most of the radicalized youth series on al-jazeera really understand the differences and similarities of cultures across the world so no matter what we've been news and current affairs that matter to you. more than 50 mourners die in a stampede at the funeral for the uranium military chief killed by a u.s. airstrike. i believe the most important punch is that the days of the united states in this region. iran's foreign minister says the killing of kasim sulaimani will end america's presence in the middle east. hello i'm barbara starr you're watching out jazeera live from london also coming out 4 men are sentenced to death for the 2012 gang rape and murder of

a student that sparked outrage across india. and after another battle to get into congress venezuelan opposition leader one way though is sworn in as the national assembly president. hello thank you for joining us be assassinated iranian military commander kasim silly money has been buried but later than planned after a stampede broke out as the ceremony began more than 50 people were killed and nearly 200 injured in the crush as the funeral procession started in his hometown of kant much iran has continued to talk of revenge with the head of the revolutionary guard to telling the crowds of the funeral that u.s. allies would be quote set ablaze iran's foreign minister jevons $85.00 says retaliation over silliman his death will bring an end to the american presence in the middle east meanwhile in washington secretary of state might pump ale said the

u.s. would respond decisively to any bad choices by iran and maintains the country would never have nuclear weapons. i think the presence of an unambiguous is about the remarks he made on the floor as well as the tweets that he's put out but the seriousness with which we take this the risk attendant that we are deeply aware of and the preparations we've made to prevent those risks as well as our determination that in the event you're in to make another bad choice that president respond in a way that if he did last week which was decisive serious and message to iran about the constraints that we're going to place on that regime so that it doesn't continue to put american lives at risk or we have correspondents covering developments in iran iraq and the u.s. let's start with door such a bari in tehran so door so dreadful news of course about this emptied that we know what led to it. well it was we understand

that there was just a larger than expected crowds of mourners that gathered in care mon city this is a fairly small city and the authorities there were not expecting the huge numbers that turned out to pay their respects to the assassinated general hossam saw the money so as a result we saw the number of deaths and the casualties that we saw unfortunately which delayed the burial for several hours the authorities had to postpone it to trying to get some control over the crowds and clear the areas of the mean streets in the city and then the burial process took place much later than they planned in leadership and also we've also heard strong words coming out of the iranian leadership the foreign minister zarif basically promising retaliation do we know

when and what shape this retaliation will take. not just yet but what is clear is that there will be some kind of retaliation because as far as we understand that silence will be seen a sign of weakness that's according to the saudis here i spoke with the foreign ministers of azzurri zarif earlier this morning in the capital and he had some very strong words for the u.s. government specifically secretary of state mike pompei oh who has denied the foreign minister a visa to visit the united states and the u.n. general assembly where he was due to speak on thursday let's hear some of what he had to say iran would respond because there was an arc to war. act a war combined with an act of terrorism against a senior official of the stomach republic of iran and a citizen we don't and we are bound to protect our citizens. but united states had

other plans and great of creating so many people out so that you don't and so you know that will have consequences for the united states and i believe the most important consequence is that the days of the united states in this region. as jeff had said we've speaking there were let's take you live now to the pentagon with the u.s. defense secretary like aspect is giving a briefing let's listen like to begin by offering my deepest condolences to the families of the 3 americans who lost their lives on sunday in manda bay kenya an attack by al qaeda affiliate al shabaab resulted in the death of a u.s. service member and 2 department defense contractors while wounding 2 other american personnel on behalf of the entire department our thoughts are with the family and friends of army specialist henry mayfield jr he was in kenya in support of operation octave shield working to protect american interests in the region and improve security and stability alongside our kenyan partners we honor him and his

colleagues who lost their lives and assure you that the perpetrators of the stack will be brought to justice. the united states conducted over 60 airstrikes against al shabaab safe havens and assets last year and our forces continue to provide training and counterterrorism support to our east african partners at the mandeb a airfield to help them in the fight moving to iran at this time our top priorities remain 1st the safety and security of american personnel and our partners and 2nd our readiness to conduct operations to respond to iranian aggression since the strike i've spoken with the commanders on the ground ensure they have the resources they need to protect their people and prepare for any contingencies as a result we've increased our force protection postures across the region and will continue to reposition and bolster our forces as necessary to protect our people our interests and our facilities as i mentioned to you yesterday we have received

