i know it's against all enemies for the last 4 years on from the 2021. a tax on the capital building which is 0, examines the role of military veterans installed right on the goods that the coolest. and the potential threat again, stolen on al jazeera talks expected soon between european powers and the wrong one is new programs. days later, the man whom tore up the last agreement. donald trump will return to the white house. it's a way to things stand awards because each side wants that isn't side story, the hello and welcome to that program on the wrong con. iran says it will hold tools

with the u. k. jim and even from st. geneva, next week to discuss it's new to your program and international deal. 10 years ago . limits hanging around is new to capability in exchange for reduced functions with scrapped by donald trump. he returns as us president this month, but well, strongly hostile to iran. he said then must be another deal is ready to get tax, the weakening of key allies and the collapse of the outside raising have shaken to ron in the past. yeah. so what is each side looking for and could iran because you a little hard line stones or is a deal really possible? well, hey, from august surely. but 1st, this report from victoria gates and b, as it's been nearly a decade since world power assigned to land ma, do with a rand, under the 7 nation to quote, around agreed to scale back its nuclear program. at western nations agreed to list financial trade and oil functions that is isolated and crippled iran's economy. but

donald trump pull the united states out of that agreement in 2018. he said it ran was a threat in the middle east and the new plan was needed. he re impose sanctions that squeezed a rams economy to run into suspended some of its commitments. and then you could do an increased uranium enrichment european powers have been battling to save the 2015 do ever since the head of the international atomic energy agency, roughly i'll go see met toper, rainy, and officials into around november including president must do possession. he's expressed his willingness to renegotiate the 2015 nuclear do the i a says around his enrich uranium up to 60 percent. 90 percent is needed to reach weapons, grade level, the the atlantic republic of iran is ready for new clean negotiations and cooperation within the framework of previous agreements. it depends on how serious

the opposite policies are and this messa, ron made the nuclear agreement and implemented it with good will. it was the other policies who withdrew the the regents political landscape has changed dramatically since the last deal was agreed. rand. and its proxy is including, has below and how must have been we can by israel in the past. j. israel also attacked ran, it responded with me, saw strikes. well, trump pull down to the deal, painstaking me forged a decade ago. the biting administration has not reinstated it, as you are paying powers and do ran, consider what to do next. that doing so with the uncertainty of what policies the incoming from presidency will pice you as victoria gates and b l g 0. the inside story the i let's bring in august hass on i'm a d n a is

a professor at the university of tyrone he joins us from the running capital at 8 grand man is the deputy director of middle east and north africa program. you are paying council on foreign relations to joins us from london and treat the policy. is the executive vice president of the quincy in seduce. he joins us from washington, dc. i will welcome to all of you. let's the entire on with hassan has on. why is this being done now? why is the european powers products u. k. gemini, reaching out to iran and vice versa? at this particular point, a folder, there hasn't been really much in terms of the j. c, p r, a, or developments for data to it. what is common and is the president trump that back to power in washington and also and all the uh, basically the snap back in the account is invest was imbedded in the deal is to come up in october. so to these 2 issues,

have the potential to escalate the things between a ron and the uh, you know, the, the, your cans and the united states. the right hands of course, are trying to stop this kind of disconnection. reaching to consensus or reconciliation with europeans, though there are other issues that are affecting to the connected to the relationship with euro in particular that, that you create an issue and i was doing an issue. but i think these 2 matchers are the new things that are uh, add that are added to that, that are to be added to the uh, the file that has been basically uh, has been stopped by the united states. uh, back in 2018. now they, they are trying to stop, i think were on the uranium part. as you heard from me writing an offer shows they are trying to basically stop any escalation, which is a heart thing,

considering the rhetoric emanating from washington and also the hotline position that your cam parties are. now speaking with regards to avon, there's an increase of policy at this point, right? so you have written a book on the genesis a wrong, the actual deal with the us a you folded it very closely to the question the most people have is very simple. there was a deal on the table around didn't seem to what are on data stick to the deal, and then the deal was taken off by donald trump. so why not just go back to the deal that we had before? well, this is exactly what the biden ministration should have done and it didn't. instead of going back into the deal right away through an executive order, it decided to use trump's sanctions as leverage in order to see if we could get a better deal. and instead of it got nothing, and as a result, you now have

