NewsPoliticsEducation

Inside Policy Talks

Macdonald-Laurier Institute

Inside Policy Talks is the premier video podcast of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, Ottawa's most influential public policy think tank. The Macdonald-Laurier Institute exists to make bad public policy unacceptable in our nations capital.

Play

Open in

21 episodes
weekly
Avg 59 min
English

Episodes 21

Newest Oldest Longest

All20 Unplayed20 In progress0 Played0

Counted on this page — what you have heard stays on this device, so it is not something the list can be paged by.

#139
August 21 · 52 min
Sylvain Charlebois: Canada's dairy industry in decline
Canada's dairy industry is one of the most protected sectors of the Canadian economy. But is that protection holding the industry back? While Canada's dairy sector has long benefited from policies designed to protect farmers and maintain stable prices, critics argue that these measures are limiting competition, innovation, and opportunities for growth. As dairy industries in other countries become more competitive, Canada's risks falling further behind. What is holding Canada's dairy industry back? And can Canada find a better balance between protecting producers and encouraging a more competitive, dynamic sector? This week, Sylvain Charlebois, professor and researcher of food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University and former dean of its Faculty of Management, joins MLI's Peter Copeland on Inside Policy Talks to discuss the challenges facing Canada's dairy industry, the weaknesses of the current system, and how protectionist measures like fair pricing may be limiting its potential.
#138
August 14 · 50 min
Lt.-Col. Joel Maley: Deterrence is cheaper than defence
Latvia is home to Canada's largest overseas military deployment, with more than 2,000 members of the Canadian Armed Forces serving on NATO's eastern flank. Why are Canadians there? Why should Canadians care? As Russia's war against Ukraine continues into another year the world has become more dangerous, more divided, and less predictable. In response, Canada has made one of its most significant international military commitments in decades. Through Operation REASSURANCE, Canadian soldiers are leading NATO's multinational brigade in Latvia, working alongside allies to strengthen collective defence and deter aggression. This week Lieutenant-Colonel Joel Maley, Acting Commander of Task Force Latvia, joins MLI's Christopher Coates on Inside Policy Talks.
#137
August 6 · 1 hr 2 min
Rainer Knopff and Ted Morton: Canadian judges ran amok with the Charter
Special episode: Peter Copeland, acting director of domestic policy at MLI, sat down last month with eminent Canadian political scientists Rainer Knopff and Ted Morton. 25 years ago Morton and Knopff's seminal book, The Charter Revolution and the Court Party, offered an important counterpoint to the otherwise prevailing view that the Charter was an unmitigated good for Canadian society. The discussion took place as part a broader conference entitled Reflections on the Charter Revolution in Canada at the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy.
#136
July 30 · 1 hr 4 min
Carl Trueman: Euthanasia, transgenderism, and transgression
By almost every material measure life has become safer, richer, and more convenient... so why do many people seem more anxious, lonely, and unhappy? We often explain this malaise in economic or psychological terms but Carl Trueman argues that its deepest cause is spiritual: Western societies have rejected the belief that human beings have a given nature that dictates what is good for us. Our understanding of the human person shapes how we approach family, technology, education, medicine, and the role of government... its reflected in the most basic orientation that we take to policy issues. Carl Trueman, a Professor at Grove City College, is the author of several best selling books including The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self and The Desecration of Man.
#135
July 23 · 51 min
Garry Clement: Foreign actors see Canada as the lane of least resistance
For years Canada seemed to be the more peaceful part of North America. But that narrative is changing. Recently a Toronto police officer was shot while investigating a series of shootings in the city, including one that took place at the city’s US Consulate. The death of Constable Marc Pinizzotto is a tragedy. But it is also a warning. The lines between organized crime, foreign interference, terrorist financing, money laundering, gang violence, and hostile state activity are becoming increasingly blurred. For decades, Canadians have tended to view these challenges as separate issues. But what happens when criminal organizations, foreign states, financial networks, and violent proxies all begin operating in the same ecosystem? What are these converging threats? Why do they matter? And is Canada ready to confront them? To answer these questions Inside Policy Talks welcomes Garry Clement, former national director of the RCMP’s proceeds of crime program. He’s also the author of several books, including “Under Cover: Inside the Shady World of Organized Crime and the R.C.M.P.”.
#134
July 16 · 1 hr 1 min
Rob Henderson: Stigma and expectations will make your life better
