paratrooper families their CENTCOM deployment is extending to a full year — and buried in that letter is the clearest signal yet of how long the United States expects to stay engaged with Iran. In this solo breakdown, Scott walks through the letter unit by unit — Division Headquarters, DIVARTY, the sustainment brigade, an air defense battalion, and a brigade combat team — and explains what each one's presence in theater actually signals about the mission, as distinct from what's just routine rotation. Topics covered in this episode: Why deploying a division headquarters, not just a brigade, changes the calculus What the sustainment brigade's presence tells you about plans for maneuver forces that haven't arrived yet The finite math of American expeditionary power: how many active-duty divisions are actually built for rapid deployment, and what it costs to tie one down for a year Why the deployment's end date — March 2027 — lands conveniently after the midterms and the seating of a new Congress The Abrams Doctrine: the post-Vietnam decision to embed sustainment capability in the Reserve and National Guard specifically to force political accountability before a war can be sustained — and why Guard/Reserve activation is the next indicator worth watching The logistical and operational security problems with any surprise airborne operation against Iran, given basing constraints and adversary satellite coverage What extended deployments elsewhere — including the USS Abraham Lincoln — suggest about troop morale and force strain going into a second year of this conflict This is a practitioner's read on a story most outlets covered as a personnel-policy footnote. It isn't. At the Water's Edge is a national security and geopolitics podcast that looks for insights beyond the headlines. Newsletter: https://substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg

Trump just invoked a Depression-era tariff statute that's never been used at this scale — against the one G7 ally that's a sole-source supplier for the U.S. Army's artillery propellant and a critical link in the F-35 supply chain. Scott breaks down the actual USMCA timeline, which of the administration's five stated justifications for the trade war actually holds up, and why the timing — six months into the Iran war, with the Pentagon pushing contractors to surge munitions production — makes this one of the more strategically incoherent fights Washington could pick right now.

The ceasefire MOU with Iran has expired, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has launched what he's calling an "economic D-Day" — the same day Iran's new National Security Council chief, Mohsen Rezaei, threatened to shut the Strait of Hormuz to any nation that cooperates with US sanctions. Professor Robert Pape returns to the show with the historical argument he's been building for months: since World War One, economic pressure has never once ended a major war on its own. Not Germany, not Japan, not Iraq, not Iran to date. It takes extraordinary military force layered on top — and the cases where policymakers convinced themselves otherwise are the cases that produced the worst blowback, including the oil embargo that pushed Japan toward Pearl Harbor. This episode breaks down what the new sanctions package can realistically accomplish, why Iran's 3,600-mile land border makes this a harder problem than any prior sanctions regime, and what Saudi Arabia's new defense pact with Turkey and Pakistan signals about the region's confidence in Washington. 🔗 Robert Pape's live briefing tonight + full memo: escalationtrap.substack.com 📩 Send a question for the professor: [email protected] (personal email only, please) 📬 At the Water's Edge on Substack: substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg 🛡️ Geopolitical risk consulting: grayzoneadvisory.com

Iran has moved from survival to ambition to hard power — and it's reshaping the balance of power in the Middle East while Washington stays on the sidelines. University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape returns for his weekly real-time breakdown of the U.S.-Iran conflict. This week: a tentative Iran-Oman deal on Strait of Hormuz traffic, Iran's new list of demands to reopen it, two overlapping defense coalitions forming across the Gulf and Red Sea, and Pape's enrichment-curve analysis on how close Iran actually is to a nuclear weapon — and why he says U.S. policy is teaching them to build one. In this episode: – The Iran-Oman Strait agreement and Iran's demands to reopen Hormuz – The Mecca joint defense pact between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan – The Houthi war on Saudi oil and Iran's "resistance security belt" strategy – Why Gulf states are drifting out of America's orbit – Pape's case for why Iran is on track to become the fourth global power – The path to $6 gas, and why every major power in this conflict keeps walking into its own escalation trap – Audience questions on Europe's role and the Obama-era nuclear deal counterfactual Got a question for Prof. Pape? Send it to [email protected] for a shot at a future episode. Robert Pape is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and author of The Escalation Trap on Substack: escalationtrap.substack.com More analysis every week on the Substack: substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg Need geopolitical risk analysis for your organization? grayzoneadvisory.com

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time — and the first episode where audience questions go directly to Pape on air. We open with what's actually known about the pause in strikes and the low-level Iran-Oman talks over Hormuz transit fees, which Pape argues is not a sign of progress but of strategic paralysis: a White House caught between an air campaign that hasn't achieved its goals and a negotiated path that means conceding to Iran's steadily expanding demands. Pape connects this to a larger thesis — that American dominance in the Persian Gulf, essentially unchallenged since the 1991 Gulf War, is giving way to a power vacuum that regional actors are moving to fill. He ties this directly to the Minnesota water-system cyberattacks, now assessed by U.S. intelligence as likely Iranian in origin, which he characterizes as a calibrated test of American resolve. He closes with his "nightmare scenario" for the next two months of the war, built around economic pressure, political necessity, and the risk of an Iranian response that reaches beyond the region. In our first audience Q&A segment, we put listener questions to Pape directly: whether anything could stop Iran from targeting Gulf desalination infrastructure serving 66 million people, whether a U.S. land blockade on Iran is realistically achievable, and whether the war in Ukraine and the war with Iran could become linked through Caspian Sea shipping. Robert Pape publishes ongoing frameworks and updates on this war at The Escalation Trap: https://escalationtrap.substack.com/ Scott's Substack: https://substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg

America Can't Build Weapons Fast Enough | The Pentagon's Former Acting Chairman Explains Why Admiral Chris Grady (Ret.) spent over 40 years in the Navy, commanded at every level from ship to fleet, and served as Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — including a stretch as Acting Chairman during one of the most chaotic weeks in recent Pentagon history. Now retired and serving as a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Business Executives for National Security (BENS), he joins the show to break down why America's defense industrial base can't keep pace with modern conflict, and what it would actually take to fix it. We cover his own framework for how the character of war is changing: the shift from platform-centric to system-centric thinking, why "attritable mass" is rewriting the cost-exchange math of modern combat, why the electromagnetic spectrum is now a contested warfighting domain in its own right, and why the industrial base itself has become a tool of deterrence. Along the way: the 155mm shell shortage, the cost-exchange problem of cheap drones against expensive interceptors, why the U.S. still hasn't fielded a real answer to 1991's Blue Force Tracker, and the workforce gap behind it all, including why a welder can out-earn a lot of college grads. Read Adm. Grady's article, "The Future of War," on The BENS Lens: https://thebenslens.substack.com/p/the-future-of-war Learn more about BENS: [bens.org] Subscribe to my Substack: https://substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time. Pape recorded this episode without power of his own — tornadoes had just knocked out electricity across the south side of Chicago — and turns his own blackout into a working case study for what it would actually mean for the U.S. to take down Iran's electric grid. We walk through the difference between hitting a grid's transformers and hitting its generator halls, why one is fixed in days and the other takes months, and what a real months-long blackout does to a city of ten million people: food spoilage, water pressure collapse, hospitals losing dialysis and surgical capacity, and no air conditioning in near-100-degree heat. Pape explains why that level of damage — what he calls "medium" civilian punishment — tends to produce revenge rather than surrender, drawing on his historical research into World War II bombing campaigns and Pearl Harbor, and where the ceiling actually sits before a population is too devastated to seek payback. From there we turn to the drone hunt: the scale problem behind suppressing Iran's Shaheed arsenal, why the search area is one and a half times the size of California, and why Pape doesn't believe the Strait of Hormuz reopens before the midterms. We close on the political clock both Washington and Tehran are racing against, and why Pape thinks Iran's actual target has never been our bases in the Gulf — it's the presidency itself. Robert Pape publishes ongoing frameworks and updates on this war at The Escalation Trap: https://escalationtrap.substack.com/ Scott's Substack: https://substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg

