tv Ali Velshi on Target Al Jazeera July 2, 2015 3:30am-4:01am EDT
the elegant wide-eyed fashion icon, the definitive audrey hepburn. jessica baldwin, al jazerra, london. there is more on all of those story on his our website just head over to aljazerra.com. you can see our front page there. velshi, "on target" tonight. in tehran. >> how much could nation possibly trust the ufts,. >> the same wild accusations against united states. >> comprehensive diplomatic resolutions and the most difficult and long lasting national security situations we've faced in a very long time. >> it's early thursday morning
in tehran, and optimisti optimism is building that a deal could be made less than a week from today. but president obama and ayatollah khamenei have said they are willing to walk away if they don't get the deal they want. during this show i'll give you more of our unprecedented access while i'm here in tehran. and david schuster is in new york. david. >> head of the be international atomic agency, is headed to where you are, to meet with the ayatollah khamenei, is that seemingly a positive sign? >> it is david. both to do with the inspection and the goals of iran's nuclear program. iran has complainted that it is a peaceful nuclear program for
civilian use for the enrichment of uranium to create energy, electricity. many in the west have maintained that this is for military, nuclear weaponry. two things have to lap. the iaea wants to inspect the facilities, and they want to interview iran's most senior nuclear scientists, by interviewing them, determining what they've been up to and trying to figure out whether this is for civilian purposes or for armments as some in the west say. until very recently, the ayatollah himself has said no dice. we're not going to have international inspectors come in and interview our scientists.
but the head of the iaea will speak to president rouhani, not the ayatollah, if they can come to some sort of terms, you remember president obama saying yesterday, there are things that iran will not be willing to do, and if they are not willing to do, there won't be a deal, this is something that iran is not willing to do, allowing their scientists to be interviewed. if there is a conversation going on about this david, there is a chance that the zeal would be made. if the deal is made, it will be historic, it will be yet another milestone that president obama has achieved in the last week or so. david what is going on with the president at this stage in his second term where most people are thought of almost in a lame duck way and he's breaking all these deals, making all these deals that are creating historic proportion. point. here in the united states, the
string of political successes have given president obama a significant boost. his polling rating has reached 50% for the first time in a long time. controversial still to come including any deal with iran. first victory came after a huge set back, involving the transpacific partnership, tpp as it's flown, between united states and 11 pacific rim nation and involves 40% of the global economy. last wednesday the senate approved giving the president fast track authority, that rescued the deal after house democrats nearly buried the legislation in early june. the president signed the fast-track deal this week. after the break through on tpp, the u.s. supreme court handed president obama a huge victory on the affordable care act or
obamacare. symbolically represents a huge defeat for republicans who have tried to repeal obamacare more than 50 times. the very next day, the supreme court made its decision backing same sex marriage in all 50 states, giving the white house a reason to celebrate. the president said, when all americans are treated equal we are all more free. that brings us to today, president obama's announcement in the rose garden announcing that the united states is formally reestablishing relations with cuba, and secretary of state john kerry will go to the cuban capital later this summer to open the embassy. that brings us to iran. the united states appears to be on the brink of a deal with its long time middle
eastern enemy, the june 30th deadline for the deal have come and gone but the talks have extended for at least another week. near the negotiations over iran, two fundamental issues have to be resolved. first acknowledge inspection of iran's nuclear facilities and military sites. second, the information it has to provide about its nuclear past, president obama and george w. bush, before secretary kerry and iranian dmoaments were about diplomats were about to come to their first deal. several critics agre
disagree with be secretary of state kerry. one of the form he u.s. officials that wrote and signed a letter, published on the washington institute of near east policy, ambassador jeffrey, the obama administration seems to be back away from previous demands that iran give a full accounting, on its past nuclear development, there are three crucial parts on the development of a nuclear warhead, the first is a fissile punch and the third is the complex technology involved in placing a nuclear device in a warhead and being able to detonate it. in your view why is it so crucial to know iran's history on that third part? >> for two reasons. and this is absolutely central to why we wrote the letter. and our concerns upon what kerry
said and what we sense might happen. as you absolutely correctly pointed out in your chart, the -- two of the three limits, the fissible material and long range rockets are dual use. it's not a smoking pistol if you can find enriched uranium, theoretically there are other purposes for that as you pointed identity but in terms of weaponizing a nuclear warhead, there there is only one purpose of that is to create a hir hir hiroshima incident. is it is very important psychologically and politically
for iran to either confess to what it has done or be held accountable and blamed for the international atomic energy agency, until that is done sanction he at least those related to weapons programs should not be -- sanctions at least those related to weapons perhaps should not be lifted. >> it would set a bad precedent if iran or anybody else could get away with not disclosing research they were carrying on years ago . but such precedent isn't it immaterial over a weaponnization in the next ten years? >> not entirely. if we do not know the dimension of that program, if we don't know in detail more than we have from the