For young men, there used to be “a ton of societal pressure on you to make something of yourself.” That’s one of many positive culture norms that we’ve now lost, says author Rob Henderson. Today, “some guys are going to be ambitious and hardworking regardless of what people tell them,” Henderson says. But for many others, “if there's no judgment, no norm, no expectation,” they will sink into a state of inertia or pursue “hedonistic pleasure” and “short-term, fleeting gratification.” He says this is one of many examples of how the loss of cultural norms has impacted human flourishing. To discuss this, Henderson joins Inside Policy Talks. Henderson is a psychologist and US Air Force veteran who is best known for coining the term “luxury beliefs.” He is the author of Troubled: A Memoir of Foster Care, Family, and Social Class. On the podcast, he tells Peter Copeland, acting director of domestic policy at MLI, that in past generations cultural norms served to promote healthy lifestyle choices while actively stigmatizing poor ones – like drugs and gambling. That stigma was serving a useful function. But Henderson says there are strategies individuals can use to overcome the lack of guidance today’s culture provides about how to live a good life. He suggests that a wise place to start is by actively seeking out peer groups that promote positive norms.
#133
July 9 · 49 min
Christine Van Geyn and Ryan Alford: Canadian courts imagine wild scenarios to avoid punishing criminals
Canada’s judges have become “completely divorced from reality” in the reasoning they use to bat down mandatory minimum sentences for serious crimes, says Christine Van Geyn, interim executive director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation. Tension around this issue reached a breaking point in October 2025 when the Supreme Court of Canada issued its ruling in the Senneville case. The court struck down the one-year mandatory minimum sentence that Parliament had passed for possession of child sexual abuse material. The judges’ reasoning was not that the men before the court didn’t deserve serious punishment, but that a hypothetical teenager sharing a sexting image might theoretically fall under the same provision. Public outrage followed. But this pattern of the court using these imagined scenarios goes back decades. It’s the topic of a recent MLI commentary – “(Un)reasonable hypotheticals” – by Van Geyn and Lakehead University law professor Ryan Alford. To discuss these issues, they join Inside Policy Talks. On the episode, they tell host Mark Mancini, a Thompson Rivers University law professor and MLI senior fellow, that a particularly outlandish “reasonable hypothetical” used by the Supreme Court in its 2015 Nur ruling served as an inflection point. It moved Canada into the “world of speculation” when it comes to concocting these hypotheticals, says Van Geyn. The court imagined a situation where a responsible firearms owner who stores an unloaded gun and ammunition in close proximity could face the three-year mandatory minimum sentence for a serious firearms offence. “The scenario they picked shows us exactly how unhinged from reality they became” she says. Alford observed that the court’s trajectory on these rulings raises some bigger issues. “They're now saying, ‘Okay, well, let's treat the accused as if they are essentially members of an equity-seeking group,’” says Alford. “The reasonable hypothetical offender is in this pool now of people who we're supposed to think about and have sympathy for.” “Even more problematically,” adds Alford, “it's the notion that (the courts) now have this freewheeling basis to say the Constitution means whatever they say it means.”
#132
June 25 · 1 hr 5 min
Joel Blit: The 3 stages of the AI revolution
Some of the boldest predictions about Artificial Intelligence have forecast that white-collar workers are soon to become obsolete. This comes as rapidly advancing AI appears more and more in our day-to-day lives — reshaping classrooms, the workplace, and how we interact with each other. But we’ve seen these transformations before. As with major past major technological upheavals—like the Industrial Revolution of the 19th Century—AI is causing a disruption, presenting new opportunities even as it upends old ones. Today we ask: What can past technological revolutions teach us about AI? Will AI replace workers, augment them, or force us to reimagine entire industries? And how can Canada use AI to raise living standards and lift us up out of our present economic doldrums without allowing it hollow out human judgment and interpersonal connection—perhaps one of the most worrying prospects raised by this new technology. Our guest today is Joel Blit. Joel is a University of Waterloo economics professor and co-founder of the Canadian AI Adoption Initiative. His recent work focuses on AI and the future of work.
#131
June 11 · 1 hr 18 min
Michael Bonner: Liberalism is in crisis