Cities and towns across America are signing non-disclosure agreements with corporations — and in some cases, officials aren't even allowed to tell the public an NDA exists. Investigative journalist Miranda Spivack joins the show to explain how local government secrecy became a national security issue. Miranda spent twenty years at The Washington Post covering state and local government. Her new book, Backroom Deals in Our Backyards: How Government Secrecy Harms Our Communities and the Local Heroes Fighting Back (The New Press), documents how "accidental activists" across the country have fought back against poisoned water, toxic firefighter gear, and opaque data center deals. We cover why data centers are driving a wave of secret NDAs between corporations and local officials, the Hoosick Falls, NY water contamination case, what happened when Amazon went hunting for its second headquarters, why the collapse of local news makes all of this harder to catch, and how local government secrecy connects to national power and America's data infrastructure race. Guest: Miranda S. Spivack — veteran journalist, former Washington Post editor/reporter, Fulbright Scholar, and author of Backroom Deals in Our Backyards (The New Press, 2025). Book: available from The New Press with discount code BACKROOM30, or at your local bookstore and bookshop.org Substack: backroomdeals.substack.com X: @mirandareporter

The war with Iran has entered what Robert Pape, Professor at the University of Chicago, calls the "spiral phase" — a dynamic that's both vertical, with harsher strikes on both sides, and horizontal, with the Red Sea now pulled into the conflict via a Houthi blockade. This week brings the death of three more U.S. service members, bringing the total to 17, a bombing campaign now targeting Iranian civilian infrastructure at scale, a reinstated naval blockade, and strikes on multiple Kuwaiti desalination plants — cutting off water that millions of people depend on, with no backup supply. We cover why Pape believes he's been modeling this exact war for twenty years, and why he traces its real starting point to the bombing of the Fordow enrichment facility in June 2025, not the more commonly cited February 2026 date. We discuss new intelligence around a facility Pape refers to as "Pickaxe Mountain" and concerns about uranium enrichment moving toward weapons-grade levels, why Pape argues that neither Trump nor Iran actually controls the outcome of this war — commercial shipping companies do — and the parallel Pape draws between Trump's political calculus now and Lyndon Johnson's decision-making during Vietnam. Pape publishes ongoing analysis of the conflict in his Substack, The Escalation Trap: https://escalationtrap.substack.com/ For more analysis on this conflict, subscribe to the At the Water's Edge Substack: https://substack.com/@scottatthewatersedgeorg This is a weekly recurring conversation tracking the Iran war in real time. New episodes drop every week.

The war with Iran is back on, and according to Robert Pape, Professor at the University of Chicago, we are now knocking on the door of the most dangerous stage of the conflict yet. This week, Pape walks through why Iran's Supreme Leader has issued a call for revenge attacks on Americans anywhere in the world, why that statement closely parallels the fatwa issued against Salman Rushdie three decades ago, and why he believes the U.S. and Iran are both boxed into an escalation neither side can easily walk back from. We cover why Pape believes punishment campaigns and the recently failed MOU have left Trump with few remaining off-ramps, why Pape expects the coming wave of violence to be driven by inspired rather than centrally directed attackers, and the historical parallel Pape draws between Trump's current position and Imperial Japan's decision to attack Pearl Harbor. We also discuss why Pape believes a nuclear strike remains unlikely in the near term, and why he has been warning for months that this war could extend well into 2027. Pape publishes ongoing analysis of the conflict in his Substack, The Escalation Trap: https://escalationtrap.substack.com/ This is a weekly recurring conversation tracking the Iran war in real time. New episodes drop every week.

Joe Kent spent 21 years in Army Special Forces and the CIA before becoming President Trump's Director of the National Counterterrorism Center — then walked away from it, resigning in protest over the war with Iran. This week I sit down with him to talk about what he saw from inside the administration in the weeks before he quit, why he believes Israel drove the decision to strike, and what it actually looks like to try to "coach up" a president who's stopped listening. We get into the collapse of the MOU, whether the US has any leverage left in the Strait of Hormuz, and why he thinks the all-volunteer force has quietly severed the military from the country it defends. We also cover ground most of his interviews haven't: whether some form of compulsory service is the only real check left on endless wars, and whether 2028 opens the door to a genuine third party built around opposition to foreign intervention. Joe Kent: 21 years in Special Operations (75th Ranger Regiment, 5th Special Forces Group), CIA paramilitary officer, and former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Follow him at x.com/joekent16jan19. At the Water's Edge is a weekly conversation with practitioners and analysts on national security and geopolitics, hosted by a former Green Beret. New episodes every week

Just days after President Trump's Fourth of July weekend, Iran held a massive funeral for its slain leadership — and millions turned out. In this week's installment of our ongoing series on the war with Iran, Robert Pape, Professor at the University of Chicago and one of the leading scholars on coercion, airpower, and political violence, argues that the funeral marks a turning point that has nothing to do with capability and everything to do with will. Pape lays out his case that four and a half months of decapitation strikes, blockade, and bombing have not broken Iranian public resolve — and why that matters for the ongoing negotiations set for July 11th. We cover Kuwait and Bahrain's complaint to the UN Security Council, why Iran is reportedly turning down financial offers from Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, the risk of Washington falling into an "echo chamber" on Iran policy, and why Pape believes pressure could build toward further escalation as soon as August. Pape publishes ongoing analysis of the conflict in his Substack, The Escalation Trap: https://escalationtrap.substack.com/ This is a weekly recurring conversation tracking the Iran war in real time. New episodes drop every week.

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war involving the United States, Israel, and Iran in real time. After new strikes in the Strait of Hormuz, U.S. bombing inside Iran, Iranian missile attacks on U.S. bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, and renewed talk of a ceasefire, Pape argues that the conflict is not ending. Instead, we are in the middle game of the escalation trap. That means periods of violence followed by pauses — not a durable ceasefire. Pape explains why Iran has not been deterred by assassination, bombing, blockade pressure, or threats. Instead, Iran may be entering a period of maximum coercive leverage as oil inventories draw down and pressure grows on the global economy. We also discuss Iran’s nuclear trajectory, the risks facing U.S. forces in the Gulf, the role of Lebanon and the Red Sea, Israel’s future security position, and why the timing of Iran’s nuclear decision may depend less on politics and more on feasibility. Why Pape says Iran is not deterred Why this is military action and pause — not a real ceasefire How the war remains in the middle game of the escalation trap Why Iran may continue kinetic pressure in the Strait of Hormuz How oil inventories shape Iran’s coercive leverage Why Lebanon, Hezbollah, and the Red Sea matter to Iran’s regional strategy What this means for U.S. forces in the Gulf How Iran’s nuclear calculus may be changing Whether Iran would sprint to a nuclear weapon or wait Why nuclear timing may come down to feasibility, not politics The war did not end. The ceasefire is not holding in any meaningful strategic sense. And Iran may be using this phase of the conflict to increase leverage, pressure U.S. forces, and move closer to the kind of regional power position Pape has warned about throughout this series. Escalation Trap Substack: https://escalationtrap.substack.com At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics — bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. In this episode:Key takeaway:Follow Robert Pape’s work:About the show:

