tv Cross Talk RT November 13, 2013 2:29am-3:01am EST
also in washington we have gareth porter he's an investigative journalist and author of the upcoming book manufactured crisis and in paris we cross to emanuel to he is the president of the institute for perspective and security in europe are a gentle and cross talk rules in fact that means you can jump in anytime you want if i go to you first weigh in on the blame game who is at fault here because we were told right at the weekend there's going to be an agreement and then i'll go to emanuel and then we all were told the french you know threw in the monkey wrench what you're reading. well i think we have two problems not just one clearly the government of france was involved in an effort to throw a monkey wrench into the talks on saturday apparently after the the french foreign minister had signed off on a unified text for presentation to iran he then went on radio and gave this interview in which he referred to a con game talked about these two issues and said that he was not.
satisfied with the text in regard to those issues that is iraq and the disposition of iran's twenty percent enriched uranium stockpile so so definitely there was a problem with france doing a very unexpected turnaround on this issue. and saying no once it had agreed and then i think the united states clearly has to share the blame here because there was a an issue which we don't quite understand precisely the situation regarding the differences in the text but the united states was apparently leading iran to believe that there would be some kind of recognition implicit or explicit of its right to enrich in the text and this turned out not to be the case i think the iranians actually took advantage of the french monkeywrench if you will to say
wait a minute let's take another look at this ok ok this is one of the things i want to get it is no because it looks like neither side one agreement emmanuelle a lot of people are saying i'm not but this is what i'm reading is that the french decided to change their position decided to sabotage it because they'll get future arms deals with saudi arabia and the prime french president is the. getting israel soon how do you react to those two issues. well that's one position another position is taking consideration that france was a bit. upset not to be associated in the beginning by the beginning with a negotiation as we all know but off abuse was not on the same track as senate separate is to carry and of course. left off some general is ill children have also spoke about one event i don't know if it's quite clear in the
united states that a certain number of pressure coming from israel has been operating operating very harshly doing the. discussions one general times of a few hours of them spoke directly saying that binyamin netanyahu one directly off of use that if the deal was a bad deal then they would be immediate. by israel on the such a number of. nuclear plants ok michael it sounds like there was that's extortion right there ok it's only a good deal for israel agrees it's a good deal we all know that they don't want any deal whatsoever and i think it looks like a bit of an embarrassment for the secretary kerry and i think president again i think i think they thought that yes i think they thought that it was going to work why did he take the trouble to go all the way to geneva to meet with these guys and
there's no doubt that there is heavy pressure not just from the israelis but also from the saudis and other gulf countries warning the americans not to go too far but i think it is a bit embarrassing the they thought they had something in the can and them the french seem to have really thrown a monkey wrench and the iranians i agree with gareth said well maybe the americans were backing off on what the. they had at least implicitly promised to the iranians during the talks ok i think because it looks like it gets down to enrichment here again you have the united states and maybe france here just can't get their you know the nonproliferation treaty they have the right to enrichment and but again the exception to the rule is always around this is what it looks like they don't want an agreement because if enrichments there they don't it's in their quote unquote d.n.a. as i've read recently that you can't trust iran that's the implicit explicit message from washington. well i think the the problem with the right to enrich here
is both more and less than what it is made to appear on one hand look the the real the real situation is that the that secretary kerry does not believe that iran can be deprived in real terms of the ability to enrich which means that in fact they cannot be deprived of the right to enrich the no question about that what the united states is actually doing here is is keeping this negotiating leverage if you will for a later phase of these negotiations i mean this is kind of a negotiating tactic that really is in a way below what the united states ought to be contemplating at this point it's not necessary and it's really conveying a message to iran that we intend to try to pressure you to the maximum.