Liberalism is clearly on the ropes. To many, the threats originate from what they consider the outside: populism, authoritarianism, misinformation, and polarization. But to others, the wounds appear self-inflicted: arising from tensions within liberalism itself. For decades, liberal societies promised a host of goods: most notably, individual freedom. But many now look around and see loneliness and social decay. Families are breaking down and the culture is fragmenting. Institutional mistrust is on the rise amid a politics that seems unable to unite. Many of the institutions that once gave liberal societies their coherence—and, in fact, preceded them—like churches, families, local associations, stable communities and shared moral norms—are now shadows of their former selves. These issues are at the heart of Michael Bonner’s new book, The Crisis of Liberalism: The Origin and Destiny of Freedom. Bonner argues that liberal societies are like orphans, who have either forgotten or do not know their parentage. They have severed the moral, philosophical and theological foundations that made their societies’ account of freedom intelligible. Bonner is a historian, writer, and political adviser. He holds a doctorate from Oxford and has written widely on history, religion, politics and the modern West.
#130
June 4 · 44 min
Christopher Dummitt: Canada must teach its national story
We are in a moment of heightened focus on Canadian national identity. Ever since Donald Trump threatened to annex Canada, many Canadians have responded with the assertion that Canadian identity is unique from the United States. But this national mood comes only a few years after a campaign of tearing down statues of Canada’s seminal historic figures, and then-prime minister Justin Trudeau calling Canada a “post-national state.” Most recently, a so-called prank show with funding from the CBC targeted Canadians who have defended the legacy of Canada’s founding prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald. So, is the wave of Canadian patriotism that’s played out over the past year grounded in a firm understanding of the history – both good and bad – that has shaped the country? This a moment when Canadians would benefit from knowing the historic roots of their democracy and the stories of figures like Macdonald who helped build a nation on the northern half of the continent. One voice who has consistently stood up for the idea that Canadians should have a robust and balanced view of their past is Trent University history professor Christopher Dummitt. Dummitt joins Inside Policy Talks to discuss his efforts to reach beyond the classroom with his new Canadian history YouTube channel – titled Well... That Didn't Suck! – and share his views on the current state of Canadians’ relationship with their history. On the podcast, he tells Ian Campbell, digital editor at MLI, that one source of Canada’s amnesia about its cultural and democratic roots is the deliberate erasure of Canadian national symbols that took place in the 1960s. This was most famously exemplified by the new Canadian flag created by the Pearson government, devoid of any reference to Canada’s British heritage – the very roots that gave Canada its parliamentary democracy. Dummitt says the toppling of historic statues that has taken place in the 2020s is “in a sense just a continuation of what happened in the 1960s and 1970s.” Part of the solution, says Dummitt, is to restore provincial history curriculums that teach a cohesive Canadian national story.
#129
May 28 · 1 hr 22 min
BONUS EPISODE: Rob Henderson in live conversation with Brian Lee Crowley
This week, we present a special bonus episode: a live conversation between author Rob Henderson, who famously coined the term luxury beliefs, and MLI Managing Director Brian Lee Crowley. The event was recorded in April 2026 before a live audience in Vancouver, as part of MLI's Voices That Inspire speaker series. In their conversation, Crowley and Henderson discuss the formative childhood experiences that led the author to his ideas about elite hypocrisy, Crowley asks whether discrediting the value of intact families is an example of a luxury belief, and Henderson reveals his views on the future of reading.
#128
May 21 · 40 min
Lorenzo Vidino: How the Muslim Brotherhood quietly threatens the West
The West offers the “ideal environment” for an organization like the Muslim Brotherhood to carry out its operations “because we are extremely tolerant,” says Lorenzo Vidino, an expert on the Islamist organization. The Muslim Brotherhood has inspired or spawned some of the world's most dangerous terrorist organizations. Yet its goals, strategy, structure, and financing remain poorly understood – even by many of the world's leading national security and intelligence agencies. The Brotherhood’s long-term goal is the Islamification of society. The West’s tolerance offers fertile grounds for its activities to remain unchecked – creating a national security blind spot within Western democracies. One of the world’s leading experts on the Brotherhood, Vidino is director of the Program on Extremism at The George Washington University. He joins Inside Policy Talks to share his research on the Brotherhood conducted over the past 25 years. “In the West, they could operate freely,” explains Vidino. “They can fundraise, they can open mosques, they can disseminate the propaganda, they can carry out all the social, religious, and political activities and fundraising activities.” On the podcast, he explains in detail to Casey Babb, director of The Promised Land at MLI, how the Brotherhood carries out activities like raising revenues. He says this involves a combination of receiving money from the Middle East, conducting ventures like real estate businesses in the West, and obtaining funds directly from unsuspecting Western governments. “It's the ability of Brotherhood networks to receive grants, donations from governments at all levels,” says Vidino. “It's not like the applicant would be an organization called Muslim Brotherhood of Montreal. It would be some group with a nice sounding name about integration and friendship and interfaith,” he says. “With a bit of naïveté in most cases … policymakers – often second-tier bureaucrats – would give the funding.”