widespread support for actions from our allies and partners in the region and we will continue to work with them to protect our gains against isis i've been in constant communication with my counterparts and of call on them to stand with us in the defense of coalition forces in iraq working through nato the defeat isis coalition and with our partners on the ground we continue to bolster iraqi institutions to ensure the lasting defeat of isis as we defend our people and interests let me reiterate that the united states is not seeking a war with iran but we are prepared to finish one we are seeking a diplomatic solution but 1st this war require iran to deescalate it will require the regime to come to the table with the goal of preventing further bloodshed and it will require them to cease their malign activities throughout the region. as i've said we are open to having this discussion with them but we're just as prepared to deliver a forceful response to defend our interests finally the american people should know

that their safety is in the hands of the strongest most capable military in the world the men and women of our armed forces should know that we are standing with them and will continue to support them as they meet and overcome today's threats from a line actors including iran and its proxy militias our partner should know that we remain committed to our strategic priorities in the middle east deterring iranian bad behavior sustaining the enduring defeat of isis and supporting iraq as it becomes a strong and independent nation and the architects of terror should know that we will not tolerate attacks against america's people and interests and will exercise our right to self-defense should that become necessary once again with that open this up for some questions thank you. thank you secretary my friend to clarify one thing if you said earlier that the u.s. continues to engage isis in syria. i have has the end and ties this campaign in syria by the fact that after all by this and then secondly there seems

to be continued confusion among iraqi officials about this draft a letter that there was a televised appearance by mahdi earlier today in which he sort of laid out what he said was assigned the matter that the iraqis got. that those are his words and he suggested that another letter should be sent what have you done and are you continuing to do to clear up what you said yesterday was a mistake our policy has not changed we are not leaving iraq and a draft unsigned letter does not constitute a policy change and there is no signed letter to the best of my knowledge i've asked the question so there may be people trying to create confusion but we should focus on this much what i've said a few times now our policy has not changed we are in iraq and we're there to support iraqi forces and iraqi government become a strong independent and prosperous country. but i sincerely i've got no report

from a commander saying that we've had a material impact on our ability to engage isis along with our s.t.'s partners. follow up on leaders question what if the iraqis don't want you to stay here for the prime minister says you need to go with u.s. troops pull out and i'll say nato allies are pulling out why aren't u.s. troops pulling out so we'll take all those one step at a time there's a few procedural mechanisms hurdles if you will that the iraqi government would need to go through we remain in constant contact with them on that i think it's fair to say that many iraqis recognize the strategic importance of our partnership with them whether it's training and advising their military to become more effective on the field of battle or it's working together with them to defeat isis coalition. i think the vote the other day shows the support of most iraqis for our presence in the country as you know most kurds and most sunni's did not show and those she is who did vote and many of them voted at the threat of

a their own lives by shia militia groups even in the last few days we still see iraqis on the streets protesting their government due to corruption and the malign influence of iran so those sentiments those feelings have not gone away so i think at the end the day working with the or with the. with with the iraqi people you'll find that our presence is important for both their country ours you also asked about partners i've talked to many of our partners in iraq who are part of the devices coalition. many europeans they are fully supportive of us they are fully with us i've been told by them that the some of the movements they're taking are simply forgot for with regard to force protection we're doing some of that as well it does not smarter signal any withdrawal from iraq with a mission with the mission writ large. and one of the i'm going to get there or it . could produce a range of options that were under consideration can you give us any sense of you know how many other options are on a consideration did you support any other ones and was one option to not take

a vis strike inside iraq which would have clearly made you're not going to speak to any options or anything we present the present as you know it's kind of how i approach things i will tell you that options we presented were all options that we supported and believe we could deliver on and would be effective and with any time we deliver an option we always list pros and cons and and pluses and minuses that's how we approach it that's my duty and it's my obligation to the commander in chief where they're your where there are multiple options that you would have considered that you would support and watch for understand that the question our options that you supported in addition to this one well look there are there are always a wide range of options our duty is to narrow. down into the ones that are consistent with the president's guidance or expectation or can meet the political end state we're trying to achieve. so again we had a full panoply of options available and we present them and we portray them as we do. something about being

a nice moving troops doesn't mean that you couldn't guarantee that security you leave and have protection or did you ask them to move there no i don't think so i know in one case in particular was just a matter of us being able to move in additional u.s. forces into a confined space that was being occupied by some of the international trainers partners on the ground it was just a logistical issue. thank you can you clarify the attack soloman he was planning was that days or weeks away i think it's more fair to say days for sure and because the u.s. legally obliged to withdraw from iraq if told by the iraqi government to go i'm not going to speculate we're not there yet there's been no that has happened to the best of my knowledge and as those events unfold will address them and we'll have all the right legal experts to us on it. mr secretary you said the u.s. is not seeking a war with iraq and i think the question most people want to make sure to is how

