have to get involved and take the reins and lead it. >> reporter: it will take more than new candidates, angry residents have to make their voices heard in the voting booths and on the streets. plenty more news from the americas and around the world online for you when ever you want. 24/7 you'll find it at aljazeera.com. aljazeera.com. reaching an agreement on containing iran's nuclear programme leaves iranian military forces resources and influence in conflicts from the persian gulf to the mediterranean. the art goes like this - the comprehensive joint plan of action with iran isn't comprehensive enough. it doesn't do anything to address tehran's influence. his critics say president obama's compart thealized strategy misses the big picture

and misses a chance to undermine regional ambitions. it's "inside story". iranian know how and resources helped to push back the islamic state of iraq and levant, i.s.i.l., in iraq. as american air strikes were working to the same end. tehran is propping up the government of bashar al-assad in damascus, while many regional powers and the u.s. try to pull bashar al-assad down. saudi arabia's worried about growing iranian influence across the middle east, not least among the shia minority. iran provides support for hamas, which fought big destructive rallies against israel, and supports hezbollah, which

wreaked havoc against targets in lebanon. there are bizarre juxtapositions in nations, alliance in the middle east. saudis team up to oppose the islamic state, and the u.s. scrambles for regional allies in the taffing of task of expelling them. iran tries to work out a deal with americans to get sanctions lifted. opponents with the framework fault the american president for not pushing iran harder in the other areas. for his part, the president explained to tom freedman of the "new york times", all the other loose ends have a better shot at being tied up now. >> part of what i have told my team is we have to distinguish between the idea logically driven

offensive iran and the defensive iran that it feels vulnerable. and sometimes may be reacting because they perceive that as the only way they can avoid repeats of the past. >> gary watched iran closely through a long career in international relations including on president carter's national security staff. he joins me from new york. welcome to "inside story". is the president right? are there two iran, an offensive and defensive iran? >> well, it's trou. although in reality even iran's offensive part is often defensive because they are protecting a position that they already had could this moment, as some

suggested over the weekend, have been used, should be used to better advantage by the united states. it's said that iran came to the table because it was under such pressure, should the united states have tried to get more enrichment? >> well, if you look at the deal that we have got, which just about everybody who is honest about it is surprised by how far it goes. and you look at the intensive negotiation during the last three or four days. including an overnighter with the two foreign minister, with kerry and zarif. and then you say - you push them harder, that's what they were doing during the period of time. that's what they were doing. the reality is you can't get agreement. >> the contrary case has been made in the days since the president announced the deal, that if you get some baseline level of compliance from iran

now on the framework, and the sanctions are as they hardly desire, lifted, they'll get the keys that unlock the door to the doghouse, and won't have to deal on any of the other issues. >> well, i see it a different way. iran actually has been on the defensive for a very long period of time. it's been in a bubble of its own created by the iranian resolution. for 36 years they've lived surrounded by pressure and no access to the outside world. they want to be a player. now, does that mean that they are going to change and be everything we want them to be? absolutely not. on the other hand, would you rather talk to iran about syria, forensics, or coordinate with them when it comes to the i.s.i.s. battle, or basically do what we have done before, sit back, not have contact with them at all and complain through the newspapers. that's what we have done through

the past. it's not worked. >> i understand your point entirely about the feeling of threat. wasn't that threat eased by the american wars in the region by the beginning of the century. when george w. bush took office there was a taliban make it up as you go along republic on one side and afghanistan on the eastern border and a hostel sunni-led iraq on the other side. by the time that first decade was over, iran had friendly governments on both sides. >> yes, the united states actually made iran a gift of getting rid of its two worse enemies. taliban on the east and saddam hussein on the west of the two parties that kept iran locked into conflict over a period of a decade or so. and that - so we gave them that. so i guess we shouldn't be terribly surprised when they -

their influence has increased because of our gift. but, you know, it has increased. it makes people nervous, i understand that. again, there are a range of issues, including afghanistan today, where american troops are calling back, the business of fighting i.s.i.s. the problem of working out a political solution and so forth. they are issues where it would be useful to talk to iran. including not only excluding the idea, but some kind of security, and the oil flow in the persian gefl. there's a lot of issues that we have an interest in talking to iran about. we share some of them, some are opposed. being able to discuss those things is a good thing. >> reporter: let's take the point you made. if iran plays by the rules as laid outed in the consensus document that emerges from the

process, and by some people's life that is a big if, does it make resolution on some of these other unresolved issues in the region more possible. plausible. do you deal with an iran that is a more reliable player in negotiations once some of that pressure is lifted? >> well, i know there's a deal of controversy about this, and everyone wants to start with the idea that iran can't be trusted. but take the last 18 months. people say iran would never keep its wordar obey the agreement. they've been meticulous in fulfilling their part of the responsibility. if iran wants to become part of the world, not just that they want the nuclear thing off their back, they'll have to behave on a lot of issues. getting an agreement with them, where for 10 years they are