In the final episode of our PTSD series, Scott speaks with Dr. Jessica Maples Keller of Emory University about the future of psychedelic-assisted therapy for PTSD.Emory has been studying MDMA and psilocybin in a clinical setting, with a focus on how these treatments might enhance evidence-based care like prolonged exposure therapy. Dr. Maples Keller explains how clinical trials are designed, why Schedule I status creates major barriers, what safety screening looks like, and why access and cost may become the next major challenge even if psychedelic-assisted treatments are eventually approved.Then LTG(R) Walt Piatt, CEO of Wounded Warrior Project, returns to close out the series. He reflects on where the veteran community stands in addressing PTSD, what the VA and DoD are getting right and wrong, and whether the innovation happening across nonprofits, universities, and private organizations is a hopeful story about American civil society — or a sign that government systems are still moving too slowly.This episode asks a simple question: if the future of PTSD treatment is already being built, why are so many veterans still waiting?Guests:Dr. Jessica Maples Keller — Associate Professor, Emory University School of MedicineLTG(R) Walt Piatt — CEO, Wounded Warrior ProjectResources:Emory Healthcare Veterans Program:https://www.emoryhealthcare.org/centers-programs/veterans-programFor information about Emory psychedelic-assisted therapy studies:[email protected] — Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies:https://maps.org/STRONG STAR:https://www.strongstar.org/Compass Pathways:https://compasspathways.com/Heroic Hearts Project:https://heroicheartsproject.org/Oregon Psilocybin Services:https://www.oregon.gov/psilocybinAustralia Therapeutic Goods Administration — MDMA and psilocybin:https://www.tga.gov.au/products/unapproved-therapeutic-goods/mdma-and-psilocybineWounded Warrior Project:https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time. The U.S. and Iran have signed a memorandum of understanding. But according to Pape, that does not mean the war is over. Instead, the battlefield may be shifting to the negotiations themselves. Pape argues that while the U.S. and financial markets may view the agreement through a business-deal lens — oil flows, payments, stability, and costs — Iran may be approaching the negotiations through a balance-of-power lens. The question is not simply what the deal says. The question is whether the deal locks in a new regional balance of power. In this episode, we discuss what the MOU means, why Hormuz remains central, how Iran may use negotiations to gain leverage, what Hezbollah and Lebanon mean to Iran’s regional strategy, and why Israel may now face a far more difficult strategic environment. Why a signed deal does not necessarily mean peace How negotiations can become a battlefield of their own Why the business-deal model may miss the real power dynamics How Iran may use the MOU to lock in regional gains Why the Strait of Hormuz remains central to Iran’s leverage What Hezbollah and Lebanon mean to Iran’s regional strategy Why Israel may be in deep strategic trouble How the U.S.-Israel relationship could change under pressure What this means for Jordan, Egypt, and Gulf states Whether Iran could overreach in the negotiations A deal may stop the immediate shooting. But if the agreement shifts power toward Iran, the conflict may simply be entering a new phase. The war may not be ending. It may be moving to the negotiating table. New episodes released weekly as the conflict evolves. Escalation Trap Substack: https://escalationtrap.substack.com At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics — bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. In this episode:Key takeaway:Follow the series:Follow Robert Pape’s work:About the show:

Why Veterans Are Going Overseas for Psychedelics In part two of our PTSD series, Scott speaks with Jesse Gould, founder of the Heroic Hearts Project and a former Army Ranger from the 75th Ranger Regiment, about why some veterans are seeking psychedelic-assisted treatment outside the traditional U.S. medical system. Jesse shares his own story of leaving the military, struggling with PTSD, anxiety, depression, alcohol misuse, and hypervigilance, and eventually traveling to Peru for ayahuasca after feeling that the available treatment options were not enough. That experience led him to launch Heroic Hearts Project, a nonprofit helping veterans access legal psychedelic-assisted programs while emphasizing preparation, safety, screening, and integration. This conversation explores the promise, risk, controversy, and policy questions surrounding psychedelic treatment for veterans. It is not a discussion about miracle cures. It is about what happens when veterans run out of options, why many are looking beyond the VA, and whether the American medical system is ready for what may be coming next. Learn more about Heroic Hearts Project:https://www.heroicheartsproject.org/ Topics discussed: PTSD, veteran mental health, ayahuasca, psilocybin, MDMA-assisted therapy, the VA, alternative treatments, integration, risk mitigation, and the future of psychedelic medicine for veterans. Note: This episode is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice. Anyone considering treatment for PTSD or other mental health conditions should consult qualified medical professionals.

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time. Reports suggest the U.S. and Iran may be moving toward a deal. But Pape argues that a signing ceremony, memorandum, or public claim of victory does not necessarily mean the war is ending. For frontline U.S. forces in CENTCOM and the Gulf, the real signal is not diplomatic language. The real signal is whether U.S. forces physically leave the region. Until ships, aircraft, Marines, ground forces, tanker support, and carrier groups are actually withdrawn, the escalation trap remains in place. In this episode, we discuss what a possible agreement really means, why the 60-day negotiation window could increase Iran’s leverage, how oil inventories and energy markets affect escalation risk, and why Israel may become more isolated as Gulf states hedge toward Iran. Why a deal does not necessarily mean peace What U.S. forces in the Gulf should actually watch Why physical withdrawal matters more than diplomatic language How the 60-day negotiation window could shape escalation risk Why oil inventories give Iran growing leverage What the agreement could mean for Israel, Lebanon, and Hezbollah Whether Gulf states are hedging or bandwagoning toward Iran Why the Abraham Accords framework may be in trouble How the conflict could reshape nuclear deterrence debates in the region A deal is not the off-ramp unless the force posture changes. If U.S. forces remain in the Gulf, the war is not over. New episodes released weekly as the conflict evolves. At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics — bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. In this episode:Key takeaway:Follow the series:About the show:

Surviving war is only the beginning for many veterans. In Part 1 of this series on post-traumatic stress disorder, At the Water’s Edge examines what PTSD is, why it is so often misunderstood, why many veterans wait years before receiving care, and what effective treatment can look like. This episode features three voices from Wounded Warrior Project: Dr. Erin Fletcher, Director of Warrior Care Network; Ryan Kules, an Iraq veteran who lost an arm and a leg in an IED attack and now leads Project Odyssey; and John Eaton, Vice President for Complex Care. Together, they explain how trauma affects the brain and body, why stigma and system friction keep veterans from care, how evidence-based treatment works, and why recovery is possible. Before this series turns to psychedelic medicine and the future of PTSD treatment, we start with the foundation: PTSD is real, it is treatable, and getting care can change a veteran’s life.

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time. After 100 days of war, Pape argues that the conflict is no longer in its opening phase — but it is nowhere near over. Instead, the war has entered what he calls the middle of the escalation trap: a grinding phase where weeks of boredom can be punctuated by hours of terror. The key shift, according to Pape, is that Iran is no longer just trying to survive. Its ambitions are growing. In this episode, we discuss how Iran may be moving from survival toward dominance in the Persian Gulf, what that means for U.S. forces in the region, why the Red Sea could become the next major pressure point, and how financial markets may be underestimating geopolitical risk. Why the war has entered the middle phase of the escalation trap How Iran’s goals may be shifting from survival to ambition Why Iran may seek dominance in the Persian Gulf What it means for Iran to become a fourth center of world power Why the Red Sea could become the next major pressure point How Houthi threats to shipping could affect global oil markets Whether Iran could overplay its hand Why financial markets struggle to price geopolitical risk How the war could bookend the era of American unipolarity The longer this war continues, the more Iran’s ambitions may expand. This is no longer just about whether Iran survives. It is about what Iran may become if the escalation trap continues. New episodes released weekly as the conflict evolves. At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics — bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. In this episode:Key takeaway:Follow the series:About the show:

President Trump thought Iran would collapse quickly. According to Dr. Trita Parsi, that assumption may be one of the central miscalculations that pulled the United States deeper into war. In this episode of At the Water’s Edge, Scott Kelly speaks with Dr. Trita Parsi, co-founder and Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, about the war with Iran, the limits of American coercion, and what a realistic diplomatic off-ramp would require. They discuss why Iran has proven more resilient than Washington expected, where Tehran may have miscalculated, how the U.S. policy process broke down, and why military superiority does not always translate into political control. The conversation also covers the Abraham Accords, Gaza, U.S. military presence in the Middle East, sanctions relief, and whether international humanitarian law can survive in a multipolar world. This is a practitioner-focused conversation about strategy, escalation, diplomacy, and the future of American power. Find more from Trita Parsi here: Trita Parsi’s Substack: https://tritaparsi.substack.com/Quincy Institute: https://quincyinst.org/