intelligence, exactly what they were looking for, what kind of materials they needed, they might be able to import things, again dual-use things that they would be able to shift to produce a warhead. that's something we don't want. as the president said, after ten years, there is no stopping these people from breaking out almost immediately and even in the agreement as the president laid it out in april, within a year or less, they could have enough fissible material. but do they also have enough warhead? that is something we need to know, this is really important. >> in the bipartisan letter you helped writ, you wrote about iran coming clean about its past decisions towards a warhead, you 92 also were clear that it needto be performance based sanction he around built in penalties, if iran doesn't follow through the penalties are
clear. what has been the reaction from the obama administration to this letter? >> the obama administration actually has been and this is a change in its normal reaction to criticism which has been quite violent in the past, essentially embraced it and said yeah, that's what we're trying to do. but they missed two points. one is, many of us, not all of us, but many of us who signed the letter really don't think that if we got everything that we want and the president said he would want is a good or great agreement. it's the lowest possible common denominator that may be acceptable if we get everything we put in it. because we're not going to stop their enrichment efforts and they're going to remain a danger. but the other point is iran has to be blocked in its political and military efforts in the region. the reason the raw iran program is
such a worry and the other programs in the region are not, is the iran hegemony in the area. we have to do that to complement the agreement. >> isn't that separate from where iran has nuclear capability? everyone would love if iran stopped funding hezbollah, but shouldn't that be stopped in the beginning whether or not iran has access to materials to build a nuclear weapon? >> you're absolutely right. technically the administration that is done this and we all understand and accept that. that is the administration has done that by saying iran's role in terrorism, in syria, all fine and good, this is only on the nuclear program. but we can find statements by
the president and his advisors that this agreement he thinks is going to have a transformative effect on iran. it is going to become a status quo country because it knows it can trust us and that iran will change its spots. that's what drives much of our criticism of this agreement, it's this underlying feeling that the agreement regardless of what's in it will produce a different iran. we don't think so. we think it will produce possibly a more aggressive iran and that's bad enough. >> ambassadoryary, thanks for being ton program. we appreciate it. all of this continues to be monitored very closely. in the capital of iran, tehran, that is where ali velshi is standing by. ali. >> if a deal is reached, what happens when the u.s. gets a new president? >> iran wants to make an
>> i'm ali velshi "on target" frb tehran. >> in less than a year and a half, americans will elect a new president. and the worry here in tehran, will the next president honor such a deal if one is struck? it may not happen that way. i sat down with professor foad isade. and he tells me why iranians are so concerned about that. is i asked him why iranians are so
egger to get a deal. >> iranian leaders, especially during this administration of rouhani, has decided to make a deal, kind of closing down is iran's nuclear program, which they spent a lot of money for, people have died for it, and what they want is lifting of sanctions. they don't want sanction he suspended, i can tell you why suspension is not good enough for them. they want sanction hes lifted. if they can get that from the other side then they will have an agreement and everybody will be happy. if the other side wants to close iran's nuclear program more or less and then keep the major sanctions at the same time, then you're not going to have an agreement. iran has 10,000 kilogram of enriched uranium. somewhere that 10,000 is going to be turned to 300, 98% of it's going to be gone.
iran has spent 20 years building a reactor in arak, the city of arak. two-thirds of the enriched uranium is going to be stored somewhere. iran is getting a lot of restrictions on its nuclear program. the price of that is lifting of sanctions. >> the example of these banking sanctions is the example that the u.s. treasury uses when talking about effective ways to deal with governments that they don't like. they have been very effective. just tell us a little bit about this. the banking sanctions mean, if it's medicines or spare parts or automobiles, money to purchase these things to sell in iran cannot be transferred to other businesses. >> you know one of the sanctions that we got three years ago almost, was we could not use the swiss system. >> the international banking transfer system. >> transfer system. so no matter what we wanted to
buy, we couldn't. because we couldn't transfer the money. and in reality, the iranian banks were cut off from the international banking system. and that makes the situation quite serious. so what iran is saying is that, lift the sanctions and okay, we're going to forget about the nuclear program but lift the sanctions. the problem that we have is that we have some people in the u.s, within the u.s. congress, we have leaders of the republican party, and others, the israeli lobby, that would want iran's nuclear program closed down more or less, they don't have a problem with that part, but they also want to keep the sanctions. they want to have their cake and eat it too. they want to have it both ways. >> their response is that in iran there is a supreme leader who is more powerful than all of congress. one person who can say yes or no. >> right.