going to need to talk with us or compare notes with us and show that they are responsible. that's a starting point for getting iran to behave in a different way. it's not a guarantee. the reverse, if we don't have the agreement and iran goes back to ignoring us and increasing the nuclear capability where it was before, that's a recipe for conflict. problems. >> you made reference to it lightly, but an expert referred to the rodney danger field problem. in other words, that it feels like it doesn't get enough respect. what does it want. what does it - how does it see itself that the world doesn't share when it looks from the outside at iran? >> iran had a revolution. it was a real revolution. many in iran didn't know what

they were getting themselves into. specifically, they didn't know that they were getting an islamic government out of this whole thing. they have now had 36 years of bad management by this group that is running the country. that group is good at security. hassan rouhani, the new president, and zarif, the foreign minister are a breath of fresh air. they are saying that iran has to become part of the world. they have to get away from the need that we are isolated alone and under threat. we have to participate in the rest of the world. the nuclear think is the first step in the prospect. with domestic politics in this country or iran, there's many a slip that can take pleas. that is the objective. the question is should we help them along the path or turn them down because we don't believe it's possible.

>> great to talk to you. >> good to talk to you. >> in a part of the world where many countries are big and lightly populated. iran is a client. along with oil reserves, there's a population of 80 million, an old arab culture and an allegiance to the shia branch of islam, putting it at odds with sunni rulers. what does iran want? can it get it without a nuclear weapon. stay with us, it's "inside story".

>> >> welcome back to "inside welcome back to "inside story" on al jazeera america. i'm ray suarez. part of what americans don't seem to understand about iran is if it backed away from making progress in nuclear enrichment, it didn't want the decision to come as a result of american orders.

the two countries have been at odds for 35 years over just about everything. in his 2002 state of the union speech president george w. bush numbered iran with a group of countries he called an axis of evil. ambassador ryan crocker was in talks about iran over next talks about iran over next steps in afghanistan. the tehran government also with the taliban, when the axis of evil brought everything to a halt. the ambassador said talks were constructive. iranians pragmatic. but once the united states signalled that it considered iran an enemy, the talks seized. what can the u.s. accomplish, is the nuclear deal the first of many or not workable on its own. can the u.s. build down the tension with iran, without relations with the saudis, with israel.

>> this is a deal leaving iran with the capacity to produce material for many nuclear bombs, and does so by lifting the sanctions up front. iran will have billions in its coffers not for schools, hospitals or roads, but to pump up the worldwide terror machine. >> that is israeli president binyamin netanyahu, sticking to his position that the agreement endangers his country. joining me now, david schenker, former levant company director under donald rumsfeld, now with the washington institute, and alex vertanga. an iran scholar at the middle east institute. david, is there a public face to the reaction, and a private face to the reaction from people like binyamin netanyahu. over the outline that emerged last week.

>> i think what you see from the pm or israel is the same as in public and private. it doesn't agree with the security officials. there are many people, former required head of intelligence. the fly that blew the flight. while this deal could be worse, it's in the monitoring of the agreement, whether there can be inspections, et cetera. not all of israel agrees. what we see in private and public is probably the same from binyamin netanyahu. the saudis said they were not overjoyed but if it stops an iran nuclear programme, we'll live with it. we are okay with it. will there we a more nuanced reaction as people get used to

the maintenance of a certain amount of centrifuges and enrichment. >> i think the iranians are doing what they'll do, and the saudis accept what washington does. they'll wait until june, to see what the nature of the deal is before throwing the cards on the table. there's a chance that there may not be a deal. they don't want to be proliferized. so i think the saudis are furious and scared. that's part of the reason why they take the matters into their own hands, why they bank roll egypt in doing military operations in libya. supporting them. they know they can't count on the united states. they'll have to look after their own security. >> do you agree with that that countries are not willing to accept something less than pariah status for iran? >> a big question for the saudis

is the simple equation is one they were faced with which is can they do anything on their own. the united states has gone in and reached a deal. if the iranians implemented the agreement, from a saudi point of view start behaving differently on the regional level, that may give saudi a chance to be a player in all of this. at the end of the day you think what you are faced with is as saudi alone what can i do to face the iranians. for a time, things have been so locked. it looked like everyone was invested in the need that iran would remain locked into the current position as everyone's enemy and an international sponsor of trying to overthrow the regional order.