in a later phase of the talks and the question for iran then arises is the united states really committed to the kind of end game that was understood when they began this round of talks and i think that iran may in fact be wondering now whether that is the case i think that's the real danger of this nation the ocean it's a emmanuelle it's the west serious about dealing with iran here because it looks like the agreement of the tenant of lee had looked pretty good i mean it was a baby step but it was about building confidence and trust we don't even have that at this point well as we say it's had to to have a deal the no deal or tone that's the first point and the second point is that there is a clear commitment that we should have made in geneva and i think what my colleagues have said it's quite true is that france has paid an awkward game in this in this in this is in disarray isn't first it has been a sort of. it has disarray did it radiated itself from the european posture that's
the first danger as we all know germany was willing to have a deal at any cost first of all because after the genius of five plus one talks it would be the geneva two talks and we need a clear commitment both by russia and by iran and that was one of the things which can be declination of the previous geneva talks and the second point that maybe it's important to to raise is the fact that. france is was really upset and i think a minister of foreign affairs did a single poster saying that he again took the floor without any consultation with its european partners that is not to say that european partners did not feel that maybe the deal was not so. what could have been could have been motivated what
i won't also want to act is at sorry is the fact that there is a clear bargain which is made in iran between the reformist and the conservatives and if there is no deal at all during the next six months then the power of president hu and you will be very much. in jeopardy will be very much in danger so i think that is the first mistake we made not to have made for not having made the support does that agreement michael i can see you nodding your head are you agreeing with out there because the window of opportunity is going to is already started to close go ahead. well i agree but i'd like to emphasize that i think what has happened or rather what has not happened is really very serious because now there is an opening for the forces that are opposed to any kind of rapprochement with between iran and the larger partners to exert their influence
in a very tangible way and certainly that's true here in washington where you'll find that the the congress republicans of course strongly pressured by the israel lobby are going to be trying to impose new sanctions to really scuttle what remains of this process of gareth i mean if this is very good if i guess before we go to the break here i mean what role did the as the the israeli lobby play in all of this because there was a lot of background noise as these negotiations were going on. well i don't think the israeli lobby exerted any direct i mean if you're talking about a pac and the lobby in the united states i don't think they played a direct role in this the situation in france of course is that israel's influence is exerted in a very different way from the way it is in the united states there's a group a very tight knit group close to the foreign minister around the foreign minister and the president who are really have been guiding the french policy in the
direction of both the neo conservative position the united states and of course the israeli israeli interests for the last five years or so since the election of sarkozy in two thousand and seven it's really the same group that has been exerting this influence and that has not changed and i think it is indeed an affiliation or close close relationship with israel rather than the prospect of arms sales to the to the gulf sheikhdoms that was involved here clearly as was suggested earlier this is this phone call from netanyahu. or the meier habeeb of the member of the national somebody threatening. an attack by netanyahu you know was was are you gentlemen here i have to jump in here we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on the rest
know. that. did you know the price is the only industry specifically mentioned in the constitution and. that's because a free and open process is critical to our democracy albus. in fact the single biggest threat facing our nation today is the corporate takeover of our government and across silicon we've been a hydrogen lying handful of transnational corporations that will profit by destroying what our founding fathers once built up i'm tom hartman and on this show we reveal the big picture of what's actually going on in the world we go beyond identifying the problem try to fix rational debate in a real discussion critical issues facing america to find a job ready to join the movement then welcome to the big picture.
choose your language. of choice we can with no influential send us a still some of us. ready to choose the consensus you can. choose the opinions that you think are a cool. choose the stories that impact your life choose the access to your office. the piece of legislation was a terrible mistake and led very hard to get a letter get along here is a plot that never had sex with the target there's no legs let's call it was.