a situation in which the j, 6, you a, for all practical purposes is bad. snap back as professor i'm a young pointed out, maybe exercise by the europeans and then the next couple of months, which then most likely will trigger any ron in exits from the entity altogether. and we will see a complete disaster on this file has bite and gone back in with not only would we have avoided this, but most likely the wrong is, would also not be supporting the russians in ukraine in the matter that i currently are doing. so this is a, a cascade of, of events that have taken place, started off, of course, which i'm pulling out, but really getting aggravated by dividing ministration, choosing not to go back into the deal. was bringing natalie. hey, natalie, just what's, what's the european strategy? hey y a front of germany and the u. k. doing this now. that was a big part of it. is that in preparation for the big uncertainty surrounding the

incoming compet ministrations, the europeans wanted to show that they are still in the game of a diplomacy policy making, international policy making on your von, there is a concern again, given the unknowns wrong, president trump, that he made for the north korea with her on and that the europeans will be sidelines. so i think one of the factors that the europeans went to show that after 20 years of sort of ship hitting this nuclear diplomacy would tend wrong that they stay in the game because in particular, countries lot fonts have huge stake in the system. it's not whole system surrounding the nuclear preparation, and they want to show that some of the inspections and warm springs on rollback calls are wrong in nuclear activities happen if there is new kind of go solutions. secondly, as for, for some of you know, pointed out the issue, snap back is really the last remaining tool of leverage that your opinions have at

the moment. these are the test wrong. and these meetings are sort of a reminder from the repeated side to test for on that there is a slow turning over to runs, head per se, that is a wrong provides too far escalates to fall on nuclear activities that they were peas. we force triggers not bought earlier than they may have to get a ton of money is coming up in october when a critical decision has to be made. and also that leverage can be used to push pressed the wrong into nuclear diplomacy with the united states on terms that it may not necessarily want from the wrong inside, but feel compelled to give them what's happened on, on the regional landscape in recent months. but i suggest that that i think from the wrong side, there is also an interest to ensure that they sort of p law off the 3 the so of the 3 countries that are policies to nuclear diplomacy with the ross from a potential maximum pressure campaign from president trump in his 2nd tub. so

there's an interest from both sides to continue this diplomatic tongue go going forward until the chips for them. we understand exactly where us policy goes on the wrong. well, that's bringing house on a house on or is this the iranians peeling off as any just said, a nuclear diplomacy? get a framework done right now. then present. donald trump has stuff followed he'll be books didn't buy. is that a strategy as well? i think the 2 parties are talking to one another with one eye on the white house to see what are the options that are on the table uh, come january 20th for the europeans as early as mentioned. i think they, they have a stake that they want to stay in the game. and i think the reading ends on just down to about the welcome that provided that these parties are not going to be more

catholic than the pope putting more pressure on to run than it is already. and by snapping back a, the, the sanctions that you and sanctions now in terms of uh, the radium priorities, of course they don't want escalation. but their ideal outcome is and we can see the ation may be in the short window of opportunity to do that. i think it is going to open with the new administration's washington. it is a reconciliation that can basically re a re reinstate as sort of a deal that can resemble the j cpa. not exactly the address if you are, but at the same time would uh, lowered the sanctions that were imposed unilaterally by the united states on yvonne . now the snap back mccann is i'm will do the opposite by basically international advising the sanctions that are you in the lateral now it will give it more,

a legal frame, international the right. of course, that's a concern. but ron has, and i think it's part of the rational why they ran against are now talking to the europeans, considering really the harsh rhetoric we hear from you. okay. and capitals trade. so one of the things that donald trump said, one of the reasons for pulling out the deal is he said that iran didn't stick to the spirit of the deal, that they were still supposed taking goals. now cool, the access of resistance, how boss has below the who fees, etc. so that's likely, it's a clue, isn't it likely that that is going to be part of any new deal? is that, do you think that's correct? and i think it is quite likely that the next deal, if there is one, will contain other elements and regional aspects are obviously going to be quite important, but whether they will be central to it,

