tv Inside Story Al Jazeera September 14, 2015 11:30pm-12:01am EDT
in 2011 an explosives training exercise killed four dolphins. i'm antonio mora, thank you for joining us, for the latest news head over to aljazeera.com. ray suarez is up next with "inside story". have a graght night -- great night. night. blocked a majority attempt to when senate democrats blocked a majority attempt to derail the iran nuclear deal, one part of the iranian story ended and another began. the shia majority islamic republic of iran is involved in iraq, syria and lebanon, riling and frightening the sunni neighbours and rivals throughout the region. iran shares america's goals and continues to call the u.s. the great satan in others. what is iran's next move?
it's "inside story". welcome to "inside story", i'm ray suarez, tonight on the programme, what is iran's next move. washington's relationship with the government in tehran has been so damaged and hostile for so long, that we'll have to figure out what has changed by the long hard bargaining that led to an agreement between the permanent members of the u.n. security council, germany and iran. iran's population is huge. oil refers formidable and designed to be effective. this there's so much unfinished business between iran and the u.s. so many fires burning that it would be naive to assume that
everything would get fixed even if the deal is a big step. >> republicans held a vote on a measure to approve the deal. it was an effort to put themselves on the regard against the agreement. and put politically vulnerable developments on the spot. republicans won, with the help of 25 democrats that sided with them. beyond politics, the result means little. the day before a vote was blocked on a measure that would have rejected the agreement. >> barring the unforeseen reversal. the house measure is going nowhere, and the deal with stand. in a statement after the vopt. president obama said in part: >> the iran nuclear deal the iran deal has been a
political football, and the boat came at the end of an intense lobbying effort from both side. the white house launching a public and private campaign to sway members of congress. opponents of the deal, including the prolobbying group mounted a multi-million effort. fuelling the debate. insendary comments. quoted in iranian government media, the ayatollah khamenei predicted the demise of israel saying: the white house speak with binyamin netanyahu, they'll meet in washington in november as obama's spokesman stressed deal or no deal, the u.s. has no illusions about iran's behaviour. >> our concerns about the support for terrorism have not waned.
and our determination to confront - to work with the international community, to try to confront iran's support for terrorism has only ramped up in recent months. >> a new pew poll suggests that public sport weakened. in july after the team, 33% of those asked approved of the agreement while 45% disapproved. now the rating fell 127 points. 21% -- 12 points, 21 approved. 49 disapproved iran agreed to cut back on refining nuclear materials. the baghdad government is looking to the government for help, defeating i.s.i.l. at the same time tehran is backing bashar al-assad's struggle to stay in power in damascus. is the iranian nuclear deal a one-off, an isolated project
that pertains to this one area, or the beginning of a new posture, a willingness to do business with other powers. we are joined by jamal abdi, policy director. and nazeela, a correspondent from major world outlets and author of "the lonely war." and retired colonel pat ring lang. former intelligence officer from the middle east, south asia intelligence agency. >> can this deal between the permanent mfimembers, including the faustin usengimana, e.u. and iran act as a -- u.s. and e.u., act as a predicate to anything. >> it can, depends on how the sides play their hand. what the deal did was end 35
years of n enemy preventing the u.s. and rain changing in dialogue to resolve their issues. there has been an ebb and flow of cautious outreach on both sides. until now we have not seen something that produced a final agreement. and the fact that we have the u.s. and iran both sign on the bottom line for this agreement - it's an open door. the challenge now, does this bring new opportunities to engage on an issue. the two sides know they have a lot in common and disagreement. but the next few months and years will decide a strategic opening, where they take some of the political capital, taking it and using it to address other challenges. >> i think iran is a divided
country, between the moderates who represented the nuclear negotiators, led by president hassan rouhani, who is a more moderate person, and iranian hardliners and the supreme leader who has the final word. he sided with the hardliners. i think this is a huge compromise to allow the moderates to regain in the talks. he endorsed the deal and he said clearly that the talks were limited to the nuclear issue, and iranians were not going to go beyond that. >> that was the deal in the period before the deal was done. they were read as accommodating or opening, or they would say something that was read or accommodated. the supreme leader would come down hard, moving in the
opposite direction. i don't know where that leaves you. >> that is a challenge. the challenge is to see how far iran's supreme leader has been allowed to moderate the minister and the president to collaborate with the western counterparts to implement the team. as you said, the dale was huge -- deal was huge. was a victory for diplomacy. now we have a new era, and that is how the deal will be implemented. >> you have been a student in this part of the world for a long time. what do you make of it? >> i think we have to remember about ayatollah khamenei, that he is, in fact, the real head of the government. in fact, the president of the islamic republic and his cabinet - they are all basically under him. if they had not been allowed to run for office. they would not have had an opportunity to do that.