>> look, a lot has changed. today in the middle east you have something called islamic state, a threat everyone has to take seriously. take seriously. the iranian threat perspectives have been changing. everyone is re-assessing where they are coming from and where they'd like to go, and where they could go. let me give you an example. let me give you an example.in summer, no one expected iran to walk away the way the iranians did. he was supposed to be the man in baghdad. the iranians walked away. they had to reassess strengths and weaknesses. the saudis welcomed that. we were hopeful that iran and saudi arabia could find other arenas where they could work together. that could be yemen today.

syria is tougher. there are areas where saudi arabia and iran may find common ground. >> the iranis are pragmatic. they walked away from malaki, they had no choice. they had no other choice. they are pursuing the process of lebanonizing the basis of iraq. they are building militia said. shiite militias like in lebanon and hezbollah. and hezbollah. they will be able to control of the state. and they'll do iran's bidding. this is negative. >> these are not things that could be mediated by iran that doesn't feel under threat? is there an opening for a different kind of regional order if the nuke deal works. >> this gets to the question of is there an islamic state of islam. . is it a revolutionary regime.

they are doing it in lebanon and are doing it in iraq. they are backing the bashar al-assad regime. and syria helping them to kill 200,000 mostly sunni muslims, and now they are funding and supporting a houthi takeover of yemen surrounding saudi arabia. yemen surrounding saudi arabia.> you tell me if this looks like a regime that is doing this if threatened. for me this is the nation of the regime let me put it to you what is cthe islamic republic of iran, and what do they want? >> depends who you ask. if you ask hassan rouhani, and i want to take him back to a speech. what we want to do is have a nuclear agreement and build on it. iran is more complex. there are hardliners.

the big question is who wins the debate. as of today it is clear that the supreme leader is backing hassan rouhani, and for their own reasons he sees nothing but the need to keep compromising, certainly against the west and maybe it could be extended to the likes of saudi arabia, and turkey turkey let me stop you there and get a reaction. does this strengthen the hand of deal, works? >> it strengthens everyone, people like hassan rouhani, and khomeini, and who will reward the revolutionary guard, and he'll have a pocket of money to go out and fund the revolutionary causes throughout the region. >> from the lifting of the sanctions. >> from the lifting of the policies.

along with the team, there are senate leaders itching to put house and senate leaders are looking to put more sanctions on iran promising to pull the u.s. out of the deal the day the new team takes office. as a multinational team drafts a treaty senior washington correspondent mike viqueira joins me. still ahead on "inside story".

. >> welcome to "inside story" on al jazeera america. i'm ray suarez. president obama's team and the president himself took pains over the weekend to stress how the process is far from finished. how much difficult work there is style do. and that is with the other negotiating teams. the administration has plenty to do here at home to win over converts. clampdown on opposition and buy breathing room. mike viqueira joins me now. is that why the secretary of energy, the president's spokesman and the president himself was out there? >> it's clear when you read the te leaves that they are concerned.

the magic number is 67. any number of senators, 67 or over is enough to override the presidential veto on a bill likely to come out of the senate. that would give the congress the right to give the thumbs up and down. if that were to happen. the administration warns that it would scuttle the deal and humiliate the united states on the world statement. there was six nations, plus iran and the european union. the white house has trumpeted the deal for the moment they shook hands. you saw president obama, and last week you saw president obama give a # 46 minute interview - i just watched it again to tom freedman. where they covered the water front. a number of cropped up, chief to the interpretation that iran

makes, and the interpretation that the administration is putting forward, putting out details not agreed to. >> they are critical to members of the house and senate, whether they come off quickly, whether it's a phased thing that happens in response to iranian on. >> that is the chief area of discrepancy, and they are the actions. if you look at the totality, and especially today as you noted, the secretary of energy teamed up with the white house press secretary and made the case, a couple of contradictions when you look at what the d administration is saying. they are saying it's not done, and they should wait until after june 30th, when all the technical quote unquote details will be done. at the same time they'll trumpet what has been done.

the white house says repeatedly that congress has a role and they don't want congress to vote, citing generations of secretaries, this is something the president can do on its own. and they say only congress can lift sanctions, imposed by congress which is true. they can do away with the sanctions. it is the right, the ability or the rite of the president to wave the sanction, to ignore them. there's a bit disingenuous and that's the number one thing now. now, for the first time the white house admitted there was no agreement with iran on how quickly the sanctions would be lifted. obviously this will be a key issue going forward with congress and iran before we go, senator bob corker of tennessee makes it clear that he will demand that the senate be heard on the

measure, who decides it's a treaty. the constitution is clear that the senate has to pass in the. >> the president says he doesn't want to set a precedent where congress can weigh in on these issues, and compares it to a status of forces agreement with iraq and afghanistan, or any country where the united states has a number of military forces. they do not believe that rises to the threshold of a treaty bob corker, other disagree. al jazeera's senior washington correspondent - good to talk to you. >> tomorrow, one nation's chaos bleeding to the rest. >> college students pay the ultimate price. we take you to the request to unravel the horn of africa.

get in touch with us on twitter and facebook. watch us next time. i'm ray suarez. announcer: this is al jazeera. welcome to the newshour. we are here in doha. good to have you with us. here is what is coming up over 60 minutes. a chorus of voices calling for a pause in the fighting in yemen grows as medical supplies are delayed. china and russia say they have rah balanced and responsible approach to the crisis as their top documents meet. turkey's president visits iran after a meeting with a top