Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

Iran sanctions: Are they working?

Details

  • Description

    Michael Rubin discusses the relations between Iran and the Western powers

  • Duration 8:31
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Defcon3

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

Turn now to Iran that the ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear weapons program.

And also the introduction of sanctions which are about to -- at the end of the month sanctions against Iran's.

Energy sector and banking sector -- are joining -- serving better talk about Iran.

Then Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute a guy who's lived in Iran who studied Iran who teaches a -- all things are ran into the United States.

Special operations forces -- military so you're gonna teach us.

Michael what is the current state of the relationship and the negotiations between Iran and the western.

-- There's a lot of optimism going into last month's talk in talks in Baghdad.

That optimism didn't pan out and that shouldn't surprise.

However diplomats are arm in many ways like compulsive gamblers.

They just feel that if they go one more time to the table they can win everything back and that looks to be the case.

As how the international community is approaching Moscow but if I can just add one thing which kind of shows how that -- -- -- -- -- different perspective about what's going on them we do.

When Iranians decide it's offered negotiations in Baghdad on May 23.

The Obama administration really jumped at it they never asked why the Iranians want to Baghdad and why they -- it may 23.

It was actually the thirtieth anniversary.

-- Iran's great victory over Iraq.

The liberation of what I'm -- during the Iran Iraq War and Ayatollah Khamenei the Iranian supreme leader had used the occasion with the Americans as the backdrop.

In Baghdad to talk about how this would be once again another great victory for the Iran in nation.

In Iraq EMI I have never heard anybody.

-- of that but that makes perfectly good sense the symbolism of having that in Baghdad.

And on the anniversary of their their so called victory in that war.

Is a double sort of meaning that everybody who in the Middle East would've understood and none of us would've understood.

What things -- wanna pick up on -- you've written before and I think Darius do we talked about how the United States conducts negotiations.

In good faith and and what we expect to get out of -- and we try to be very understanding of the other guys.

Position and point of view but you -- Iranians have a very different mindset when they negotiate.

Explain.

Well indeed that's the case that -- -- in tough times quipped that the Americans play checkers while the Iranians play.

Test but we know for a fact that the Iranians will look at.

Diplomatic negotiations not as a means to get to a solution.

But rather as a means to run down the -- the reason we know this are the words of the Iranians themselves quite recently I saw no -- Who was that -- -- -- nuclear negotiator between 2003 and 2005.

Mind you that was under the reformist president -- cops and they gave an interview in the Iranian press in which he said.

Look Michael when -- offer to suspend uranium enrichment.

Wasn't.

Helped create peace.

Rather it was to divide the Americans from the Iranians to avoid these sanctions that the UN and we use that.

Pause to import extra centrifuges -- extra technology.

Now we also know from the international atomic energy agency that it was at this point when Iranians talked about or when the American diplomats and European -- bit.

The Iranians were being flexible that they run -- were actually working on a military nuclear program.

When you when you talk about the Iranians.

-- -- and I -- your recently written.

You talk about all the Iranians feel that it is -- it's an.

The weather there reformers or whether they're part of their current regime.

All Iranians feel that Iran should have access to nuclear weapons as a statement of their great power status.

So is there anything that's going to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons if if all of these different disparate political groups -- -- oppose each other.

All agree on one thing which is a nuclear Iran is their -- Bumper right.

Ball actually.

All factions of the Iranian political spectrum will agree on this concept that the Iranians deserve.

Nuclear power technology.

They won't necessarily outright say they want nuclear weapons the only time in which any Ronnie and think tank past as in a poll question.

Do you think would you sleep safer tonight if the Iranians had nuclear weapons 66% of -- -- -- now and the think tank was subsequently.

Closed down but here's the -- while that you run ins will say that they want.

Nuclear power nuclear technology nuclear energy.

We have to look at not at the whole we're seeing.

But the units within the Iranian regime that would have command control and custody over any potential nuclear weapons program.

Those units are the most ideologically pure units of the revolutionary guard and that makes traditional deterrence and containment it throws it out the window.

A nuclear Iran be like what -- they do if they ever were to get nuclear weapons.

OK best case scenario is that the Iranians would feel themselves so.

Secure behind their own nuclear deterrent.

That they might lash out in other means for example reinvigorating the terrorism with which.

They were involved back in the 1980s and 1990s.

Likewise when we talk about -- when the -- talk about.

Closing the Strait of Hormuz right now that's rhetoric but should they have nuclear weapons that could very well be reality the real danger is.

Suppose you have an uprising in Iran where the regime is collapsing and you have this ideological unit.

Of the Revolutionary Guards having control and custody of nuclear bomb what happens if the -- knows it only has twelve hours left.

In a situation like that.

They might simply launch for ideological reasons knowing that no one's gonna retaliate against -- country that already had regime change.

When Muammar Qaddafi lost control of Tripoli.

His forces decided to launch scud missiles at their opponents just out of sheer spite.

In -- situation like that when some people Washington rest assured of the Iranian regime is in suicidal if -- Iranian regime is dying of a heart attack anyway.

Then the logic again of deterrence goes out the window.

About the Iranian -- traction.

Well we'll be running in Syria connection is deep you've got to remember that the Iranian regime is now what.

33 years old.

And traditionally it's only ally in the world it's only consistent ally has been Syria -- -- the Iran Iraq War every Arab country supported Iraq.

And the Syrian supported Iran so with this uprising in Syria the Iran is feel that their isolation would be complete and and if they don't have Syria as a proxy.

They also can't support Hezbollah in the same way that they are now and so really everything is coming to a climax it's a perfect storm.

Unfortunately.

In the midst of this perfect storm we withdrew from Iraq which makes it easier for that -- -- -- to supply Syria over -- Is there any way to severing that connection between Iran and Syria.

The only way to sever that connection would be if the Syrian regime fell I don't think diplomacy is going to do it certainly nothing in the past 33 years has succeeded in doing it.

Aren't you about what would happen if a military option were used against the -- -- nuclear program.

Some people have said well but only by a couple of years other people have said it would ignite.

A larger regional war that would draw the United States into it.

Some people have said look Israel could do it on its own and it would stop fairway -- how would you play all that out.

Well I think most people agree both on the fact that it would delay.

The Iranian nuclear program although there's discussion about for how long would it the way up at the same time most people agree on the consequences.

The Iranians would lash out through terrorists means perhaps through other military means.

There'd be a cascade of proliferation throughout the region and so forth.

But here's the reason why I have my doubts about military action against Iran.

If you were to delay Iran's nuclear program by let's say two or three years.

What happens -- up -- in three years.

Are we simply gonna use the US military kick the can down the road because we don't have a policy to address the more fundamental problem.

Which isn't Iran's nuclear program but actually the ideology and the regime which would yield.

-- --

Load More