a new machine and it's fun, but a new generation is fighting fire. with reason we're fighting for voices to be heard, because we don't want to see any others who to get her. i never again part of the radicalized youth series on al jazeera. ah, ah, hello, i'm darren jordan and joe hall with a quick reminder. the top stories here on al jazeera president, emmanuel macro has come out on top of the 1st round of frances presidential election. with most votes counted, he is expected to face bar right candidate marine le pen, and a run off on the 24th of april. bennett swift reports in the french capital. emmanuel mac, ron only did one campaign rally, but the man who brands himself a centrist did enough to have a chance of being the 1st incumbent french president in 20 years to win a 2nd term. again, though, you'll have to beat the far right at do

a little better. you, you so, so tony the ellipse, don't you do our fellow citizens that abstained or voted for the extreme buffy either because they are angry against inequality or to the ecological chaos or insecurity killers or the difficulty of living in dignity, even working hard. i don't convince you in the days to kind do you his opponent and the 2nd round of voting will again be maureen le pen, leader of the national rally. it's manifesto includes a promise to make it illegal for muslim women to wear, had scarves in public places, they will cover the bonuses. you, your vote depends all over the french territory on the legitimate preponderance of the french culture and language, the customs of our regions, and the french way of life on republican laws and values. if we can, le pen might pick up votes from supporters of air exam or another extreme right candidates, the former tv pond, it has asked his supporters to packer. in the 2nd round,

the far left john lute melon, shawn had hoped that this time he might make it to the run off. but again, he didn't quite get enough votes. francis traditional right and left wing parties continue to hemorrhage support. the conservative, the republicans party on the valery pay, chris saw their share of the vote collapsed a single digits. the socialist and an hidalgo had been all but wiped out their share of the vote, barely registered. the beneficiary of those former conservative and socialists votes seems again to be micron. we ought to be asked the french brutus to support them to the us wrong european france for the next turn of the election in 2 weeks repugnant. i believe we have a good record and we have a wax up plan with the vision to the future of the young, our country and for the workers often to the left, macro has promised higher pensions and more staff in health care for the right thousands more police officers and judges, and

a rise in the retirement age from 62 to 65. going into the 2nd round, emmanuel, my phone could again benefit from the same republican front that help you easily beat marina pan. back in 2017. that is most of the losing candidates tonight, but urge their supporters not to let in extreme right. it will be difficult, marie le pen to overcome. oh, to bother bernard smith, al jazeera paris, the 10s of thousands of people have protested in pakistan against prime minister in one cons removal from office. he treated this video and thanked his supporters for opposing what he called us back to regime change. parliament would pick his replacement on monday. you claims president a lot of me as the lensky says, he spoken to the german chancellor about more sanctions on russia. local officials say they found graves with a bodies of dozens of civilians in the village of the sofa near keith. video has been posted on line showing shanghai residents angry at chinese officials,

several district coded 19 locked down. the cities 26000000 people. going to go out once a day to collect food delivered by korea, but many say they don't have enough to eat. a funeral has been held for a palestinian woman shot dead by israeli forces an occupied westbank town at the sun. hundreds of people attend to the burial of the mother of 6. she's the 3rd palestinian to be killed by israeli forces in i'd west on sunday. and in janine the man heard when he's ready forces open fire the vehicle he was in now died. residents block roads expecting possible raise by israeli forces also closed in mexico referendum to decide whether presidents under espanol open upper door should stay in power. early estimate suggestive a 90 percent who voted fat tips remaining in office. but those are the headlines and he's continues here now to 0 after the bottom line states we've done so much bye for now. oh

i hi, i'm steve clements and i have a question. if the iran nuclear deal isn't close to a done deal, or iran in the united states, back on a collision course to war, let's get to the bottom line. ah, after a toughie or negotiations, iran in the united states seem to be this close to restoring the historic nuclear deal. they sign in 2015. that deal was torn up by foreign president, donald trump, who replaced it with a policy of maximum pressure on the iranian government for years. but shortly after winning the 2020 election, the administration of president joe biden said the maximum pressure policy had failed. and the united states was ready to lift sanctions on iran in return for limits to the iran nuclear program. but the devil from the details. and now both sides accuse each other a blocking progress and talks in vienna,

