Bob Pittman

That's interesting.

Let's talk a little bit about China's role in this.

We can put B3 up on the screen.

This is some reporting from the New York Times showing that China was taking a more active role than previously known in Iran.

American intelligence agencies have obtained information China in recent weeks may have sent a shipment

of shoulder-fired missiles to Iran for its conflicts.

They say it's not definitive that the shipment was sent.

There's no evidence the Chinese missiles have yet been used.

But even a debate in Beijing over sending missiles to Iran suggests the degree that China sees itself as having a stake in the conflict.

Intelligence agencies have assessed that China is secretly taking an active stance in the war, allowing some companies to ship chemicals, fuel, and components that can be used in military production to Iran for the war.

Obviously, we take with a grain of salt anything that any intelligence agency says, but there's no doubt China has vested interest in the resolution of this conflict.

There's also reporting that China was involved in pushing Iran to the negotiating table.

So how do you think that they're viewing where we are right now?

My question here is on the blockade.

Let's say that the scenario that you laid out happens.

Trump walks, but he keeps a naval blockade.

Is that a tolerable situation for Iran?

How long could they really survive without doing something radical to try and change the status quo?

My last question for you, Trita, and you set us up well for our next block, which is an oil analyst is going to join us to talk about what he's seeing in the markets right now.

But what about the role of Saudi Arabia and UAE who have signaled they want the war to continue?