#127
May 14 · 1 hr 1 min
Andrea Lawlor: Canada’s courts are fair game for criticism
Courts have become central players in some of Canada’s biggest political and moral debates – especially since the advent of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That’s raised hard questions about their role, what accountability mechanisms exist, and how Canadians understand the place of the judicial branch within their system of government. Like any other institution, courts depend on public trust which must be earned and sustained. McMaster University political science professor Andrea Lawlor has been tracking how Canadians perceive this institution. She joins Inside Policy Talks to discuss her findings. Lawlor’s research, conducted with Acadia University’s Erin Crandall, finds that Canadians still generally trust the courts, but this confidence has shown signs of decline, and it appears attitudes are becoming more politicized. On the podcast, Lawlor tells Peter Copeland, deputy director of domestic policy at MLI, that her research found little shift in how Canadians on the political left perceive the courts. However, she has observed a moderate decline in support from those on the right – particularly tied to court decisions on moral issues like medical assistance in dying. However, Lawlor says there is one type of court ruling that tends to register a public reaction across the political spectrum: criminal sentencing. “Those tend to uniformly push public opinion,” says Lawlor. “I think there was some consensus across the political spectrum that Canadians were dissatisfied … and they certainly wanted the legislature to step in.”
#126
April 30 · 59 min
Erica Komisar: Healthy family life requires tradeoffs
Our culture tells parents that “you can do it all” – but that's “a very dangerous narrative” and “a narcissistic trope,” says social worker and parenting coach Erica Komisar. Is it time for our culture to grapple with a hard truth: life requires setting priorities and making trade-offs between items like career and family, rather than trying to have it all at once? Modern societies invest a great deal of resources into children. But often it comes in the form of trends like helicopter parenting, bulldozer parenting, or intensive parenting. Are these short bursts of anxious, structured engagement what children really need? Or do we use these to paper over the gaps our modern culture has left in traditional family and social structures? Our economies and social norms prize autonomy, flexibility, and paid work. Meanwhile, many parents feel more stretched and isolated than ever, and the social networks they inhabit feel thin. To discuss these challenges, Komisar joins Inside Policy Talks. Komisar is a clinical social worker trained in psychology, and an author whose work argues that the first years of childhood are foundational for attachment, mental health, and later resilience. On the podcast, she tells Peter Copeland, deputy director of domestic policy at MLI, that “it's a narcissistic trope that you can do it all, that you don't have to take anything off the plate, that you don't have to sacrifice anything, that you can have everything and do everything all at the same time.” She says that messaging sets up internal conflict for parents, especially mothers, when they face choices around whether to stay home with their toddlers or return to work. She says deep down many mothers would rather stay home, and the pressure to return to a career sets up internal conflicts leading to health problems or even resentment towards the child. For example, she points to the growing trend of women posting online that they regret becoming mothers. “When you reject your own children and mothering, we know that we've taken a turn in society,” says Komisar.
#125
April 23 · 59 min
Keldon Bester: How to address the demand for online gambling
Sports betting, online gambling, and now prediction markets are becoming harder to avoid. What was once confined to casinos or occasional wagers is now built into our phones, advertised on sports broadcasts, and increasingly our wider digital economy. This raises bigger questions about the impact of markets. Should markets always follow demand, even when it involves a social harm, letting choice prevail and government coffers swell with the proceeds? Or should we look to the total economic and social impact – like indebtedness, bankruptcy, addiction and mental illness – for a sense of how to approach issues like the demand for gambling? In Ontario, research has found a sharp rise in gambling-related helpline contacts among young men since the province expanded private online gambling, and reporting has also pointed to a major rise in gambling-linked insolvencies. In the United