significant iranian influence. my guest is mohammad marandi, an iranian academic who has advised his government during nuclear negotiations. how far will tehran go in its strategy of regional resistance? mohammad marandi in tehran, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. it's a pleasure to have you on the show, professor marandi. now, viewed from where you are, the iranian capital, does it feel right now like the middle east is on some sort of inevitable slide

toward a multi—front war? it depends on the united states. the united states could have stopped this genocide from day one. they chose not to do so. and now the united states seems to be giving a green light to the israeli regime to expand the war. and the united states itself is carrying out assassinations in iraq as well as missile strikes on yemen. so instead of stopping the problem, the genocide in gaza, we are moving in the opposite direction. well, in that first answer you've given me an awful lot to unpick, and we'll try and do it bit by bit. i asked you about the expansion, escalation, of the conflict. you chose to put all responsibility on the

united states and on israel. i would put it to you that if one looks at what is happening right now across the region the greatest fear, immediate fear, of expansion is to be found in the red sea and in the fact that the houthis, supported by and armed by iran, are firing their missiles, pretty much as we speak, toward commercial shipping in the red sea. that right now is a point of huge potential danger, isn't it? they are not firing missiles at shipping, at ships that are passing through the red sea. they are only imposing an embargo on israeli ports. and ships that want to go to israeli ports, they have been told to turn back. if they don't turn back, then they strike them. but they haven't killed a single person. so all these ships have to do

is not go to israeli ports. and the reason why they're doing this is because of the genocide in gaza. so if the americans stop the genocide, then the issue in the red sea ends. well, we'll get to your use of the word "genocide" in a short while. it's a word of course the israelis entirely refute, and of course it is also the subject of a case before the international court of justice in the hague right now. but let's stick with what you characterise, in such sort of straightforward and simple terms, as the forensic targeting only of vessels that are heading to israeli ports. you know full well that's not the way it's working out. we've just had a report in the last few moments before we came on air of a missile hitting a ship which is flagged to the marshall islands. it's a us—owned bulk carrier. and you also know that the wider impact of this is that most of the key global shipping companies now think it's too dangerous to even contemplate using that route. so it's having a massive impact

on entirely israel—unrelated commercial activity. no, again, that's the fault of the united states because since the united states started killing yemeni soldiers — they killed ten sailors and then they fired missiles across the country, killing more people — the yemeni armed forces expanded their targets to those countries that have attacked yemen. and the united states, by the way, has a very long history of genocide in yemen. they supported, along with the british and the canadians and the germans, the seven—year—long genocidal war against the yemeni people which only ended two years ago. they helped the saudis bomb yemen day and night, bomb weddings, bomb funerals, schools, ambulances — exactly what's happening in gaza. and they also imposed a starvation siege for seven

yea rs. there's. .. so, really... hang on, though. isn't there a basic question of international law here? i mean, i've heard you in the past refer a great deal to international law when it comes to what's happening in gaza. there's a very simple international legal situation in the red sea. it is simply illegal for the houthis to be firing at commercial shipping in international trade waters like this. and the un security council passed a resolution condemning "in the strongest possible terms" these attacks by houthi rebels. it was passed by 11 votes, with even china, russia and algeria choosing to abstain, not to oppose the motion. well, the un security council isn't a democratic body, and the ansar allah movement — or what in the west you like to call the houthis — they, the armed forces of yemen, have no option to stop the massacres, to stop the genocide.

if international law was so important, why was it that when iranian ships were taking fuel to syria and the israelis would bomb them in the mediterranean sea no—one complained about it, no—one took this to the un security council? the americans didn't condemn the israelis — when a ship was going to help gaza years ago during a siege and the israelis attacked that ship, killing ten people, including an american citizen, in international waters, where was the condemnation? when us armed forces take iranian ships, when they hijack iranian ships and take iranian oil, where is international law? where is the un security council? so that's not really a valid argument. the question i opened up with is the dangers of escalation and where this goes next. you'll be very aware thatjoe biden has said,