it may well go back to you in paris so it's i to ask you a question all three of you a question israel doesn't want to. taunt a detente between washington and around because that will include agreement among other members of the u.n. security council that makes the likelihood of an israeli attack on iran much less and this is what the israelis are afraid of they want to keep force on the table give them a lot more wiggle room any kind of agreement with the internet the real international community and people that make the decisions makes war a tougher option for the israelis do you agree or disagree with me. yes i was saying that i was agreeing on what you've just said and also what your colleague said you have to have in mind that minister front of iran is at least was in paris last week and everything was made so it was a low profile visit which was
a shame because it was a news story corps visit but that's that's one issue the second issue is you speaking about a sort of israel lobby there is more a neoconservative lobby very active in the ministry of foreign affairs the iranian dilemma the iranian agenda is under the hands of a certain number of neoconservatives diplomats and they still have their hand on the issue so again that is a hard pressure on our minister found affairs and to respond directly to your question to the question you raised you have to have in mind as you mentioned that minister of interior. just came back from israel that the president will be going in israel the seventeenth of november and of course we have to have in mind that there is a game change inside the is the power of stakeholders the minister of foreign
affairs of gottlieb in money will be definitely wanting to have a more harder line on this so again it's very. evident that israel was has me may have used france in order to do a show force and sure that they should not be a stall game in this are going to be a bad agreement again as you mentioned it not only on the iranian agenda but on the plutonium agenda one of the issues that was raised by a lot of abuse is that we were very afraid of the. reopening of the reinforcement of the iraq plants which is not about now only on one time and you know many man you well imagine iran's just signed in. another agreement with the i.a.e.a. for more and more inspections the most inspected country in the history of the i.a.e.a. so i'm sorry with the for the french position is just nonsense ok i'm sorry gareth
you want to jump in go ahead i'm not defending and i know i know you i know you know i know you're not going anywhere i know you're not defending it ok let's make that clear go ahead gareth jump in. i was going to a peter i was going to address the question of the use of force because i think that there's a danger that the israelis can convince at least some people in the international community that it is serious about an attack and that that is going to exert some influence on the talks and that would be extremely unfortunate because i am quite convinced and have been for the past nearly the past year that the israelis that netanyahu in particular has been using the threat as a ploy to influence the united states the europeans the russians of the chinese to be much tougher on iran of course to pass the most harsh sanctions imagine garrett get years later this is op right there again and stop right there
let me ask you quite how much more tough can you get on iran beyond going to war explain to me ok really well i mean you can. i'll tell you exactly what you can do and this is what the neoconservatives in the united states are threatening to do which is to pass sanctions which do not have any national security waiver which is the way in which the president can in fact to get out of this mess which is to agree that he will in fact use the national security waiver to prevent those sanctions from going into effect as part of a deal that's what they can do and that's what the israelis are now trying to bring about of course michael what where is diplomacy right now because it seems to me they didn't that there's been a concerted effort they have succeeded and it's the party of war now that prevails ok israel and its friends won a major victory here and the western powers look hopeless it's quite amazing here wag the dog go ahead michael well you know peter you're absolutely right and this
was a quite a lost opportunity and i was looking at the somewhat rambling text of the secretary kerry's remarks in abu dhabi. where he was in a sense backpedaling a bit trying to reassure the gulf cooperation council allies and certainly israel that in fact as they put it all options are on the table so here we were going back in a very convoluted way to to a rather more hawkish position so clearly i think the bomb administration was thrown on the defensive and i really do believe that obama and the people in charge you know don't want to get another conflict going in the middle east considering what we've gone through with iraq and afghanistan but now the pressures are being exerted a new and we will see whether the obama administration is going to wobble or is going to be forced to wobble by
a conservative congress ok emmanuelle it seems like there's no clear voice coming out of the western this is a very important issue because this is really the issues of war and peace here and we're going down the path that we saw with iraq again this country doesn't have nuclear weapons everybody knows that ok there's no they're not even close to any kind of breakout level but it sounds like the drums of war two thousand and three all over to me again go ahead emmanuelle. i'm not sure first of all because i'm not sure france is convincing is sufficient sufficiently convincing for its european partners such as one issue bad to made not have been too in the past but it's great to now as we mentioned there's been a clear decide to do it as a sion between germany and great britain at least doing the geneva talks and of course you have to also other ninety talents were not on the same track as the french that's the first point the second point is we have to take in consideration