the thing - ayatollah khamenei himself declares himself continuously to be a revolutionary, an islamic revolutionary. ant anticolonialist. it's reflected in statements made recently. we have to respect the facts that the man is a politician. he is not really liked. he has to balance the interests of various blocks. the business groups, crazies and irgc, the cudgorce, other clerics and people like that. he has to do that, he's shown to be willing to experiment to keeping the revolution alive and pressure off. so they don't have an explosion in 2009. >> when it looks like there's splits, what is that. a pantomime for the benefit of the world. >> there are. as this lady says, there's real splits in society.
and they are and ayatollah khamenei sees them as a contest for his attention. some see him as the ruler of the faithful. if you look at the coming to power, a reformer, and ayatollah khamenei found that he was too liberal for his taste. and the former leader, you know where he stood, a cleric, that says you cannot scourge people into paradise, putting him on the liberal side. i think you can see that ayatollah khamenei will be willing to experiment on what works and not. >> when reporting comes out of the iran, it can raise as many questions as it answers. you hear about rank and file,
you're watching "inside story", i'm ray suarez, today is the first day of the new jewish year, 5776, happy now year, iranian president hassan rouhani beat me do it. sending greetings out on his act: account: it's not the first time iranian leaders sent out jewish new year greetingsment the clerical leaders never missed an opportunity to denigrate israel. >> what is the difference. in world view, approach, tone, between the religious leaders. the lected leaders and single servants that run the machinery. long-time military intelligence services with me.
jamal and others of the iranian american council are with me. >> we talked about it earlier. it happens all the time. daylight between different parts of iranian society. and if in the yaits you take some enkourgets from that. you are dismissed as naive. is it naive? >> well, it is naive, that's true. you see the same dyke ot somy in iranian policy. in iran they are dealing with a situation, that is a little different to the situation in the states. in iran we deal with the supreme lead whore is the guardian of the revolution, of a certain value. one of them is being anti-u.s. or anti-israel. with the majority they don't see that. they want to the see the country stage. they'll want to see the international community and become part of the bigger global culture. that dichotomy becomes
complicated when the harsh voices, like the ones we heard on friday come out. >> you refer to the ayatollah khamenei as a politician. he must also, i'm guessing, want to maintain clerical supremacy in the iranian system, and that means satisfying young people's aspirations. pi.d typically islamic society runs on the basis of some sort of informed consensus that makes people, if they don't like power, they are accepting to it. they have an armed revolt. and he functions that way, accustomed to functioning within the system that is consensus in islamic religious science. incentively he seeks to balance the forces. doesn't mean he's intent on becoming a friend of united states. he has a long-standing feeling that we are bad people living
under a bad system. but there's a possibility. first beginning with the europeans, and investment and the chinese maybe, people like that. you know, to have people move more and more to the west. there is the fact that we are - we, the iranians are co-belligerence against the sunni menace. the islamic state and others. iranians have been very useful in iraq and syria, along with the hezbollah allies. we refuse to acknowledge that, but perhaps we will. >> the fact that we are on the same side in iraq, does that open possibilities? >> yes, of course it does. if we look at the last 15 years of u.s. involvement in the region, united states took out iran's two biggest enemies in afghanistan and iraq. we happen to be on the same side as iran when it came to, at
least in the initial parts of the invasion. we have not been able to ingoing since then because of various geopolitical and domestic political constraints, but this presents on opening and the fact that we have a deal enabling greater connections between not just at the diplomatic level, but the iranians and american people. it presents openings, because as we know, you know, hassan rouhani, the current president of iran, he was elected. it wasn't a fair election, but it was a competition among chosen candidates. it was fair to argue he was not the chosen candidate. it was the iranian people that turned out against the odds. they didn't listen and not go to the elections, but that allowed iran to enter negotiations with a president in the united states
who wanted talks. >> if iran abides by assurances in the nuclear proliferation disal, or the hot stots calm down a little. if the relentless anti-rhetoric quietens down, tanks sanctions in place will be in place. in a year, when an american flag flies over an embassy in afghanistan, is it too soon to ask whether a chance exists for a better relationship between the u.s. and iran. iran's next move, it's "inside story".