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time. After two weeks of ceasefire claims, strikes, and renewed negotiations, Pape argues that the conflict is not moving toward real stability. Instead, the U.S. and Iran may be entering what he calls a new era of instability. Even if a memorandum of understanding is signed, the underlying issues remain unresolved: nuclear enrichment, Iran’s stockpiles, control of the Strait of Hormuz, oil prices, and the U.S. military presence in the Gulf. Pape also warns that diplomacy does not necessarily mean the danger has passed. The U.S. has a long history of bombing and talking at the same time, from Vietnam to Bosnia, and troops in the region should not assume negotiations mean escalation is off the table. Why a possible memorandum of understanding may not change the trajectory of the conflict Why Trump remains stuck in the escalation trap How tactical military success can worsen America’s strategic position Why instability itself may benefit Iran What the oil inventory countdown means for the next 30–60 days Why the Strait of Hormuz remains central to Iran’s leverage What would actually change the military reality for U.S. forces in the Gulf Why bombing and diplomacy can happen at the same time A deal is not the same thing as stability. Unless the underlying force posture changes, the war may remain trapped in a cycle of negotiations, skirmishes, oil pressure, and escalation. New episodes released weekly as the conflict evolves. At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics — bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. In this episode:Key takeaway:Follow the series:About the show:

Former NASA Administrator and Secretary of the Navy Sean O’Keefe returns to At the Water’s Edge for a conversation about American power, strategy, space, war, and national identity. At a moment when the United States is confronting conflict with Iran while also advancing the Artemis program, O’Keefe explores a deeper question: what actually makes America powerful? Drawing on decades of leadership across NASA, the Navy, the Office of Management and Budget, academia, and the private sector, O’Keefe discusses why Artemis matters beyond symbolism, how commercial space is changing the future of exploration, what Ukraine’s battlefield innovation reveals about the future of war, and why America’s alliances and credibility may be among its greatest strategic assets. The conversation also examines the limits of military power, the danger of unclear objectives, the challenge of defense procurement, and whether the United States can still mobilize around ambitious national missions. This is a conversation about more than Iran, NASA, or the Moon. It is about whether America still understands the sources of its own power.

The war with Iran may be more than another crisis in the Middle East. In this latest installment of The Escalation Trap, Robert Pape argues that the conflict is becoming a hinge event — almost the inverse of the 1991 Gulf War. Instead of demonstrating American military dominance, this war may be revealing the limits of U.S. power when tactical military strength no longer produces strategic outcomes. This conversation moves beyond the Gulf to examine what the war means for China, Taiwan, Europe, NATO, India, and the future of American influence. Pape explains why allies are beginning to rethink their assumptions, why America’s security umbrella may be weakening, and why this conflict could accelerate a broader shift in the global order. In this episode: Why the Iran war may be a hinge event for American power How this compares to the 1991 Gulf War Why military dominance may no longer translate into strategic success What Trump’s meeting with Xi could mean for Taiwan Why allies may begin making more independent security decisions How the war is affecting perceptions of U.S. credibility Why America may need a deeper strategy of economic modernization What to watch as the conflict continues Key takeaway: This is no longer just about Iran. It is about whether the post-Cold War era of unquestioned American military dominance is ending — and what comes next. At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics, bridging academic theory with how conflict unfolds in the real world.

This is the latest episode in The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time. Pape argues that the conflict has now entered the true danger zone. The negotiation track, he says, may be effectively dead for weeks or months — not because talks are impossible, but because the core issues at stake are zero-sum. Unlike a real estate deal, international politics has no court that can enforce an agreement. When the issues involve nuclear weapons, sovereignty, and control of the Strait of Hormuz, every concession can make a state more vulnerable in the next round. Why the Iran conflict may have entered its most dangerous phase Why negotiations over sovereignty and nuclear weapons are so difficult to sustain Why international courts and institutions cannot enforce great-power bargains Why China and Russia may see U.S. weakness as an opportunity Whether Europe can balance Russia without the United States How nuclear proliferation could either stabilize or destabilize a multipolar world Why the current conflict may accelerate a more dangerous global order How new media formats are widening access to serious national security analysis The danger is not just that negotiations fail. The danger is that each failed negotiation makes escalation look more like the only remaining option. New episodes released weekly as the conflict evolves. At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics — bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. In this episode:Key takeaway:Follow the series:About the show:

Former State Department senior advisor and National Security Council official Negah Angha joins At the Water’s Edge to discuss what the war with Iran reveals about American strategy, alliances, and decision-making. Angha explains how major national security decisions are supposed to move through the U.S. government, why inconsistent objectives and poor consultation with allies can weaken American credibility, and how Iran’s pressure on the Strait of Hormuz has exposed vulnerabilities in the global economy. The conversation also covers low-cost drones, the limits of the U.S. defense industrial base, Congress’s role in war powers, the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the complicated role of diaspora communities in U.S. foreign policy. This episode is about more than Iran. It is a broader look at whether the American national security system can still align military power, diplomacy, alliances, public support, and long-term strategy in a crisis that moves faster than Washington’s bureaucracy.

This is Part 7 of The Escalation Trap, an ongoing series with Robert Pape of the University of Chicago tracking the war with Iran in real time. This week, the Trump administration announced Project Freedom, an effort to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by escorting ships through the waterway. At the same time, Iran is working with Pakistan and Turkey to expand overland trade routes, Hezbollah has increased drone attacks against Israel, and conflicting reports emerged over a possible encounter involving a U.S. warship. But according to Pape, the bigger picture is clear: The United States is losing control — not only in the Gulf, but across multiple regions at once. Why Project Freedom may mark a shift toward further escalation How Iran is using Pakistan and Turkey to work around the blockade Why U.S. credibility and influence are declining in multiple theaters What a loss of control in the Gulf could mean for Europe and Asia Why a future Trump-Xi meeting could have implications for Taiwan How the war with Iran may be reshaping the global balance of power Why escalation may now look like the only remaining option for Washington What to watch as the U.S. attempts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz This conflict is no longer confined to Iran, Israel, and the Gulf. It is becoming a test of American power — and the consequences may extend across Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and the global economy. New episodes released weekly as the conflict evolves. At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics — bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. In this episode:Key takeaway:Follow the series:About the show:

Are the wars in Ukraine and Iran separate conflicts—or part of something larger? In this episode of At the Water’s Edge, Scott sits down with Paul Poast, Associate Professor at the University of Chicago, to unpack his argument that we may already be living in a new era of “world war.” Rather than a 20th-century style global conflict, Poast explains how today’s wars can be defined by multiple interconnected theaters, where major powers compete indirectly across regions—and where decisions in one conflict shape outcomes in another. Read is NYT OPED: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/12/opinion/international-world/iran-ukraine-world-war.html The conversation explores: What actually defines a “world war” in today’s context How the wars in Ukraine and Iran are strategically connected Whether U.S. and Russian actions across theaters are a form of great power balancing The role of alliances—and why strained relationships may still hold How munitions shortages, oil markets, and second-order effects shape modern conflict Why policymakers may be “making it up as they go” in a rapidly evolving environment And why in a conflict like this, success may mean finding the least bad outcome, not outright victory This is a wide-ranging discussion on how to think about modern warfare, great power competition, and the risks of escalation in an increasingly interconnected global system.

This is Part 6 of an ongoing series with Robert Pape (University of Chicago) tracking the Iran conflict in real time. Over the past week, we saw renewed efforts to restart negotiations—including a Pakistan-backed diplomatic push—but no meaningful progress. Ceasefires continue to be announced and collapse just as quickly. At the same time, something more significant may be taking shape beneath the surface: 👉 The “third way” between escalation and accepting Iran’s rise may no longer exist. Why recent diplomatic efforts—including talks involving Pakistan—failed to gain traction How Iran may be building a pathway around the blockade through Pakistan, Russia, and Oman What it means for Iran to emerge as a potential “fourth center of world power” Why shifting alliances in the Gulf could reshape the balance of power The concept of a growing power vacuum as U.S. influence declines What escalating coordination between regional and nuclear powers could signal This conflict is no longer just about military escalation. It’s about who fills the power vacuum—and how the global system reorganizes around it. Whether Pakistan deepens its role as a land and economic outlet for Iran Continued coordination between Iran, Russia, and regional partners Any shift from demonstration-level force to direct strikes on infrastructure Signs that Gulf states become direct targets of pressure or instability New episodes released weekly tracking how this conflict evolves in real time. Pape publishes ongoing updates and frameworks on this conflict via Substack. At the Water’s Edge delivers practitioner-level insight into national security and geopolitics—bridging academic theory with how conflicts actually unfold in the real world. 🎯 In this episode:🧠 Key takeaway:📊 What to watch next:🎧 Follow the series:🔗 Follow Robert Pape’s analysis:📡 About the show:

For years, many in Washington have assumed that pressure, protests, or targeted strikes could trigger regime change in Iran. But what if those assumptions are fundamentally wrong? In this episode, Scott sits down with Arash Azizi, a writer and historian focused on Iranian politics, to break down what’s actually happening inside Iran right now—beyond the headlines. They discuss why the Iranian regime has remained in power despite widespread opposition, how authority is really structured inside the system, and why the lack of a coherent opposition movement may be the single biggest factor shaping Iran’s future. The conversation also explores: Who actually holds power inside Iran today Why leadership decapitation hasn’t led to regime collapse How the current war is impacting internal dynamics What a realistic path to regime change would require Why the next regime in Iran may not be democratic This is a grounded, inside look at Iran’s political reality—and what policymakers, analysts, and the public often get wrong.