austria. so where to things stand and what's at stake today, we're talking with roxanne for mine, from my aunt, who teaches international politics of the middle east and north africa at the university of cambridge and treat a party, the executive vice president of the quincy institute for responsible state craft, an author of treacherous alliance, the secret dealings of israel iran and the united states, treat it. let me start where you, where are these talks stuck right now? and we're the actually close to getting a real deal. they were without a doubt, a close and we are still very, very close. but there are some details that are made ah, for one thing the europeans are completely done with their elements of the deal. and the last things are remaining are few sanctions issues and the issue of whether the i r g c will remain on one of the us. ready terrorists listing at demand that the ron was, have made, they had done it earlier before. but the reason why it becomes such a problem right now, it's that it's become public. once it was leaked,

both sides found themselves in possible position because now it's really difficult for both of them to compromise, which is probably the intense behind those will be. well, i would ask you just to go one step further because i think, you know, trying to understand the politics of iran and look in the political situation in the united states. this deal, if it were to come about half the stand, the test of the light of day, you know, you have to have at least enough a consensus maybe consensus as the wrong word. but at least the majority view that it's a healthy, that's a resilient deal to get through and. and as i understand it, this a i r, g, c, a foreign tort. terrorist organization designation is a hold up on the iranian side. are there other elements of the deal that are keeping it from moving forward? it really is it, i mean there's some minor sanctions issues. beyond that, the us side is actually done with its requests, what it wants from the audience. this is the last thing remaining its request,

of course, from the audience. i think you're absolutely correct that under normal circumstances, there needs to be enough confidence in a deal and make sure there's enough support on both sides for it's long get ready to be able to be strong. but we have to be quite honest on the circumstances with or without this ira gcg listing issue. reality is that neither side has high hopes that this deal will survive the by that ministration. because of the political instability on the us side in which you high school republicans are already made clear. they're going to rip this deal apart if they take the white house in 2025. just as trump did in 2016, dr. roxanne, farm on for my on you and i have discussed this issue before. i feel like we're going round the circle again to you know, to be here when we, when we discuss prospects for a potential deal. i guess my question to you is, how do you see things right now where they're stuck and again, coming back to that political question,

how i'm more familiar with washington where i sit right now. but how do we avoid a circumstance where we just simply go through flip flop, maybe not just in white houses, but we were around the corner from an election in the united states. and doing a deal may in fact become treated parts. he knows as well. he worked in the us house of representatives, the us house of representatives, if it goes republican, may very well become a tortuous place for those people to forward this new iran nuclear deal. roxanne, well, i think one of the things that, that we hear often is that we've never been closer to a deal coming together. and we've also never been further away because the things that have to be resolved have been the problems right from the beginning. many of the other things were in some ways, the easier ones. and now we've gotten down to the most difficult and the street says they've become public, which makes it considerably more difficult if you think back on the 2015 deal. most

of what was negotiated then was completely hind doors until the whole deal was put forward to the public. so this one has been all the way along much more on the front burner. it has, there been issues that have been brought up all the way through, which is what has given it many, much of the political impetus that has caused this ability of, of the republicans on the one side. and many democrats also who are not at all sure . they support this deal to express strong doubts and plans for how to handle it when it is signed and if and when it's signed. and i think that like why is one of the issues is that iran has a lot at stake now that the deal was something unknown at the time that it was signed in 2015 by the time that it was stopped. and in 2018 by, by donald trump, it was clearer to the iranians,

but the failures were of this deal. and so they're much less willing to step back from that and monitoring the sanctions, for example, that they really get lifted, something like that has been an issue. and then certainly the element of the islamic revolutionary car, the i r g c, which has become in a sense, a football going back and forth. and is highly politicized, as well as being picked up very much by israel, which is a major player. and, and how this is all being negotiated on the global. thank you, treat it, you know, mid march. there was the rumor. and i don't know if it was real or not. you might, that the united states was going to try to move to d list the i r g c from that foreign terror operators list that, that, you know, sponsors in foreign terror list. and i guess my question to you is, you remember when the 1st iran nuclear deal was being negotiated. you had secretary, john kerry, your secretary, ernie mo, knees you had secretary desk secretary,