you know, "we will not tolerate these kind of attacks." we've seen us and uk air strikes on yemeni territory. again, as we came on air, there were reports of an explosion very near to hodeida airport in yemen. so this is ongoing. will the iranians — who of course supply the weapons and the technical equipment to the houthis which allows them to conduct these operations in the red sea — will the iranians continue to support houthi escalation? the ansar allah movement, the yemeni government, will always have iran's support. just as iran will continue to support the resistance in gaza, iran will continue to support hamas to defend itself. the same is true with hezbollah and the resistance across the region. that will continue, just as the united states assists israel to carry out genocide, just as planeloads of weapons are constantly going into israel so that they can use them against the people of gaza, the iranians

are going to support the victims and the resistance. the americans for years helped destroy yemen. the iranians supported the people of yemen. so if the americans discontinue the violence, then obviously the situation will calm down and everything can be restored to the order that would be suitable for international trade and business and the oil markets as well. now that more than three months has passed since that hamas — brutal hamas assault on southern israel, maybe you can be clear with me in terms of where iran stands on its responsibility for that hamas operation. you've just said to me that iran will always stand with "the resistance". you regard hamas as part of that resistance. are you now prepared to be open with me and say iran knew that

hamas was going to do that and iran supported hamas�*s military leadership in gaza undertaking that operation, which, let us not forget, killed 1,200 people? well, there are a number of things that we have to unpack here. one is that iran didn't know about the operation. iran does not control hamas, hezbollah, ansar allah or the other organisations... how do you know that, by the way? how do you know iran didn't know? because you're very well connected, you've been on iranian delegations to the nuclear talks. i know that your family has strong connections to supreme leader khomeini. but how do you know to be so categorical that iran was not aware of what was going to happen on october 7th? well, based on your own statements, which i don't fully acknowledge, but i know enough to be able to say that iran did not know. and the reason is that hamas, islamichhad, hezbollah,

ansar allah, these are not iranian proxies. these are iranian allies. they have a relationship with iran, which is friendly, which the different sides communicate regularly. they have a similar vision, an anti—colonial vision for the region, and each of them make their own decisions, by... so what exactly... what was saleh al—arouri — who is a very senior figure in hamas�* military wing, who was based in beirut, and we know that he was flying back and forth between lebanon and iran talking to senior leaders in the iranian government — what the heck was he talking about if he wasn't actually indicating what hamas�* strategy was going to be? well, as i said, the iranians have always supported them. i think it's quite clear that their defence capabilities and their tunnels and their ability to beat the israelis — and that is what they have done over the past three months — is with iranian help.

there's no doubt about that. you asked the question whether that particular operation on that particular day was something that the iranians knew about. what i'm saying is that these different entities and groups have their own agency, but the iranians support them... it's interesting. ..and why did... it's interesting. sorry to interrupt. the line is a bit delayed, but i'm very interested in what you're saying, because first of all you've just claimed that hamas is sort of winning some sort of victory in gaza. it's hard for an outside observer to understand that when, you know, the gazan people are suffering so very much with... now the figure from the hamas—run health ministry seems to be over 2a,000 people killed in the israeli military operation. it's hard to see how hamas is winning. first of all, hamas and its allies, islamichhad and others in gaza, they have defeated the israeli regime on the ground. there's no doubt about that.

the fact that the israelis take it out on civilians and murder tens of thousands of people — and it's more than 2a,000. there are thousands of people missing and they're all probably under rubble. and they probably suffered, many of them, for hours, if not days. and then there are the many thousands of people who have died of illness, and infants because of hunger. so it's way more than 2a,000. but murdering ordinary people is not a victory for israel. in fact, the greatest defeat for the israeli regime is the fact that it has carried out this genocide and it has exposed itself to the world, and the fact that it has shown the intent to carry out genocide, as the prime minister said explicitly, as the president said explicitly, and as the defence minister said explicitly, and they cut off energy, they cut off food, they cut off medicine. the intention is there. that is not a victory.

you... that is a moral defeat. you keep using the word "genocide", and of course you're not sitting on thejudging panel in the hague. you're not part of the international criminal tribunal. we do not know what they're going tojudge. it may take years for them tojudge. and certainly we do know the israelis absolutely reject and refute any use of that word. but moving on from that, what hamas clearly really wanted from iran was for iran to give the green light for hezbollah to launch a full—frontal assault on israel across that northern israeli border. that has not happened. in fact, hezbollah has been markedly reluctant to deepen its military engagement with israeli forces. it suggests to me that iran actually feels it can't afford a full—on multi—front conflict. no, first of all, again, you say, "a green light "from iran to hezbollah." that's not how it works. that's not how it ever worked. and that's why the west always