This is Part 3 of an ongoing series with Robert Pape (University of Chicago) analyzing the escalation dynamics of the Iran conflict in real time. Over the past week, several developments have shifted the trajectory of the war: U.S. ground forces entered Iran for the first time in a limited rescue operation Continued strikes on energy infrastructure across the region Increasing pressure around the Strait of Hormuz Early indicators of reserve and National Guard mobilization But the most important shift, according to Pape, is this: 👉 The “short war illusion” is over. His article in the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/06/opinion/iran-war-strait-hormuz.html The expectation that this conflict would remain limited is fading—and that changes how governments, markets, and military planners respond. Why the recent U.S. ground incursion does not yet constitute Stage 3 What defines the transition to full ground operations Why targeting energy infrastructure has repeatedly failed to achieve strategic objectives How civilian harm shapes long-term escalation dynamics The operational indicator that would signal real regime instability Why expectations—not just battlefield outcomes—are now driving the conflict Wars don’t just evolve based on what happens on the battlefield. They evolve based on what people believe is going to happen next. And that shift may already be underway. In the next episode, we examine a deeper question: 👉 Is this conflict changing the global balance of power? Pape argues that Iran may be emerging as a fourth center of world power—a claim that has major implications for how this war unfolds. New episodes released weekly tracking the escalation dynamics of the Iran conflict. At the Water’s Edge focuses on practitioner-level insights into national security and geopolitics—bridging the gap between theory and real-world decision-making. 🎯 In this episode:🧠 Key takeaway:📊 Looking ahead:🎧 Follow the series:📡 About the show:

Most people think AI is ready for modern warfare.It’s not.In this episode, I sit down with Tyler Saltsman, Founder and CEO of EdgeRunner AI, to break down what artificial intelligence can actually do on the battlefield—and where it falls short.Tyler is building domain-specific AI models designed to operate directly on-device, enabling warfighters to make better decisions in real time without relying on internet connectivity.We discuss:- Why many commercial AI models refuse real-world military tasks- The problem with bias, guardrails, and lack of transparency in current AI systems- Why AI must operate offline in contested environments- The gap between Silicon Valley and the warfighter- The biggest bottlenecks inside DoD acquisition and procurement (ATO, OTA)- How AI is changing tactical decision-making at the unit level- The risks of relying on a small number of dominant AI labsWe also get into the realities of building a defense tech company today, and what it takes to move from prototype to fielded capability.This is a grounded, operator-level conversation about AI in warfare—focused on execution, not hype.---About the Guest:Tyler Saltsman is the Founder and CEO of EdgeRunner AI, a defense technology company building domain-specific AI models for military applications. He previously worked at AWS, where he was involved in large-scale AI model training and infrastructure development.---Subscribe to At the Water’s Edge for conversations with operators, policymakers, and builders shaping the future of national security.

This is Part 2 of an ongoing series with Robert Pape (University of Chicago) breaking down the escalation dynamics of the current conflict with Iran. Follow him at his substack: https://escalationtrap.substack.com/ Over the past week, the situation has evolved rapidly: Additional U.S. forces are deploying to the region Energy infrastructure across the Gulf is under attack Proxy actors, including the Houthis, are expanding the conflict In this conversation, we focus on one question: 👉 Where are we now? According to Pape, the answer is clear: We are now in the “escalation trap” — and nearing Stage 3. That next phase could mark a critical turning point, potentially triggering: Ground operations A prolonged war of attrition A shift toward what Pape calls “Stage 4” — where risks begin to extend toward the U.S. homeland Why the conflict is expanding, not stabilizing What “Stage 3” actually means in practical terms Why current “peace talks” are likely not real negotiations How Iran’s position has strengthened economically during the conflict The relationship between foreign troop presence and terrorism risk What to watch over the next 10–15 days Military success does not always translate into strategic advantage. In fact, as Pape explains, it can create the very dynamics that deepen and prolong conflict. If you’re interested in practitioner-level insights on national security and geopolitics: Follow the show Share this episode Send it to someone tracking this conflict

Episode Title:The Drone Threat Is Already Here Episode Description: Drones are no longer just a battlefield problem. From Ukraine to the Middle East, unmanned systems are reshaping how wars are fought—cheap, scalable, and increasingly accessible to both states and non-state actors. But the most important shift may not be happening overseas. It’s happening at home. In this episode, Scott sits down with Paul Lushenko, Chief Strategist at Joint Interagency Task Force 401, the U.S. military’s newest effort to coordinate a whole-of-government approach to countering drones. Drawing on both operational experience and research, Lushenko breaks down how drone warfare is evolving, what we’re learning from Ukraine and the current conflict with Iran, and why defending the U.S. homeland against drones is far more complex than most people realize. Are drones a revolution in warfare—or just the next evolution? What the war in Ukraine is actually teaching us (and what we’re getting wrong) How drones are being used in high-end state conflict with Iran The growing threat of drones to U.S. bases, infrastructure, and public spaces Why the biggest challenge isn’t technology—it’s coordination The cost problem: $1M missiles vs. $10K drones How tactics spread globally through a “contagion effect” The role of Joint Interagency Task Force 401 in countering drone threats Why mindset, training, and policy matter as much as hardware “This isn’t just a capability reserved for distant battlefields. It’s on our shores. It’s on the southern border. It’s at stadiums.” Paul Lushenko is the Chief Strategist for Joint Interagency Task Force 401, where he helps synchronize U.S. military and interagency efforts to counter drone threats at home and abroad. He is a career Army officer with nearly two decades of experience supporting special operations and has conducted extensive research on drone warfare, military innovation, and the integration of AI into modern conflict. Drone warfare is no longer confined to distant battlefields. As the technology spreads and becomes more accessible, the United States faces a new kind of challenge—one that requires not just better technology, but better integration across the military, government, and society. This conversation explores what that future looks like—and how prepared we really are. Follow At the Water’s Edge for conversations on national security, geopolitics, and the future of warfare from a practitioner’s perspective. 🔑 Key Topics Covered🎯 Key Insight🎙️ About the Guest📌 Why This Episode Matters🔗 Listen / Follow

The Escalation Trap: Robert Pape on Iran, Airpower, and Strategic Failure Robert Pape will be giving a live briefing the status of the conflict and what stage 3 escalation looks like at 5pm EST 22 March 26 on his substack, Escalation Trap. Robert Pape Robert Pape's Substack HERE (https://escalationtrap.substack.com/) Description: What if the biggest risk in war isn’t failure—but success? In this episode, I’m joined by Robert Pape, Professor at the University of Chicago and one of the leading scholars on coercion, airpower, and political violence. As the conflict with Iran escalates, Professor Pape explains why what we’re seeing isn’t just a series of military exchanges—but a predictable pattern he calls the “escalation trap.” A dynamic where each step forward reduces control, increases pressure to escalate, and makes it harder to achieve political objectives. We break down: Why airpower alone has never achieved regime change How escalation actually progresses in stages Where the real center of gravity lies in the current conflict Why Iran may have more leverage than it appears What policymakers and the media are getting wrong What a realistic endgame could look like This is a practitioner-focused conversation on how wars actually work—and where this one may be headed. Note: This conversation was recorded in real time as events were unfolding. Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 02:00 The Escalation Trap explained 08:30 Why airpower fails strategically 17:30 Escalation stages and shifting advantage 26:30 Economic warfare and oil leverage 35:00 Who has the advantage right now 39:00 What policymakers are getting wrong 42:00 What happens next