whether they will be t variables to it remains to be seen i think actually the main concern of trump has, is not the regional aspect, but rather why did the original gdcp way not allow american companies to go into the ronnie and market allowed chinese russian european companies to go in. but not the american ones. because the by the obama administration did not towards the primary sanctions meeting, the sanctions that the us imposes on its own companies. on the table. i think trump's key interest here is to make sure that if any deal is struck, that he can say he's got a better deal because it will benefit the american economy and the american businesses. and there is an opportunity there because the ronnie is, are now realizing, i think that they will not be any sustainable american sanctions relief. unless there is actually american companies in a board meeting that european companies who go into your on will leave on this on

the minutes if the us reimpose the sanctions. but if american companies are in the bond, it will be much more difficult for the us to ever go back to sanctions policy. so if you actually want to have sustainable sanction, certainly if you need to welcome in the america as into the learning economy. so i think there's an opportunity there since this is a key, trump interest the wrong and seem to be realizing this. the question is, is if the mechanics and the movements of diplomacy actually enabled the 2 parties to even get to the stage of discussing these core issues. and he is an interesting point is that because you've heard trace of policy beyond. so we are in an environment, but even if there is a new kid you, uh, that's uh they were pins a positive bit idols to see that there's going to be a rush of your if you businesses to the wrong of european diplomats going to run in the same way, don't be sold with the opening of following the 2015 you can deal. i think what we

are entering into is a much more direct negotiation than we've had before between the us and iran. if indeed, as mister pulse, he said there is going to be diplomacy, but that actually this time round in an ironic way is going to be the rub axes, the rawlings neighbors that are going to take your traditional role in both to promote account reach whichever on but also the, the trauma cap, lease with iran. i think this is understanding that there's going to be a triangulation of economic benefit. stop involved with the ride from a future deal that would 1st and foremost come from countries like for example, could talk the united aarp and ross and saudi arabia. and in this way there is a and pass forward where the west obviously does the nuclear diplomacy. what's wrong on the are of goals states around here on do some of the regional security discussions with the wrong. but the economic benefits set the right from us

sanctions listing come from some of the runs neighbors 1st and foremost in ways that produce the traditionally we have seen come from europe. so i think the game is a very different one than what we saw in 2015 class on the game is a very different one from what we saw before. if iran is us to give up the simple for the axis of resistance and mass as black, such as we mentioned before, if it's off to 10, but it's regional influence. is that gonna fly with iran? is that going to be something they are willing to negotiate? on what, what the red lines that i think they really is where clear back in 2015 that they will move towards regional agreement with the west provided that the nuclear deal would stick and that would work for the right hands economically. i think the, that the iranian experience is quite the opposite. that does not materialize. now i don't, i don't see any reading an objection to deal on a uh, on

a bigger basically deal with the west on a bigger platform. actually it was you rhonda firstly proposed the grand bargain back in 24, but did not receive any answer from the united states. that included regional aspects of course. now with regards to trump, i think uh, i think uh, i mean, no matter what the excuse was, one of the biggest deals that has been signed by who run the past 4 decades. what with was with boeing. so the ranges understood that they need to get engaged with the, with the, with the get the american companies engaged in. yvonne have done their interest also uh, an intent during the, when you in market. but that did not really stop trump. actually trump once a deal for himself, he didn't like the 1st deal because it was obama cuz he wanted a new one. and the warranty as well. ok. but to the way he pulled a, uh,

pulls the united states out of the deal against its, uh, basically the legality of the, of the, of the deal did, did not appeal to the brandy. and so they did that. they couldn't really well, i mean, that's a very good point, but let me, let me pick the, with a trace of straight to, you know, trust is the cooling of diplomacy. it's the, the bedrock of deployment. say that was a deal from rick to all up. why should be erroneous trust? any new deal coming from trump, even if it's a business based one? as you might suggest, could happen. why do they trust them? so i trust, obviously is important, but trust is not something that you just get on the spot. trust is something that is built up actually to agreements over the course of a very long time. what you need to have in place is mechanisms and that it helps you build the trust. and there are plenty of good reasons for the vonnie is not to