conversation about the prospects for if not normal relations, prospective relations between a major player in the middle east and asia. my guests are still with me in washington. is it possible to evolve a working relationship. >> it is necessary. certain issues have to be cleared up. there's the u.s. and israeli intelligence communities have been of the opinion for some time that the iranians stopped work on a weapon as opposed to a nuclear programme in 2003. now that we have the deal. it's dependent on the posture. we should be able to clear it up. the answer to the question.
whether they had an long weapons programme is a feasture of how americans thing of the threat to israel and the united states. it has to be cleared up. >> important for the united states and the main ally. >> absolutely. >> what is do able here? >> could be - the united states - and -- have a functional relationship. if not full diplomatic ties. >> what is achievable is low-hanging fruit. maybe cultural exchanges, and small things to start out with, to warm the relationship and trusts. but we are talking on the sidelines of the nuclear relations. there are big things that need to be addressed. the situation in syria has, you know, has not been able to be resolved for a political
solution, from around or be at the table. the united states allies. doesn't want iran to be a part of the talks. we should move beyond that and say we are aware, regardless of what allies say they can and cannot do. >> does not sound like the domestic situation will allow for that. >> if president obama moves towards talking, not evening opening relations. the president has done many things in the past seven years, and is capable of doing that, capable of elaborating with the officials and foreign ministry and demanding that they abide by international obligations to implement a deal and collaborate
on other issues over syria. does an american demand have any impact. >> they can do a lot in this country. if they are performing their part of the deal regarding the nuclear issues. that will abolish mistrust. and iranians are teeking their own interest in the region. i.s.i.s. is a threat for iran, not sufficient an idealogical threat, but a strategic threat. they are close to the iranian borders. iran has many interests to fights on the ground. and also other parts. that we have seen in yemen, iran can play a role. iran so becoming a danger now.
this is something that the majority had been hoping that the nuclear talks could lead to. >> jamal mentioned syria, they are two places where american and iranian interests seem to be irreconcilable. >> i don't think it's true. our major opponents in the middle east, and eventually in the world is not iran, or any group of shia, it's the sunni movements like al-nusra and i.s. they sustain to receive subterranean support from people in turkey and the golf. and president obama showed a healthy tendency to look to american interests first. i think it is clear that being more cop mfiwould be in our
interests. >> retired military officers and professor long, author of the lonely war, journalist and jamal abdi, policy director, thank you to you all for joining us on the programme. at our new time. >> i'll be back with a final thought on pending persian problems. send us your thoughts an twitter or follow me. tell us what you think about what will happen with u.s. irani relations. we'd love to here it. stay with us.
>> i routinely pass what was the i routinely pass what was the iranian embassy in washington. it's a modern building topped by a dome. it's been empty and unused since the late '70s. in the decade since, iran has not hesitated to commit to aims in the middle east and the western world. the former president doubted the holocaust and spoke of wiping
israel off the face of the earth. reopening relations with iran and anything this these goings on would have been dismissed as crazy talk. i wondered why. in a complicated and dangerous world, it makes no sense to only talk to your friends, as if the existence of an open channel to work out disputes is like eating desert before dinner, two countries able to destroy the world many times over cleared at each other fighting through proxies. maybe it could be better used by two ordinarily enemies that have a lot of hatchets to bury, rather than what it is today. overflow valla parking for parties at neighbouring embassies. i'm ray suarez, that's "inside
story". malcolm turnbull takes over as prime minister of australia. the fourth leader in two years. hello from doha. this is the world news from al jazeera. >> more countries tighten border controls as the e.u. fails to agree on rehousing thousands of refugees. support for president bashar al-assad. claims that russia has positioned tanks and troops at an air base. >> the brits economy not lki