The Sahel region of West Africa has become one of the most unstable security environments in the world. A wave of military coups, expanding jihadist insurgencies, and the growing influence of Russia and the Wagner Group are reshaping the geopolitical landscape across Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and the surrounding region. But what is actually driving the crisis? In this episode of At the Water’s Edge, Scott Kelly sits down with Fidel Amakye Owusu, a security analyst specializing in West African and Sahelian security dynamics, to unpack the forces behind the region’s instability. They discuss the origins of jihadist movements in the Sahel, the collapse of state authority across parts of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, and how insurgent groups are increasingly performing functions traditionally associated with governments — including taxation, control of trade routes, and local security. The conversation also examines the role of French counterterrorism operations, the political consequences of recent military coups, and how Russia and the Wagner Group have expanded their presence as Western forces have withdrawn. Finally, they explore one of the most important questions facing the region: can the democratic states surrounding the Sahel contain the instability, or will the crisis spread further into coastal West Africa? This episode provides a practitioner’s perspective on the evolving security crisis in the Sahel, one of the most important and least understood geopolitical challenges in the world today. Fidel Amakye Owusu is a Ghanaian security analyst focused on terrorism, insurgency, and governance challenges across West Africa and the Sahel. His work examines extremist movements, regional security cooperation, and the political dynamics shaping stability in the region. The rise of jihadist insurgencies in the Sahel Why governance gaps fuel instability in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger How insurgent groups fund themselves through taxation, trade routes, and resource control The impact of French counterterrorism operations in West Africa The recent wave of coups across the Sahel Russia and Wagner’s expanding role in regional security Whether democratic states like Ghana and Senegal can contain the crisis

What is the war in Ukraine teaching the world about modern warfare? In this episode of At the Water’s Edge, Scott Kelly speaks with Samuel Bendett of the Center for Naval Analyses, one of the leading analysts tracking Russian military adaptation and the role of drones and emerging technology on the battlefield. They discuss how Western analysts misunderstood Russian capabilities before the 2022 invasion, how the massive proliferation of small drones has made the battlefield increasingly transparent, and why both Russia and Ukraine have turned to commercial technology and civil society to sustain combat operations. The conversation also explores the early role of artificial intelligence in the war, how soldiers on both sides are modifying technology at the tactical edge, and what lessons the United States military should be learning from the conflict. As China, Iran, and other major powers study the war closely, Ukraine has become a real-time laboratory for the future of warfare—and a warning about how quickly modern conflicts can evolve beyond anyone’s expectations. • The battlefield is becoming transparent. The widespread use of small drones means that forces operating near the front line are increasingly visible, forcing militaries to rethink mobility, concealment, and survivability. • Commercial technology is now part of warfare. Both Russia and Ukraine have relied heavily on off-the-shelf drones, radios, and other commercial components, often sourced through civil society networks. • Civil society has become a wartime logistics system. Volunteer groups and online fundraising campaigns have helped supply frontline units with critical equipment—from drones to communications gear. • AI is beginning to appear on the battlefield. Artificial intelligence is being used to process massive quantities of battlefield data and assist with target identification, though fully autonomous systems remain limited. • The world’s militaries are watching closely. China, Iran, North Korea, and others are studying the war in Ukraine to understand how drones, electronic warfare, and battlefield adaptation are reshaping modern conflict.

Retired Major Richard Ojeda joins At the Water’s Edge to discuss his campaign for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District, why he believes veterans should play a larger role in American politics, and what he sees as the biggest failures of Washington today. Ojeda spent 24 years in the U.S. Army, much of that time at Fort Bragg, before returning to his hometown in southern West Virginia, where he served as a state senator and became known for his outspoken populist style of politics. In this conversation, we explore how military service shapes his political worldview, the challenges veterans face when transitioning to civilian life, and the role Congress should play in overseeing the executive branch during times of geopolitical tension. The discussion covers everything from VA bureaucracy and rural economic decline to war powers, foreign policy, and populism in both political parties. While the conversation touches on highly political issues, the goal of this episode is not endorsement but understanding—examining how a combat veteran running for Congress views the current strategic and political moment in the United States. Transitioning from military service to civilian life The VA disability system and challenges veterans face navigating it Why Ojeda believes veterans should run for public office Campaigning as a populist Democrat in a Republican-leaning district The role of grassroots campaigning vs. corporate PAC funding Congressional oversight of the executive branch War powers and constitutional limits on presidential authority How foreign policy decisions affect military communities Trade policy, manufacturing, and the economic challenges facing rural America Working across the aisle in Congress Richard Neece Ojeda II is a retired U.S. Army major and former West Virginia state senator. During his military career he served in multiple deployments during the Global War on Terror. After leaving the Army, he entered politics and became known for his outspoken advocacy on behalf of working-class communities and veterans. He is currently running for Congress in North Carolina’s 9th District. Scott Kelly is a former U.S. Army Special Forces officer and the host of At the Water’s Edge, a podcast examining national security, geopolitics, and the strategic challenges shaping the world today from a practitioner’s perspective. If you enjoy the show, please consider: Following the podcast Leaving a rating or review Sharing the episode with someone interested in national security or public service The views expressed by guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the host or the podcast

The United States and Israel are now at war with Iran. Airstrikes, missile exchanges, and regional escalation have reshaped the strategic landscape in a matter of days. But the larger question remains: What happens next inside Iran? In this follow-up conversation, Scott Kelly is joined again by Zolal Habibi, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), to examine how one major opposition movement views this moment—and what they believe comes after. This episode explores the practical, political, and strategic dimensions of regime change in real time. Whether war strengthens or weakens the Iranian regime internally The NCRI’s announcement of a provisional government Claims of resistance activity inside Iran The formation of a potential “Liberation Army” Opposition unity and tensions with the monarchist camp Kurdish autonomy vs. territorial integrity The risk of state collapse and “Libya scenarios” Whether foreign coordination is necessary—or dangerous What a post-regime transition would actually require Does war produce a rally-around-the-flag effect inside Iran? What would signal real regime fracture versus narrative momentum? Can armed opposition movements coordinate without fragmenting? What safeguards would prevent a cycle of revenge or state failure? What confidence can be offered that Iran would not become the next failed state? There are multiple competing Iranian opposition groups with different visions for Iran’s political future. Zolal Habibi represents one of those organizations. Invitations have been extended to other factions—including representatives from the monarchist camp—to present their perspectives in future episodes. The claims expressed in this conversation are those of the guest and her organization and may not be independently verifiable in real time. Regime change is often discussed as a headline. Much less often is it examined as a messy, structural process involving institutions, armed actors, coalition dynamics, and governance capacity. This episode focuses on those mechanics—not just the rhetoric.

Ethan Brown returns to At the Water’s Edge to discuss the second volume of his JTAC trilogy, Visual Friendlies: Tally Target, which examines the evolution of close air support during the surge years in Iraq (2006–2008) and Afghanistan (2011–2013). We explore how 20 years of uncontested air dominance reshaped American warfighting culture — from precision targeting in dense urban battle spaces to the rise of persistent ISR and smartphone-level situational awareness tools at the platoon level. Key topics include: How close air support evolved during the surge years The relationship between ground commanders, JTACs, and pilots Risk mitigation culture in the post-9/11 wars Whether technological dominance created institutional dependency NATO’s role at the tactical edge of the fight Jointness as one of GWOT’s enduring legacies The political-military divide and the importance of clearly defined end states We also discuss what must be unlearned from GWOT as the U.S. military prepares for potential large-scale conflict in contested environments — where air superiority and persistent coverage may not be guaranteed. This episode is a candid reflection on tactical excellence, institutional adaptation, and strategic ambiguity. Ethan Brown is a former U.S. Air Force Tactical Air Control Party (TACP) specialist who served 11 years, including time embedded with the 75th Ranger Regiment as part of Air Force Special Tactics. He is the author of the JTAC trilogy, a detailed examination of close air support and air power integration during the post-9/11 wars. Visual Friendlies: Tally Target Available via Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Casemate Publishers. Subscribe to At the Water’s Edge for weekly long-form conversations on national security, civil-military relations, and emerging strategic challenges.