close are we to war with iran and specifically how would you characterize the iranian military movement over the course of the it is true we're not seeking war with iran i think the what happens next depends on them. i think we should expect that they will retaliate in some way shape or form either. through their proxies as they've been doing now for for how many years or bio and or with by their by their own hand and so we take this one step at a time we're prepared for any contingency and and then we respond we will respond appropriately to whatever they do and how would you characterize their military movements over oh you know we watch very closely we see their movements i don't want to get more into that because star seat and in the intelligence issues so. i'll just leave it that. mr secretary you talked about being ready for potential conflict here in case

a lot of families but if they don't we could allocate against american targets or interests in the middle east but instead target our partners in the region is that enough to warrant a u.s. response look at you know we are not going to comment on i'm not going to hypothesize or comment speculate but we are standing there to defend not only our interests but those of our allies and partners and i want to reassure them that we're there with them as well. 2 points to follow up on the fight maybe we have talked about our own needs to deescalate my 1st question is does the u.s. have any publication to deescalate or is that solely the number one scored my 2nd question you have said several times in the past couple of days that you will follow international law own potential work crimes i think let me set that aside i think everyone would expect you to actually that my question is not hypothetical president is out there with his position if you get him to order would you resign

from office rather than violate the law barbara going to get into some hypothetical that you're portraying here i'm fully confident that the president is not going to be the commander in chief and i could listen to legal water and and as i said the united states military will as it always has a bay the laws of armed conflict and escalation does the u.s. have any responsibility for all of litigation to also to your school leaders that has been your views fully and for we have not we're not the ones that have escalated this over the past arguably 40 years and certainly over the past several months it's been iraq through its proxies and it has consistently aek escalated this in terms of the size scale scope of other attacks so we reached the point where we had to act in self-defense we had to take appropriate action so at this point as i've said a few times now the ball is in their court but they do next will determine what happens in the subsequent moves. thank you mr secretary i would like to ask you

before the fact against the custom so that when you have you been in consultations with your partners and that engine i mean the g.c.c. countries over history of. if you have informed 'd them that this operation is going to be but he's. at this moment i'm not going to get into the details of our consultations on any matter with other countries obviously we've we've been talking about our our force posture in iraq for some time our concerns about iranian actions were the actions that they are inspiring resourcing or directing through its militias but i'm not going to get any into any details. you can call them on your remarks but of all mentoring you raise some questions about the kind of people who didn't vote and didn't vote yesterday and today do you believe that vote was legitimate that resolution calling on u.s. forces to leave was legitimate and then separately on the issue of. you say that you expect iran to retaliate are there any off ramps to this crisis or do you

expect that we're heading towards this military operation on the 1st question i want to characterize it any any differently than what many other people have characterized in many experts and that is as non-binding and we know there are other there are mechanisms by which they would have to act i'm an expert on the iraqi government so i characterize it the way i did with you all the other day is nonbinding with regard the off ramps there's a big off ramp sitting in front of tehran right now and that is to deescalate to message us that they want to sit down and talk without precondition by the way to the united states about a better way forward for a way forward which. would constitute a new. a new mode of behavior by iran where they behave more like a normal country and that would one could presume free up free them up from economic sanctions and allow the iranian people to pursue the life they want to live and that is one with the. freedom and prosperity and all those things that most human beings want you to. do they should do the search after pressure from

iran is the iraqi government prevented the u.s. military from using certain capabilities within the country and bring operations in any way. they have taken some actions in the past that have hampered some of our operations with regard to airspace and things like that but nothing that we weren't eventually able to work through with them and is that happening currently. there's nothing they're doing right now that is hampering our operations to the best of my knowledge i just want to follow up until they're they are questioned so what would just impress feel a bit more on this what would constitute a binding order from the iraqi government because there seems to be a disconnect from why the prime minister is telling them about their tool or another and heads of state from europe about implementing this resolution if they were occupying them and what the pentagon says has been communicator hasn't become you have to go it's a great question for the iraqi prime minister so but are you that i mean that you are not taking his. his communication about the implementation of that the