States, new research has linked legalized online sports betting to worsening consumer financial outcomes, including lower credit scores and higher rates of delinquency and bankruptcy. To discuss this growing problem, Keldon Bester joins Inside Policy Talks. Bester is the executive director of the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project and a fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation. He’s one of Canada’s leading voices on monopoly power, competition, and the broader question of how markets should be structured to serve the common good. On the podcast, he tells Peter Copeland, deputy director of domestic policy at MLI, that the onslaught of marketing geared towards promoting online gambling comes on the heels of society having spent more than a decade figuring out: “how can I make someone spend as much time on their phone as possible?” He says introducing gambling into the mix makes that an even more dangerous experiment. “The fact that every 10 minutes you get a notification that says, ‘Hey, place a free micro bet on the outcome of the Jays game might in isolation be fine, but in sort of aggregate [might] be something we don't want to become a much bigger part of our economy,” says Bester.
#124
April 16 · 58 min
Melanie Phillips: The West can’t wrap its head around Islam
“The whole of the West views Islam … through a Western cultural prism,” and that’s a problem, says British author and commentator Melanie Phillips. With terrorism, extremism, and antisemitism surging throughout the West, people are looking for answers. They’re trying to understand why our leaders and institutions are failing to stand up to this threat. Phillips, one of the clearest voices sounding the alarm about these issues, joins Inside Policy Talks to share her assessment of the problem. As a journalist, Phillips has championed traditional values in the culture war for more than three decades. She is the author of numerous books, including her 2006 best-seller Londonistan, about the British establishment's capitulation to Islamist aggression. Her latest book, Fighting the Hate: A Handbook for Jews Under Siege, was released earlier this year. On the podcast, she tells Casey Babb, director of The Promised Land at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, that the West’s “ignorance” of Islam is one of the key factors leading to the extremist threat going unchecked. “They think (Islam) is a private matter between the individual and the Almighty,” says Phillips. “I'm sure that is part of the religion of Islam, but Islam is also a political project. … If you're a pious Muslim, you have a religious duty to Islamize the non-Islamic world.” “The West can't get their heads around that at all.” She says Western governments must show leadership by standing up for their own cultures. “I don't think it's coincidence that governments that have gone down this bad road of not defending their culture properly have descended into – certainly, as far as Britain is concerned – a mire of absolute incompetence,” says Phillips. “They can no longer keep the show on the road.”
#123
April 9 · 1 hr 35 min
Yuan Yi Zhu, Xavier Foccroulle Ménard and François Côté: The Supreme Court's judicial activism is a threat to Parliamentary sovereignty
Last month, a major constitutional showdown took place before the Supreme Court of Canada. Over four days of hearings, the court heard from a record number of interveners in quite possibly the biggest and most consequential case since the Charter was adopted in 1982. In the wake of these hearings, the justices will now deliberate on Hak v Quebec. It's a case that addresses the scope of rights and their limits, whether the Notwithstanding Clause is subject to any restrictions beyond proper application, and the balance of power between courts and legislatures. Many are tempted to view this case through the lens of the law that's at issue: Quebec's controversial Bill 21, and whether it is right or wrong. But the stakes are far greater. This case is really a question of who decides what the law means, how it is interpreted, and ultimately changed. However the court rules, the decision will shape Canadian politics for years to come. At MLI, this is central to our Judicial Foundations Project, where we examine how courts, legislatures, and constitutional principles interact in Canada’s parliamentary democracy. These cases raise fundamental questions about whether that balance is being maintained, or fundamentally altered. To discuss the Supreme Court hearings and what's at stake in the outcome, three leading experts join Inside Policy Talks. Yuan Yi Zhu is a professor of International Law at Leiden University whose work focuses on constitutionalism, public law, and the limits of judicial power. He is a member of MLI’s Judicial Foundations Project. Xavier Foccroulle Ménard is a lawyer with Stikeman Elliott, and a legal scholar specializing in constitutional law, rights adjudication, and the theory of the Charter. And François Côté is a lawyer with Droits Collectifs Québec, an organization which is directly involved in the case as an intervener. On the podcast, they discuss with Peter Copeland, deputy director of domestic policy at MLI, the key factors at play in this case and how they connect to Canada's growing culture of judicial activism.