In this episode of At the Water’s Edge, Scott sits down with Zolal Habibi, an activist affiliated with the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), to examine the structure, strategy, and claims of Iran’s organized opposition movement. The conversation explores recent protest activity, internet shutdowns, disputed casualty figures, and the role of so-called “resistance units” operating inside Iran. Scott presses on difficult questions: When do protests evolve into insurgency? How durable is the Islamic Republic’s security apparatus? What would political transition actually look like? And how realistic are competing visions — from secular republic to monarchy restoration? Topics include: The significance of Tehran’s bazaar strikes Nationwide protest dynamics and generational shifts Internet blackouts and information verification challenges Claims of organized “resistance units” operating inside Iran Casualty reporting and the difficulty of independent confirmation The historical designation and delisting of the MEK Armed resistance and the “right to resist” debate Competing opposition visions: republic vs. monarchy Kurdish autonomy and territorial integrity U.S. policy toward the Islamic Republic What a post-regime transition plan might entail This episode presents the perspective of an organized Iranian opposition figure. Claims regarding casualties, arrests, and internal dynamics are contested and difficult to independently verify under blackout conditions. The purpose of this discussion is analytical: to examine how resistance movements conceptualize escalation, legitimacy, and political transition. This discussion does not advocate for any particular faction. Instead, it examines how one organized resistance constituency conceptualizes escalation, legitimacy, and regime change — and where those assumptions warrant scrutiny. Future episodes will examine regime durability, fragmentation risks, and competing analytical perspectives.

Episode: Jahara “Franky” Matisek (USAF Lt Col) — Fixing America’s Broken Arsenal Guest: Lt Col Jahara “Franky” Matisek, U.S. Air Force | PhD Political Science | prolific writer on strategy, security assistance, and the defense industrial base What this episode is about America’s military can execute at breathtaking speed—but sustaining a long war is a different game. In this conversation, Lt Col Jahara “Franky” Matisek breaks down why the U.S. defense industrial base struggles to surge production, why supply chains are more opaque than most policymakers admit, and why “resilience” can’t be wished into existence with slogans and PowerPoint. Key topics Why the U.S. can be “tactically awesome” for a short fight—then hit limits in missiles, munitions, and sustainment The “black box” problem: the government often lacks visibility into tier-2 and tier-3 suppliers Why throwing money at production doesn’t automatically remove chokepoints (casings, propellant, and other bottlenecks) The mine-to-missile reality: minerals, refining, machining, certification, and how China shows up at multiple points in the chain The tradeoff between efficiency (markets) and resilience (surge capacity)—and why the market won’t fund resilience “as a charity” Continuing resolutions, short funding cycles, and how uncertainty drives small suppliers out of the defense ecosystem The workforce constraint: skilled trades, machinists, and why you “can’t Zoom-call the bolts into a submarine” Strategic infrastructure beyond the obvious: power grids, pipelines, and data centers as a bedrock of modern command-and-control Why “digital warfighting” runs into practical limits: electricity, cooling, transformers, copper, and long lead times Notable quotes “We can do great war stuff for about a week. Anything longer than that gets really hard.” “Resilience isn’t something the market provides out of charity.” “You can’t Zoom-call the nuts and bolts of making a submarine.” “The defense industrial base is a black box—and that’s terrifying in a crisis.” Referenced reading Foreign Policy: “How to Fix America’s Broken Arsenal” (Matisek and co-authors) Additional related work discussed: resilience and industrial base commentary (FPRI) Follow / connect Scott Kelly — Host, At the Water’s Edge Lt Col Jahara “Franky” Matisek — USAF, scholar-practitioner on strategy and the defense industrial base Call to action If this episode made you rethink “deterrence,” share it with one person in defense tech, infrastructure, or policy—and drop a comment with the single chokepoint you think would break first in a major-power conflict.

Retired Major General Matt Smith joins Scott to unpack why veteran transition isn’t just a “feel-good” topic—it’s a long-term national security issue tied directly to readiness and recruiting. They discuss Emory University Goizueta Business School’s Master of Business for Veterans (MBV) Program, the importance of community during transition, and how veterans can translate military leadership into the “language of business.” This is a tactical conversation for leaders leaving uniform—and for employers who want to actually harness veteran talent. Key Takeaways Why how we treat the GWOT generation directly impacts future recruiting and readiness. What the MBV is (and isn’t): “half an MBA,” built to give senior leaders the core business foundation. The underrated value of grad school for vets: time, perspective, and exposure to “what’s possible.” Why in-person cohort/community can be a force multiplier during the 1–2 year transition window. How veterans should think about GI Bill ROI (and why everyone wants your benefits dollars). The veteran “secret sauce” businesses miss: disciplined initiative + relentless after-action review mindset. Why the chain of command often gives well-intentioned but wrong transition advice—and how to recalibrate. “A PhD in the human condition”: the leadership dataset vets carry into any organization. Quotes “Transition is a process, not an event… it takes about two years.” “Graduate business education exposes you to what’s in the realm of possible—and what you don’t want to do.” “If you’re spending other people’s money, they won’t give it to you unless you know how to run a business.” “Veterans bring disciplined initiative—the secret sauce of the American military.” “You have a PhD in the human condition.” Chapters 00:00 Why veteran transition is a national security issue 03:16 MG Matt Smith’s background + what the MBV is 06:58 Classroom dynamics: experience, discipline, and veteran accountability 13:12 2001 vs now: how academia’s view of veterans has changed 15:43 The “three buckets” of MBA value (skills, translation, time) + what’s missing 19:52 Timing grad school with retirement + the power of an in-person support system 24:28 “It’s okay not to know”—transition goals and changing plans 29:41 GI Bill ROI, reality checks, and why location/industry matters 31:03 “Business as a language course” + the PMP as translation 34:13 Doing anything you want (and failing fast) after service 39:49 “PhD in the human condition” and why vets don’t see their own value 44:15 Advice to employers: how to actually utilize veteran talent 47:14 MG Smith’s personal transition at the one-year mark 49:29 What Emory could do next + why society needs vets at places like Emory 54:22 Closing thoughts: GWOT ended quietly; transition didn’t—plus gratitude to Vietnam vets

🎙️ Episode Description In this episode of At the Water’s Edge, Scott Kelly is joined by former Air Force pilots, Tactical Air Control Party (TACP) veterans, and military scholars to take on one of the most contentious debates in U.S. defense policy: should the A-10 Warthog be retired? Drawing on combat experience from Iraq and Afghanistan, Pentagon planning, and military history from World War II to Ukraine, the panel makes a clear case that retiring the A-10 isn’t about obsolescence—it’s about priorities. They break down what close air support (CAS) actually requires, why multi-role fighters like the F-35 cannot replace a dedicated CAS platform, and what is lost when institutional knowledge and CAS culture disappear. This is a ground-truth conversation about war as it is actually fought—low, slow, close, and unforgiving—and why the A-10 still matters in an era of great-power competition. Steve Call — Former B-52 pilot, Pentagon strategist, military historian, author of Danger Close Nathan Bachand — Former TACP, Air National Guard, PhD historian, founder of the TACP Foundation Conan Higgins — Former TACP with 25 years of service, former law enforcement officer, PhD in international law, author on crisis leadership What the A-10 was actually designed to do—and why that mission still exists The difference between dedicated CAS and “CAS as a checkbox” Why speed, stealth, and altitude don’t replace loiter time, visibility, and survivability The limits of the F-16 and F-35 in real close-air-support scenarios CAS as an offensive enabler, not just a defensive backstop Lessons from World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, and Taiwan war games Why drones and light attack aircraft are not true A-10 replacements Institutional incentives, budget priorities, and the Air Force–Army divide What ground troops lose when CAS culture disappears Close Air Support is not obsolete—it has been deprioritized No existing aircraft replaces the A-10’s combination of survivability, loiter time, and firepower CAS requires people, culture, and repetition, not just sensors and software Future wars will still put soldiers in the mud—and they will still need air support they can trust “You can atomize terrain from the air forever—but if you want to keep it, you put young men in the mud.” “The sound of the A-10 gun is the hand of God saying: don’t worry, I’ve got you.” “If the F-35 had outperformed the A-10, you’d already know about it.” CAS — Close Air Support TACP — Tactical Air Control Party JTAC — Joint Terminal Attack Controller FACA — Forward Air Controller (Airborne)