parliamentary resolution on its face in terms of what he's actually facing the best of my knowledge i haven't received any communication from him or the iraqi government about about the legislation or about an order or a request to withdraw u.s. forces. thank you mr secretary could you please explain to us hope the killing of. one of your runs the generals would contribute to the case of the escalation you're asking iran to deescalate now would the u.s. respond in such a manner if one of your top generals. was killed in a 3rd country let's take a look at history solomon he was a terrorist leader of a u.s. designated foreign terrorist organization he's been conducting terrorist activities against us and our coalition partners for over 20 years he has the blood of hundreds of americans soldiers on his hands and wounded thousands more and then we could talk about all the mayhem he's caused with against the syrian people the

people of lebanon even the his own people in iran he is responsible in the quds force for for the killing of iranian people so this sense that somehow taking somebody who go by the way over the last few months had planned orchestrated and or resourced attacks against united states that resulted in the killing of american and the siege of our embassy in baghdad and was in bag baghdad to coordinate additional tax to somehow suggest that he wasn't a legitimate target i think is fanciful he was clearly on the battlefield he was conducting preparing planning military operations he was a legitimate target and it was his time was do. that attack show both parties ok tony. can you give it a little bit of a preview of what we're going to tell congress tomorrow like this in terms of how much detail will you be given willing to give members that you're having thus far and told the public in terms of this guy's size scope and eminence you know what

you are aware how skeptical people are of the eminent threat issue you were there in 2003 when you were in all that so what temperance practitioners what we what are you prepared to disclose the consulate 1st of all much of my messaging to congress will be the same as one. delivering to you all here in terms of my views on the policy the this the broader regional situation the history obviously with members of congress we can go into a classified set we will be in a classified setting and be able to share more but the exquisite intelligence that we're talking about that led to the decision to that was i should say one of the factors that led to the decision to strike it's all the money is is only shared with a handful of members the so-called gang of 8 and so they are getting that briefing this afternoon and and they will have access to that but most members will not have access to that you talked about increasing force posture in the region what about force protection levels have you gone up to the sea or delta highest level the the

commanders in the region i should say globally are taking all appropriate force protection measures relevant to their situation the threat that they're that they're receiving the readiness of their troops etc so i'm confident that our commanders are going to do the right thing on the ground ok thank you all very much . and we were listening there to mark casper a secretary of defense and we can also cross live now to alan fischer in washington d.c. who was also listening to that so a lot of the journalists there really pressing the secretary of defense asking questions for example whether the u.s. is actually legally obliged to leave iraq if the government there wants it to and says should what did you make of that press conference. why i think one of the most interesting things was he said that general solar money was in america's view

a legitimate threat his time was jew is what mark kasper said he said that the general had been planning a military activity he gave the idea that it was happening within days that would threaten american lives he said he's been doing this for years and had the blood of hundreds of americans on his hands and that is why the decision was taken he says the range of options were presented to the president we have from my pompei or. today when he said that there was from the intelligence agencies and also from people on the ground. pros and cons were presented to the president and he decided to go ahead with this it was interesting that he said that is an off ramp for iran it is talks without preconditions something the americans have talked about in the past but have been rejected by iran because they want to see sanctions being lifted before they would even consider sitting down with the administration they also

believe that as we're now in an election year that it's in their interest to wait to after november 2020 in the election because they believe that if there is a democrat in the white house there is a possibility that they will go back into the iran nuclear deal which theory has said they would step away from in the last couple of days so it's interesting that he often that and asked for the situation in iraq he says he's had no contact from iraq a toll continues to insist that the letter that was given to the iraqis that said there was going to be a movement of troops before the full withdrawal of the united states was an unsigned draft something that the iraqis dispute interestingly enough he used the language of a lawyer when he said that there was no sign version of this to the best of my knowledge so he's saying that they simply didn't happen but certainly the biggest takeaway saying that as far as he is concerned when it came. to general siller money his time was jew he had blood in his hands and the americans considered him

a legitimate target and said that he would continue to act within international law the reason that question keeps coming up 1st of all is whether or not it is right and proper and within international law to target someone who is a member of a foreign government and whether this gives the opportunity to other governments to target people they don't like but also because donald trump said on sunday that he would target cultural sites in iran if there was to be any retaliation from the u.s. to any sort of aggression from iran it was pointed out that that is perhaps against international law mark esper was asked about it on monday he said that he would not carry out an order that was against international law that would breach the law when asked about that specifically what donald trump says target cultural sites he said that the president would not issue an order that was against international law so he's trying to clear the up but it's clearly something that is winning over donald trump because not only was he asked about it when he was asked about it