as you mention it there is at the moment that we are speaking. the venue of the director of the a in so that's an agreement was achieved in that in that sense and we also have to have in mind the arising of the twentieth of november when there will be again negotiation it will be a lower profile but there would still be negotiations to be again very honest i'm not defending by any way france's posture i do think it is a wrong post too because we need to have confidence building measures towards iran but on the same aspect the things we also have to link what happened in geneva what will happen in the next week and we need also and again france is very weakened by its poster because it is going to genius for the syrian talks again not
on the same track as it's a partner's ok gary where are we going on this here ok now on the twenty or the twenty there's going to be more talk slower a lot of also i mean is the steam out of this thing and everyone's just going to continue playing the blame game go ahead. well i was just going to say i agree with it with what has just been said by my colleague but i also would add that what is really important here is that the so-called confidence building measures are linked to an end game this is what the iranians have been saying all along from the beginning and as i read what the secretary of state and others have been saying in recent days. there's a real question whether the united states is fundamentally committed to an end game where the united states is in fact going to remove all the sanctions in return for very stringent controls over the nuclear program of iran that is to say the level of enrichment the kind of investment and of course the very stringent monitoring
system by the i.a.e.a. which the iranians are willing to do the question is whether the united states wants to or is willing to give up this what it regards obviously as a leverage over the iranians in the form of the sanctions the israelis don't want them to do it and i'm afraid the there is a temptation here for the united states to to try to use this leverage to the hilt and perhaps to sacrifice the possibility of the kind of deal that it could get so i think that's the real issue that is posed by the next round well it seems to me michael fine go to you with this did the ring on the part of the west would give iran every reason to want to build a nuclear weapon now ok it gets inverted ok if you can't make a deal you can't negotiate then what do you do you defend yourself go ahead. well i
think that the more hard line elements of the revolutionary guards in iran may you know may agree with that then there is a kind of a strategic logic at least at a certain level although you would think that a broader level iranian security is not really going to be guaranteed by having one or two bombs on the contrary it may in sight make it or others to attack it but i but i think the you know the larger problem here is the possibility of even a kind of a cold deal between the united states and the. big powers and iran would amount to a kind of diplomatic revolution across the table middle east and that is something that there are so many entrenched interests well in there and there are plenty of countries there that go i want that to happen they just don't want to happen not happening have happened a lot of the continued the instability here garrett that made you the last word go ahead jump in what what i want to say earlier but didn't have
a chance to say was that there's a lot of posturing here really phony posturing about the issue of iraq iraq a cave the heavy water. reactor that the iranians have not brought on line they're very far from having brought on line and the idea that this represents a proliferation risk which is constantly referred to in the news media is really quite bogus and the reason is that iran has no ability to reprocess the plutonium that will would be produced by such a reactor and indeed has even already made it clear in the talks that it's prepared as part of the deal to have arrangements where they were by the the plutonium would be removed so that it can't even be reprocessed so this is really a bogus issue ok that's one of the reasons why the french intervention all right gentlemen waiting and on the word bogus here thank you very much many thanks to my guests in washington and. paris and thanks to our viewers for watching us here in
leningrad was blocked. one day mom went and saw that all the shelves were empty. in november the. warehouses it was the main storage place for all the food in the city people eating the earth because it had small traces of sugar in it i tried to eat it as well but i couldn't. the third night it was incredibly heavy bombing. it was a direct hit on that very shelter and everyone was buried under me. all of them with dead. wealthy british style.
markets. find out what's really happening to the global economy for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines to cause a report. is obviously more for the latest because it's pay. women wanted to avoid rate they really needed to buy a gun. since learned how to use them. this is the one that i want to go with for once again it's the field strength for women definitely the target of the gun lobby the one you don't want to kill them not one to kill anybody would have so many would you with this with her. i'm noticing more and more is this really scary marketing tactics which implies that women have some sort of moral obligation to own guns to protect their family and young girls shoot out here too so we do have a pink or. more kids young kids choke on food than are killed by firearms if
being armed made us safer in america we should be the safest nation on earth were clearly not the safest. if you. know opportunity. to construct your own. gears don't want to meet. in a lot of. the time that the kid came to be we can see. you just me as i was when i was in the hood. said. i don't want to die i just really do not want to die young young.
an afghan probe into a series of brutal civilian killings. after washington refuses to help despite allegations from locals of american involvement in the deaths. here from a judge who says he's got evidence pointing to the ugly truth behind the operations in. the us decades long sanctions regime against iran despite predictions that nuclear negotiations in geneva will break new ground. and britain's immigration problem by sending out threatening text messages with intimidating out of it but its effectiveness is simply testing the public's patience.