In this episode, Scott and LTG (ret.) Walt Piatt discuss the critical issue of supporting veterans as they transition from military to civilian life. They explore the role of the Wounded Warrior Project in providing essential services, the challenges veterans face in reintegration, and the importance of finding purpose after service. The conversation also delves into the complexities of navigating the VA system, the future of veteran support, and the pressing need for mental health resources. Walt emphasizes the importance of community support and the need for veterans to connect with one another to overcome their struggles. Takeaways Veterans face significant challenges when transitioning to civilian life. The Wounded Warrior Project plays a vital role in supporting veterans. Finding purpose is crucial for veterans after service. The VA system can be complex and difficult to navigate. Community support is essential for veterans' mental health. Veterans should not feel alone in their struggles. There is a need for better mental health resources for veterans. The stigma around seeking help is decreasing. Veterans are valuable members of society and should be supported. Trustworthy organizations are essential for helping veterans. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and Personal Connections 03:13 Wounded Warrior Project: Mission and Impact 04:11 Transitioning from Military to Civilian Life 07:15 Challenges Veterans Face in Reintegration 10:03 Finding Purpose After Service 13:17 Navigating the VA System 16:14 Bureaucratic Challenges and Solutions 23:12 The Importance of Supporting Veterans 25:18 Transitioning from War: The Future of Veteran Support 27:56 The Ongoing Battle: Mental Health and Suicide Among Veterans 33:23 Finding Purpose: The Path to Healing 36:39 Addressing Mental Health: The Need for Immediate Support 46:31 Navigating the Veteran Service Organization Ecosystem 53:08 A Message to Veterans: You're Not Alone

In this conversation, Wendy Cutler, a former U.S. trade negotiator, discusses the complexities of international trade, the role of government in negotiations, and the evolving landscape of U.S. trade policy. She emphasizes the importance of understanding cultural nuances in negotiations, the impact of political changes, and the need for a balanced approach to trade that considers both economic prosperity and national security. The discussion also highlights the unique challenges posed by China and the necessity of collaborating with allies to address these issues effectively. takeaways Trade is not just about money; it involves various stakeholders. The government plays a crucial role in negotiating trade agreements. Political changes can significantly impact trade negotiations. Cultural factors are essential in understanding negotiation dynamics. The U.S. has shifted from a focus on economic prosperity to economic security in trade policy. China is a formidable economic rival that requires a strategic approach. Working with allies is crucial in addressing the China challenge. NAFTA's impact shows the need for careful consideration of trade agreements. Trade policies should be holistic, addressing both international and domestic concerns. The future of trade will involve navigating complex international relationships. Navigating the Complex World of Trade The Role of Government in Trade Negotiations "Trade is not just about money." "Trade negotiations take years to develop." "Economic security is becoming a priority." Chapters 00:00 Understanding Trade Negotiation 02:26 Negotiation Tactics and Challenges 07:25 Political Dynamics in Trade Negotiations 14:05 Evolution of U.S. Trade Policy 19:52 Economic Security vs. National Security 28:41 The Role of Allies in Trade 33:38 Lessons from NAFTA and Future Trade Agreements 38:08 Advice for U.S. Trade Policy

In this conversation, Scott shares his unexpected journey from a viral resume incident to appearing on national television. He discusses the challenges and excitement of being contacted by major media outlets, preparing for his appearance on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, and the surreal experience of meeting the Jonas Brothers. Scott reflects on the importance of veteran transitions and the support of the military community, while also navigating the chaos of newfound fame and media attention.takeaways Take every call; it sharpens your skills. The military teaches accountability and communication. Viral moments can lead to unexpected opportunities. Networking is crucial, especially for veterans. Preparation is key for public speaking engagements. Embrace the chaos of media attention. Always protect your personal information online. Unexpected connections can lead to great opportunities. The importance of community support for veterans. Humor can be a great way to connect with others. Chapters 00:00 A Dog's Emergency and a Viral Moment 13:53 Media Attention and Career Opportunities 16:34 Preparing for the Tonight Show 19:43 The Journey to New York City 22:26 Unexpected Media Engagements 24:48 The Impact of Viral Fame 25:11 Preparing for the Tonight Show 27:59 Navigating the Green Room Experience 30:54 The Anticipation of Going Live 33:52 Going Off Script on National Television 36:55 Meeting the Jonas Brothers 40:05 Transitioning to Fox and Friends 43:01 The Aftermath of Fame 46:28 Returning to Reality

The conversation with Logan Harris, CEO of Spotter Global delves discusses how radar combined with other sensors are critical to detecting threats in real time and enable decision makers to counter the threat of drone. The risks of drone used by nefarious actors is matched by the risk of inadvertent civilian use and Logan shares his recommendations for policy makers to protect our critical infrastructure. There are nearly 26 million drones in total. Only about a million drones are registered. 25 million drones remain unregistered. Most drones are relatively new and prone to crashing. Information can be readily obtained from most drones. Drones present a danger to helicopters and low-flying aircraft. The risk associated with drones is expected to increase. Unregistered drones complicate aviation safety. The technology surrounding drones is rapidly evolving. Regulatory measures are needed to address drone safety.

In this conversation, Douglas Holtz-Eakin discusses the pressing issues surrounding America's national debt and fiscal health. He explores the implications of government shutdowns, the role of deficits in economic growth, and the structural challenges posed by entitlement programs. Holtz-Eakin emphasizes the need for political leadership to address these issues and the importance of long-term thinking in economic policy. He also touches on the Federal Reserve's independence, the impact of tariffs, and the future of social security, providing insights into how these factors intertwine with national security and global economic dynamics takeaways America's national debt is a significant concern that has been growing for decades. Government shutdowns have minimal economic impact but highlight political dysfunction. Deficits can hinder economic growth and limit opportunities for future generations. Entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare contribute to structural deficits. Political leadership has failed to address the looming fiscal crisis effectively. The future of Social Security is uncertain, with potential cuts looming in the next seven years. AI may improve productivity, but it won't solve fiscal issues overnight. Sovereign wealth funds are not a viable solution for the U.S. due to a lack of surplus. Tariffs raise revenue but can harm economic growth and are a regressive tax. Supply chain resilience is crucial for national security and economic stability. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Douglas Holtz-Eakin 04:49 Government Shutdown Dynamics 07:57 Impact of Shutdown on Fiscal Health 12:49 The Deficit Dilemma 17:44 Entitlement Programs and Structural Deficits 22:46 Potential Solutions for Social Security 26:47 The Role of AI and Sovereign Wealth Funds 30:57 Tariffs and Global Supply Chain Fragility 32:15 Supply Chain Resilience Post-Pandemic 34:02 Government's Role in Supply Shortages 35:30 Long-Term Thinking in American Politics 36:51 Congressional Accountability and Military Actions 38:25 Influence of Special Interests in Politics 38:49 Understanding the Congressional Budget Office 41:54 The Future of the Dollar and Global Trade 44:40 The Federal Reserve's Independence and Its Importance 48:58 Comparing Monetary Policies: U.S. vs. Other Countries 53:54 National Security and Fiscal Policy 57:43 Bipartisan Solutions for Economic Reform Find out more about Douglas Holtz-Eakin and the American Action Forum here