a 2nd time he reiterated the position telephone for the moment thank you for that let's go back to dorset bari who joins us from the iranian capital tehran adore center that you were listening to secretary of defense mark as far as well as so a legitimate target with blood on his hands is how close of slimline it was described how something like that going to go down in tehran and also how do you think that the suggestion of talks without precondition preconditions would be welcomed. well i think the. u.s. version of what the money was and who he was is very different than what the reigning in see him saw him as rather he is now very much seen as a national hero in this country we've seen images of his state like funeral processions over the past 4 days going through various cities across the country so

i think this notion that they did something that was good for the international community is very very much disputed here it's just quite the opposite the iranian position is that the united states has just unleashed war in this region basically by carrying out this assassination of a highly regarded and much admired general in the islamic republic now in terms of getting off this off ramp or as the defense secretary put it i think it's very unlikely that given the current circumstances that were in we will see any kind of a reproach between the united states government and the iranian officials in fact it's just the opposite we've heard from various high ranking officials over the past few days since assassination on friday that iran is preparing to answer back this attack with similar. likelihood of that it's response to the same extent so it's very unlikely that this will open up any kind of dialogue between

the 2 sites or such a bari with that analysis from tehran door so thank you let's go to a summer binge of ivan joins us live now from baghdad there were some in that news conference we heard that a famous letter mention the letter by a u.s. general not signed the parallel but effectively saying that u.s. troops would leave iraq it must be quite a confusing situation for the iraqi government to receive that letter and then have the secretary of defense say that it was nothing was just the draft. well it is quite interesting that in the last few hours the iraqi prime minister and partner of the united states has been contradicted by both the secretary of defense and the secretary of state let's break this up the secretary of defense says this letter was a draft there was no signed version the iraqi prime minister told his cabinet members today that there was a letter we was told that this was an official letter we were sent both drafts in english and arabic and we found discrepancies in that draft so we sent the arabic

draft back to them and it and we got it back and then a few hours later they said that it was a mistake according to the iraqi government officials this was the last official communication they received and things that they have seen have all been appearing in the media so according to the iraqi government this letter stands as it as it was and it was confirmed by them and we saw a lot of activity here in baghdad in the green zone where a number of helicopters started flying again presumably these were american assets which were not flying after us and the money was killed on the other hand earlier you heard the secretary of state might pompei oh talk about how slim and he was not . carrying a diplomatic message her sort of minus mission was military something again that the iraqi prime minister told his cabinet that was not true he said some silly money came in on friday at 8 am he was supposed to have a meeting with the money after an interaction between iran and saudi arabia so

again a very interesting development here which i'm quite sure that the prime minister's office here in back that would be looking very carefully on how to respond to what he finds an odds with the u.s. government which is part of it and he has been insisting even with the u.s. ambassador that the only way forward is for foreign troops to leave this country some of injury there with the latest from baghdad as some are saying q let's go live now to our white house correspondent kimberly have really the president is actually speaking about solem an e.o. what's he saying. yeah a lot of fast moving developments happening here at the moment in the white house in the oval office if i keep checking my phone i'm just trying to see the latest readouts coming from the pool reports we know that the u.s. president is meeting alongside the greek prime minister real soon of the secretary of state mike pompei o is there as well and they have been asked to comment on the intelligence behind the decision to kill general saloon monny the u.s.

president saying that lots of lives were saved by killing him he knew his past his past was horrible we did ourselves a lot of other countries a big favor no these are just the short snaps of what we've heard there will be longer fuller comments that will be played back within the hour we expect but there were again were very vague specific in fact no specifics and that seems to be something that's haunting this administration whether it was the defense secretary as we just heard the secretary of state several hours ago even the national security advisor robert o'bryant speaking here at the white house a few hours ago they continue to make the case that americans were under threat and that the evidence of that of an attack against americans was imminent but offering no specifics and this is certainly something that is a concern to many not just the ordinary american but also members on capitol hill because there's this feeling of a lack of transparency so nother development that's just taken place in the last

hour or so is that we're learning that the u.s. president in fact had a meeting yesterday that was kept secret with the saudi vice minister of defense khalid bin solomon to discuss stability in the middle east now this is unusual that we did not get a readout from the white house about this in fact so unusual that the only way we learned about it was that the saudi arabian government released a photo saying that this meeting took place yesterday on. monday and this is prompted the white house correspondents association to release a statement saying it's disturbing to see the government of saudi arabia have more transparency than the white house about a meeting with the president in the oval office and the u.s. president has since tweeted about this meeting but certainly it was almost still almost 24 hours when we safe to assume since this meeting occurred so there's this lack of transparent.