wendy sherman, your people that felt like there was an enormous groggy toss and energy around it. president obama himself knew every fine detail of this deal went out. talk to the american public, i don't get that sense of like high church, high school, you know, power players in circling in the iran deal to kind of carry the ball forward. has this been relegated to a lower level of priority, or was that part of the strategy all along? it was part of the strategy and you're absolutely right. this is a completely different approach compared to what the obama administration pursued. i mean, this was high priority number one priority had the president's own strong involvement from the very, very outset. this does not have from the very beginning, dividing ministration did not treat this as a high priority. and to certain extent, understand that the they came in and they saw a tremendous amount of domestic crisis that they have to attend to. and there was

a political argument within the white house that's nothing on the foreign policy sponge, should be allowed to jeopardize biden's domestic agenda. and that legacy has still lived on this is part of the reason why the vital ministration didn't do what would have been much easier, not easy, but much easier. and i think far more effective, which is to just go back into the deal when executive order and then resolve all of these thorny issues from inside the deal. while the iranians, as a result of the us returning to the deal, would have seized a lot of the nuclear activities and they certainly would not have been able to expand the things that they have done right now. so for instance, part of the challenge, the administration is facebook right now, is that the iranian breakout capability, which is a time it takes for them to make a decision to build a bomb and then to have that ready material for the ball. it was at 12 months, as long as the deal was in place. it's now shrunk to mere weeks as

a result of most of the activities the wrong is, i think, gauged in santa barbara, came into office such as enrichment of 60 percent. it simply did not exist prior to biters pregnancy and had he gone back into the deal from the very beginning. yes, that would have been a political cost. it would have been somewhat challenging and certainly some stony issues such i or do you see which still have been difficult to resolve. but most of the very, very problematic things that the vitamin situation is based wood right now, including a much higher political cost to get this to congress would have been avoided. and what, what treated just said is extraordinary. i mean, what he basically just said in my words, is that iran is an undeclared nuclear weapons power today. some years ago, and i think peter was at this dinner. i had was participating dinner with former iranian president, hot tommy, who told us that we were fools because iran at that moment when he was there, would have frozen re processing at a non industrial level at

a research level and brought the, you know, the central futures down there that we would have had iran in a sort of flight or indeed level, you know, in perpetuity and that every time we have, you know, change the game or, or, or move the goal posts. iran has come up and been unwilling to kind of be back. i'd love to get your sense if you have any real. i don't know why iran, if it is as close that treated just said why it whatever give up is nuclear program now? well, it's a very good point that you make. i wouldn't say it is a nuclear weapons power yet. and i wouldn't even put it on the same level as japan, which has turn key capacity, which iran, as far as we know, just not. and one of the reasons is because the whole driver for iran really has been to use the nuclear program as leverage it has wanted to rejoin the international community at want sanctions lifted. this goes back 40 years to the time of the hostage crisis that it has been trying to re, ah,

assimilate itself back in the international. and so the, one of the best tools to do that has been the nuclear program. certainly this is not a moment as we see the, the war and ukraine, and we're seeing what's happening with, with north korea. that this is a, a time for any country that has an option for nuclear weaponry to sit back and, and easily give it up. these are very difficult times we're in, but it is not a nuclear power yet, even though the possibility of becoming one has certainly become as, as treated as a matter of weeks. and that means that it has enough weapons grade capacity to build a weapon, but it has not done so yet. roxanne, when, as it one of the question here, and i'm not sure i'm gonna get it outright but entreaty your view too. but i sort of wonder if america and the west have created a real problem in what i would call our own nuclear snobbery. i remember an

ambassador of turkmenistan in the mid 1990 is coming and you know, giving an organization i was helping to run a very big portrait and i said, you can't give that to us. he says, no, no, you have to take it because you're the only ones in washington who talked to us. since we gave up our nuclear weapons without nuclear weapons, we have no status in washington dc. we can't meet anyone. now you see russia, we have nato and russia in 10th, but, but there were, was being very careful of red lines, not wanting to see a nuclear escalation in russia. ukraine, which gave up a nuclear weapons program, is seeing the horse deployed against it by an invading nation over sovereign territorial lines. you saw in libya, giving up a nuclear program as well. and we saw what happened in that nation. so i guess our, all of these lessons in history that we're seeing on fold, not something iran is noticing when it worries, when, when you know its domestic security is one of the driving forces of the perception