gets iran and our region wrong. that is why they've lost in afghanistan, that's why they lost in iraq, that's why they lost their dirty war in syria and that's why they lost their genocidal war in yemen. and, by the way, in parentheses, i think everyone has eyes and they see what's happening in gaza. we do not need any court to tell us whether it was genocide or not. if the court... but... 0k, well, you've made that point. let's not keep going over that ground. but i'm intrigued to know how you think it does work if it doesn't work in terms of green lights from iran. and we know, because hamas leaders have said this, that they would like to see more direct engagement from hezbollah, because not least it would distract israel's military from its massive operation in gaza. why, if you tell me how it works, why is it working in a way that iran is not engaging all the allies it has on that northern israeli border? you are making the assumption again that iran is telling different groups what

to do, and it doesn't. and, by the way, i should point out that hezbollah has been fighting for three months. it has given i think roughly 150 martyrs in the defence of the people of gaza by drawing away half of this genocidal army to the north. and 150 people for a small country like lebanon is pretty huge, and they are continuing the fight in the north. and ansar allah is also struggling to make sure that the israeli regime suffers economically as it carries out this genocide. the iranians want, and so do all of these groups — hamas, islamichhad, hezbollah, ansar allah, the iraqi resistance, iran — all of them want a ceasefire. no—one in the region wants escalation. and this hamas spokesman last night, he was completely happy with how the resistance across the region is supporting

the resistance in gaza. right... everyone wants... it is the united states and israel that want an escalation, and iran and the other regional actors do not want to play their game. yeah, well, it's certainly true that israeli officials, including the defence minister, have talked about a ticking clock, and the fact that if violence continues across the northern border, israel may well engage in some sort of offensive operation in the south of lebanon. so we'll keep an eye on that. but you talk about inflicting economic difficulties and woes upon israel. isn't the truth that iran's ambivalence in some of these theatres of operation right now is based on the real vulnerability and weakness that we see inside your country? you've had an inflation rate of around 40% for the last year. your poverty rate has increased from i9% to 30% in a decade. more than 26 million iranians live on less than $7 a day, which is your own country's

official poverty rate. you're a country which can't engage in multi—front war. well, first of all, the economic situation in your country isn't all that great, nor is it all that great across the eu. and the iranians, they have been suffering for decades because of western sanctions. first, they suffered because of the western—imposed war on iran, where they supported saddam hussein to destroy much of our country. and they gave saddam hussein chemical weapons to use against us. i suffered from those chemical weapons. then they imposed sanctions. the sanctions against iran, the maximum—pressure sanctions, have been imposed because of iran's support for the people of palestine. few countries in the world have suffered like the iranians simply because they say that apartheid in south africa and apartheid in palestine are illegitimate. so when the united states

puts its boots on the neck of the iranian people, there isn't really much at all to be proud of. but iran is not... the iranian people... whether or not there's a us boot on the neck of the iranian people, we know the iranian people are deeply divided inside your own country, not least thanks to the extraordinary bravery and courage of iranian women and girls in the woman, life, freedom movement who continue to reject the strictures imposed upon them by the islamic republic. that that is an ongoing vulnerability inside your country, isn't it? well, first i have to complete what i said. the iranians are fully supporting hamas, islamic jihad. there is no ambivalence. and i think the very fact that they have succeeded over the past three months shows both their bravery, their courage, their competence, but also the support that iran has given

and will continue to give. but with regards to iranian women, the dean of my faculty — and i've been an academic at the university of tehran for 22 years... for those 22 years, 18 of those years, women have been the dean. my boss at the university of tehran, for most of my academic career, have been women. so this caricature of women... well, in that case, you ask them, maybe, how they feel about the fact that even stricter laws since the surge of protests after the death of mahsa amini, even stricter laws have been passed — women facing up to ten years injail now for not wearing hijab. the united nations has called this a form of gender apartheid. and we see how furious and how unprepared to accept this so many women and young women,

girls, are in iran today. you can smile but this is the reality. steve, i think you should worry more aboutjulian assange and the genocide that your government is helping to carry out in gaza and the thousands of women who've died and the thousands more who will die. women in iran are much more empowered than most countries across the world. women in iran are pilots. women in iran are professors. women in iran are scientists. women in iran are taxi drivers. women in iran are truck drivers. and the narrative in the west about iran is almost universally linked to iran's opposition to apartheid and racism and ethnocentric policies of the israeli regime. all right. we all know... you speak as a man. maybe just put yourselves for one minute in the shoes of roya heshmati, whojust a few days ago, not long ago, anyway, in iran, was given