and he has been -- if you read what he has been saying, he's been quite accommodating. what he has been saying is the basic idea that iran more or less closes its nuclear program and then we get the sanctions lifted. why lifting is important because suspending, if we get just suspension, it's done by the president. the u.s. president is supposed to call the congress inform the congress that he wants suspension. and then we don't know who will come after obama. if it's a republican they could just forget about the agreement. in the u.s. history we have had instances of that. some president comes, they make an international agreement -- >> so iran wants permanence. iran wants the promise made and honored. >> doesn't want the disagreement blown apart by the next u.s. president. that's what we're worried about. >> and of course all eyes center
on vienna where those negotiations continue on their way and they'll go they say until july 7th al jazeera's james bays with more. >> still some sticking points and a great deal for them to get through because this is supposed to be the final and some understanding. we understand that more foreign ministers will be coming in the coming hours. to try to get momentum of this moving towards a deal which they want to achieve in the last week or so. >> all sides are eager for an agreement but up next we'll talk to a man who says this one on >> as greece plunges deeper into
the potential of nuclear relations hangs in the battle. believes an agreement would only cause more problems against the middle east. he believes and agreement will only cause more problems across the middle east. he calls the potential deal a crummy deal, how come? >> there are a few issues with the deal. start with a premise of do we need a deal with iran? does iran need to be a friend of the united states at this point in time? sure it does. everybody would love iran to be a friend but -- >> this isn't what this deal is about, that iran is a friend or rolling back the hezbollah or hamas terrorist groups or anything like that. can we stop for ten years iran's pursuit of a nuclear weapon? >> there's problem right there. ten years is a very, very long time in american diplomacy, very
short time in the relations in the middle east. >> isn't it longer than a year or two, which is the breakout be -- the breakout time, it's got maybe a year before it can do what we're asking be done for maybe isn't a ten year period better? >> if you put it like that, maybe it is but i don't think that's the case. first of all nobody guarantees that iran that has a long long history of cheating on deals will actually stand by its -- by its ten-year option. first of all, let's remember that we are signing with one man, unelected man, ali khamenei, 79 fest years old not in the greatest of health, after he passes away
that the next supreme leader is not necessarily going to obliged by anything that he has signed. >> one of the things that if he does sign, one of the suggestions is that part of this deal would include at least some ability to monitor in some fashion what iran is doing at some of its research facilities. is there something there at least that may not be worth a deal but is there something promising about this? >> well, technically we have a monitoring -- iran is obliged to accept monitoring right now. the problem is, that as the international atomic agency in vienna has reported over and over and over again is that over time iran has reneged on some of those agreements and hasn't allowed its inspectors access to where they want to. and by the way, while we are negotiating, our position which has been initially inspections anywhere, any time, is now a little less than anywhere and less than any time. it's any time the iranians
sagree to any time -- >> the key issue is not whether it's anywhere, any time, is when the inspections happen are they effective? can the united states effectively monitor? it's a situation of not, we're coming tomorrow, no you have got to come the next day, but the squabble is whether the united states and international inspectors will know what's going on. >> the united states has actually had actually quite a crummy record in intelligence over how people are going to develop nuclear weapons. we didn't know that russia was going to do it initially, we didn't lately know that india was going to do it, pakistan is going to do it, north korea, et cetera, et cetera. so the intelligence, actually, the intelligence agencies will be less active because they'll rely on the iaea only, and that will make some of the agencies less reliable in their inspections.
>> columnist news week, thanks for coming in. we appreciate it. >> thank you very much. >> it's been an intriguing day in tehran, iran. the head of the iaea is going to tehran to speak to president rouhani. let's go back to tehran and speak with ali velshi. ali. >> i am speaking with as many officials as i can. to see what they want, they all want diplomatic sanctions ended, whatever you calm it. is a burr johning economy, they want to be -- best of your b usurgeoning
society. they want to be exposed with the world, they want to trade with the world, want to sell their goods to the world, they want to buy new cars new equipment new things, they want to buy from russia from china, they are not going to get what think want and be hasan rouhani, they elected, what i can get everybody to tell me is they want these sanctions to end and they will give up the nuclear program they are so proud of in order to get an economy that works. i'll continue on this subject but for now that's it for me ali velshi from tehran. >> ali, thank you very much. >> i'm david schuster, on behalf of ali velshi and his crew, and the entire team at al jazeera, in the united states. i'm david shuster, thank you for >> you have kids here who've killed someone? >> award winning journalist soledad o'brien takes us inside the violent world of kids behind bars. will a new experimental program be their last chance?
>> i have to do my 100 percent best so i don't end up in a place like this again. egypt approves tougher security laws a major attack in sinai. the muslim brotherhood calls for a revolt. ♪ ♪ welcome to al jazerra, aim sami zeidan in doha. also ahead european leaders rule out any further dealt negotiation with his greece before a referendum plan today sunday. the iaea chief meets top lead nurse teheran as negotiations continue for a deal on try iran's nuke lack program. and a look at the life and tes