of legitimacy of its own government. so i guess, i mean, if i were advising the iranian government, i might say, why give up nuclear weapons if you see some of the other things that are going on out there roxanne, well, it's a dangerous neighborhood, as we all like to say. and i think that it's a bit more difficult to be a iran and have nuclear weapons than one might say, because certainly the, the growing i stand off aggression as shadow war that we're seeing between israel and iran is a, a problem. and israel has made very clear it will not accept that iran has any kind of nuclear weapon. and we're seeing in a sense, a, a, an introduction to that kind of approach even now with a great deal of exchange of, of attacks, of drones, destruction of are about many elements that have been going on this last year and

a half that have really shown that israel will not allow iran to take that step. likewise it's, it's quite difficult within the arena of multiple war, such as we have in that region to have a country now take on the actual development of nuclear weapons and view that as something that will add a, a degree of security. because in some ways it will only contribute to insecurity and the region treated. and what is your sense of that and, and are we creating a culture, we're having nuclear weapons gets respect and security. now, of course, that same rationale could apply to saudi arabia could apply to other countries in the region that once you proliferate in one or allow the proliferation one, it's hard to imagine that calculus not being the same elsewhere in the region. and so we end up in a reactive situation rather one proactively where nuclear non proliferation regime

for maintain. but what's your sense of how we've contributed to an environment that i think it would be very hard to give up that nuclear potential. if one had it, i think i'm fortunate you're quite right. there is an incentive structure that has been created in which if not having the bomb, nevertheless, moving towards the provide, you would leverage. i think we should also keep in mind, however, the united states has been quite forceful in making sure that the cost of pursuing the past that north korea and iran has been on is a tremendously costly one. and i think it's also of a strong signal. so other countries in terms of a deter, it is not to think that this ultimately will really pay off. what i'm quite worried about is that the wrong? yes. for a very long time. i do not think actually has last for a weapon. i think what sound is absolutely right. it was a leverage. it was a way of getting out of the containment that the united states postal on since $979.00, which again, was largely because of the bonds all and very radical and stabilizing

a kid. but nevertheless, the plan was never to actually go for a ball. what i'm fearful right now is that the internal debate in yvonne may be changing not only because of ukraine, but also because of the fact a bit stronger perception on the iranian side, that the sanctions that have been imposed on yvonne are going to be there more or less permanent because of the very strong republican opposition to any kind of arrangement. so even if you've on agrees to get rid of big parts of its program, about 98 percent of its low and enriched uranium stockpile. is it still going to be on some form of a sanction? because every time a republican takes the white house, those sanctions are going to get snaps back. at some point the volunteers are going to say if we're already paying the price for having a bomb, what we don't have $1.00, we might as well get one and perhaps that will change the situation. that's the problem which sanction, in terms of, if there isn't a clear and reliable path to get rid of the other side. and the sanction country

may start record concluding that the only way to get rid of them is to escalate for an indication on that would be to move towards a ball move very, very close to it. and that would be a very bad situation in my view. you know, russian, i think the neighborhood, as you've mentioned before, is complicated. there are a lot of instabilities you've got yemen, the hudy's, we've got an hour to, to month hiatus, i suppose, a ceasefire that, you know, possibly, you know, with the saudis could, you know, create an opportunity to do some negotiating there. but, but part of this puzzle is that the u. a e, this saudi arabia and israel, which have legitimate security concerns in the region, have been long concern about iran nuclear program. they recently met secretary of state anthony blank and, and i'm just interested in, as you look at the signals from your purch, do you see any way or what kinds of concessions might bring? and israel, a, you a e and saudi arabia,

into alignment with the buyer and ministration on the, on the possibility of this deal moving forward, or do they become a kind of permanent veto? well, i think that 1st of all that, that growing alliance is very important. they both, they all, you know, those 3 along with egypt where, where, where there was also a recent meeting are very much of the views that they should be putting together a, an alliance that is partially directed at containing you, ron. and it is very much something that i think we're seeing is engaging in the exchange of quite high level ammunitions and, and technology and surveillance. and we're seeing that happen at quite a case. and i also agree with you very much that i think one of the problems that they see is that once iran might get a bomb,

that there would then be a rush for many of the states in that region to, to get a nuclear program up and running as well. so a very rapid escalation in that area. so i think that itself is something that the saudi uni israeli coalition in the sense would like to have control over as, as that direction seems to be the one that we're seeing pursuit. and i think that there's also a sense that at right at the moment, iran is also having real difficulty containing the groups that it's so horrified quite a bit of control over as having real difficulty in terms of the politics going on in iraq at the moment. it is running into quite a bit of friction with the syrian establishment as well. it has certainly got no, not very much leverage of lebanon, which is so fragile, but in a sense,