7a lashes for refusing to wear the hijab. just put yourself in her shoes. is that the country you want to live in? you know quite well, if you've ever travelled to iran, which i'm not sure you have. i have. well, then, if you have, you know that you're giving a caricature of the country to iran. i'm not going to go into a specific case and what this was about. what you say it's about is not at all what is the reality on the ground. you've given me a few minutes to talk, and i will tell you very specifically, clearly, as a man, as a human being, that women in iran have more rights than women in palestine. women in iran have more rights than any of the countries in this region, which you have imposed upon the populations — dictatorships across the board where neither men nor women have any role to play. in iran, as i said before,

we have women in parliament, we have academics — my own colleagues in my department, one third of them at least are women. most of the new people who've been hired at my faculty are women, as far as i know, over the past 10—15 years. so this is all a caricature. and i think you know quite well where the problem lies. there has to be a distraction away from the reality. "there is a genocide going on right next door, "alongside the mediterranean sea, and of course we have "to debate whether it is really a genocide or not. "but the real problem is iran. it's not the united states. "it is iran that's violating human rights, it's iranian "women that are suffering." but i wonder why it was that, four years ago, when the us government murdered general soleimani, the iranian general who led the fight against isis, millions of iranian women came to the streets for his funeral — millions.

and what was isis doing, the isis supported by the west? they were crushing women in syria and in iraq. we have run out of time. mohammad marandi, i thank you very much forjoining me on hardtalk from tehran. thank you. hello there. tuesday brought some fresh snowfall to parts of northern ireland and northern england, although here the snow did tend to turn back to rain through the day, but nevertheless it left a thick covering here in grasmere in cumbria. further northwards, though,

in scotland it was here that the snow stayed as snow, particularly across the northern half of the country. a snowy pitlochry here. we have had some very large accumulations of snow, then building in. really the result of a few days worth of snowfall. lerwick — 18 centimetres of thick snow there on the ground and there is morejust around the corner because of these shower clouds you can see here. very heavy snow showers heading into northern scotland. this cloud further southwards — well, that's storm irene. it's named by the french forecasters at meteo—france. it will be bringing some disruptive snowfall here, some freezing rain mixed in as well. and in parts of belgium, germany, we could see 20 or 30 centimetres of snow. now, the precipitation from that just about stays offshore. you'll get very close and there will be a veil of cloud working into southern—most counties of england over the next few hours. at the same time, there will be some showers around working southwards across england and wales, mostly rain, maybe one or two flurries. but that will leave a legacy of icy conditions pretty much nationwide as we start the day on wednesday. now, wednesday, there will be further snow showers in northern ireland,

so a few more centimeters here, but the heaviest snow will once again be affecting northern scotland. another 5 to 10 centimetres expected on top of what's already fallen. so, yes, there will be some further disruption here. more heavy snow to come as well for northern scotland through thursday. a few more centimetres possible for northern ireland. thursday, a lot of dry and sunny weather elsewhere. but again, there could be some wintry showers working down the north sea coast affecting parts of eastern england, and late in the day, as the winds start to turn to a north—westerly direction, you might see some wintry showers turn up across north wales, cheshire, merseyside and the north—west midlands. by friday, although for the majority of the uk it continues to be cold and sunny, the showers that will be affecting scotland could be really prolonged, but the air is turning very slightly less cold and so the snow should tend to become confined to the hills. that process of the weather turning milder, then continues into the weekend, with south—westerly winds blowing much milder weather conditions across the country. however, there will be some very strong winds, maybe even disruptive winds around on sunday into the early part

of next week. and spells of heavy rain, as well, that could see areas of flooding return.

live from london, this is bbc news. qatar announces israel and hamas reach a deal to deliver medicine to hostages in exchange for aid to enter gaza for civilians. the uk prime minister faces a crucial vote on his rwanda bill after two conservative deputy chairmen and a ministerial aide resign over the issue. and, as it drifts away from the antarctic, rapid erosion on the world's biggest iceberg signals its final months of existence.