#122
March 27 · 1 hr 7 min
Brendan Case: We need better metrics for human flourishing
As Canada continues its decade-long slide in the UN’s global happiness rankings, there’s growing questions about whether policymakers are even using the right metrics to measure the indicators of living a good life. Across the developed world, there’s a similar, troubling pattern. The 2026 UN World Happiness Report, released earlier this month, suggests pronounced declines, particularly in Anglosphere countries. That includes Canada, which dropped to 25th spot in the rankings, while the United States sits at 23rd. These findings come despite a general rise in material prosperity. While the UN survey moves beyond looking strictly at GDP, some organizations are calling for an even broader view. To discuss this, Brendan Case, associate director for research at Harvard’s Human Flourishing Program, joins Inside Policy Talks. Case has been closely involved in shaping Harvard’s Global Flourish Study, a major international effort to better understand well-being across countries, cultures, and life stages. The study seeks to move beyond narrow economic measures of happiness. On the podcast, he tells Peter Copeland, deputy director of domestic policy at MLI, that GDP is “an extremely coarse measure” even when it comes to looking at material wealth, and falls far short on capturing other kinds of well-being. He says the UN survey also has its limits. “I think that they have genuinely helped in moving the conversation beyond just a narrow fixation on ‘how can we generate more income?’” says Case. However, his team has been engaged in a “friendly debate” with the UN report’s editors on the best alternative mechanisms. Case notes that the UN metrics ultimately come down to respondents giving a subjective assessment of how satisfied they are with their lives, while the Harvard study looks at a several concrete measures, like health, as determinants of respondents’ well-being.
#121
March 19 · 53 min
David Wand: Race should not trump merit at Canada’s universities
Across the country, law and medical schools have adopted identity-based admissions criteria in the name of equity. But very little data has been available on how those policies work. New research from MLI is changing that. In a new paper on DEI and admissions in Canadian law and medical schools, researcher David Wand requested admissions data from 18 law schools and 14 medical schools. Only six law schools and eight medical schools agreed to share their data. Wand then compared applicants’ standardized test scores – such as the LSAT and MCAT – against actual admissions outcomes. To discuss his findings, Wand joins Inside Policy Talks. On the podcast, he tells Peter Copeland, deputy director of domestic policy at MLI, that race is a key factor in the admissions process, raising, he argues, serious questions about meritocracy. Based on these findings, he argues there is a better way forward and calls on provincial governments to ban race from the admissions process. “The ultimate goal here is to ban it and follow the lead of other multiracial democratic countries that also are concerned about historical disadvantages experienced by certain racial groups,” says Wand. He points to Scandinavian countries as an alternative model, noting that they do not consider race in admissions but instead support disadvantaged students earlier in the process through programs aimed at improving academic performance.
#120
March 12 · 44 min
Nadav Eyal: For the Islamic regime, survival is victory
As the second week of war in Iran continues, there’s growing questions about whether regime change is possible, and what the end game looks like. The United States and Israel have taken out the long-time leader of Iran’s Islamic regime, Ali Khamenei. But with his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, now installed as the new supreme leader, the regime appears to have dug in for a long fight to retain power. Are the ongoing aerial strikes enough to permanently hobble the Iranian regime, and are Iran’s people ready to bring about a new government? Can the United States be counted on for continued military support if that’s what it takes to topple the regime? And, as Canada debates its own position on the war, what should Canadians understand about the risks posed by the regime – not only to the Middle East, but to global security more broadly? To share his on-the-ground knowledge of the Middle East, Israeli-based journalist and political commentator Nadav Eyal joins Inside Policy Talks. Eyal is a regular contributor to Call Me Back with Dan Senor and Amit Segal. On the podcast, he tells Casey Babb, director of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s The Promised Land project, that one of the challenges when it comes to bringing about regime change is that many Westerners have become averse to longer processes because of the fast-moving news cycle. However, as a core part of its survival strategy, Iran’s Islamic regime was structured to withstand prolonged conflict because it always expected this type of war with the United States and Israel. “This was their prophecy all along,” says Eyal. “They built their country, their polity, around the idea of resistance, and now they are trying to resist.”

Showing 1–20 of 21 episodes