everybody's keeping hands off there at the moment, in case a war breaks out almost by, by default. so in many ways we're seeing that some of leverage that iran, it's malicious, it's various shia crescent. my extension is in a way, right at the moment becoming a little bit more fragile or compromised. and so we're also seeing that that is playing a role at the moment into how far it can be pressed in as we go all the way full circle back to the negotiations with the adjacent p, o a. all of these elements are reflecting that particular balance and how, how other states in the region are viewing it. i remember that before the 1st day, c, p o, a was struck, the 1st iran deal was struck. president obama said unambiguously, we have a choice. we either try to, ah, you basically freeze and stop, you know, iran's move to a certain kind of, you know, a nuclear possible capacity down the road,

or we're going to be at war. and when he said that we're going to be at war, we're going to have that conflict that, that collision at some point was very much part of the argument for why the j. c. p o, a came in. so i guess my question to you is, if this deal isn't done, does president obama's equation come back into effect? and where does restraint fit when it comes into the potential for iran, which is not exactly a buddy of ours in the world. we're to get a nuclear weapon. would that then justify a preemptive strike to try to stop that or a military incursion? of some kind. is an excellent question, steve. and i would start off by saying that i do believe that if there is no deal, the most likely scenario remains some form of escalation tours of war. but i do think the situation is very different from 2012. what i think obama. i genuinely believe that if there wasn't a deal,

he would be more or less forced to go to war. today, we have a very different situation entirely united states. it is quite remarkable how strong the anti war sentiments are amongst the american public. just take a look at the recent polls done by bookings in terms of american attitudes towards the warrant ukraine. a hor, in which the overwhelming majority of the american public leave it defaulted. russia did leave. the ukrainians are absolutely right. so more than 65 percent do not want to see any u. s. military involvement in that war. beyond simply providing arms and some training, but the red line is american lives. this is a very different situation compared to just 10 years ago. and i think that is imposing a significant restraint on biden, on yvonne as well as on ukraine. i mean, i think you would have seen a rather different posture 16 years ago if that were taking place there. but so when it comes to the constitution, i don't think it's going to be the same type of automatic escalation. what i do fear, however, is that both sides are going to teach some escalate worry steps. and that's going

to get them into an escalator cycle in which they will likely end up in some form of competition, even though neither side grad right. getting to that point, i will, will have to leave it there. fascinating, important, consequential conversation with both of you political scientists, roxanne, farm on for my on and treat parssi. thank you so much for being with us today. thank you. so what's the bottom line? any deal between the u. s. in iran has its enemies for the record, the u. s. regularly certified that iran was living up to its treaty obligations. but president trump wanted america to exit the deal, no matter what israel in the gulf countries, while they fear a resurgent iran in the region, they prefer iran to be in a defensive position, not one where it can normalize. and on the iranian side, let's face it, some parts of the iranian system thrive from tension with the west, even as they're ordinary iranian citizens suffer. and then there's the problem of what's the point of signing

a deal with america only to have it torn up every time he administration changes in the white house. that is the not we're stuck with on the iran deal. and my guess is we're going to be stuck there a really long time, and that's the bottom line. ah, talk to, i'll just see when we ask, what is the time table in your mind? when do you think that you are, can be off of russian gas? we listen or, and i have seen and played football with these refugees. i look at them and they're happy. they're smiling. we meet with global news makers and talk about the stool. restock matter on out, you see of all my friends and co workers who were detained. i am the only one who survived. they were all waiting for news of the menfolk and was only one word, a lips full month with a saw, a boy killed in his father's arms. i saw a man killed next to his son. i have only once in my life seen men who are scared

to death. 30 years old from the start of the wall pulse near the camp on al jazeera lou. hello, i'm darren, jordan, and dough. with a quick reminder, the top stories are on al jazeera president, emmanuel macro has come out on top after the 1st round of france is presidential election. with most votes counted, he is expected to face far right candidate marine the pen in a run off vote later this month. most opinion bowled suggest he'll win, but the very tight margin your trust. no movie is an honor, is an obligation. it commits me. and you can all more count.