trust drum to not to trust the united states and vice versa. the question is do there interest a line? do they have an interest in trying to see if in that range been can be put in place? i think trump has an interest he wants to get out of the middle least he wants to reduce the risk of the us getting dragged in it towards over there. he wants to be able to say, as a professor or the all said that he did a better deal that this is good for him. this is about his ego. if you take a look around, there's probably 3 major deals that can be struck by trump within the 1st year, one is between russia and ukraine. one is between israel and saudi arabia and one is between the us and the wrong between the 3. despite the fact that they're all very difficult, it seems to me that the von may actually be the lowest hangings proved for many different reasons, including that the us is the main actor in the deal making. whereas it is not necessarily in the other ones. and as a result,

they may very well end up being the trump prioritizes this issue, and that perhaps not immediately, but after realizing how difficult the others are. and then the question is, does that align with the volume interest? and if it does so, they will have to take a chance, both of them, and then if it works out, then perhaps some trust will be built, if not further, trust depletion will take place. but if you make trust a pre condition for the you will not get a deal under almost any circumstance. i think it's an interesting point that treats and makes in, in washington dc. he's talking about the americans and that you know, that push for diplomacy, this idea, it's a low hanging for eggs, so it's a deal that can get done. but there is a elephant in the room here as well. is israel? israel has a say in american foreign policy like, well, no, that's actually just the fact. so as well, these guys get involved in this as well. and as we've seen from israel, there's a hard line when it comes to any deal to be made. now whether you your opinions at

um, along with all of this, and where is america with, with this idea of the israel is going to have to have a site? well, i think that and keeping israel closely engaged in the discussions that happen with iran is something that your opinions and the us administration and you've been under biden has on the students and assessed it to you to prevent them from icing as a spoiler. so i think going full woods and there's going to have to be sort of a management of relations from both to ron and the united states actually. so on the west side, we have a president's an incoming president, trump that may actually unlike any other president and recent time be able to and let's say strong on israel into accepting a deal between the us that yvonne and i do think that the notes in yahoo administration will be willing to put up assuming that type of flight that we sort

of put up under obama, against it trumpet ministration. i remember that there's going to be a whole series of trade offs that will be happening between the us and as well on issues like what's happening in gaza 11 in syria. so we are again, as i mentioned in a very different game today than we are in 2015. so that needs to be understood. but again, president tom is going to be a president which will not want to be told what to do, of buying his relative ministration and is likely to push back. also, we're going to have a quite a strong hold of republicans in the us congress. and the last time a deal was agreed between the us and iran under president obama. there was a lot of work to be done in the us congress because they were also being essentially courted by is ready interest at that time. but i think now given that a loyalty to present to him is the number one priority for republicans. if there is

a deal being pushed forward by the president from you, your message get less pushed aside from the public inside and also less, less post spots from the democrats that are interested in avoiding major conference with her on. and on the ronnie inside there will have to be relationship management with russia. i don't see, sorry, any real running out of time. and i do want to put you made some very interesting points today. and i want to put one of them to have fun. i think the idea of the negotiation teams right now is a very different time is a little, i guess, of said including you that it was when the initial agreement was made. is iran going to push to a hard line agenda? have a much tougher negotiating stones this time around and knowing the stakes might be a lot higher. actually, yvonne has never protected very hard line a, you know, policy when it comes to negotiations with the last in the after the jcp re,

their uh, pro engagement reform mind its new president, president, position john is actually, is very much into dealing on a credit mad a crisis and i think that's what 12 dictate runs position. moving forward. i don't think a brand new hands are interested in any hotline position. they haven't been, they only stick to their basically, they were saying that, but just if you raise the basis for any reading engagement now i think it will be the basis for an uber engagement. and it, we haven't, i've restriction but is inclined to dealing based on it, but also with pragmatism. so, no, there is no hard lining matter hard line position. but at the same time, i mean 11 hand can my clap there is, there is another side that is the united states. uranium is r i n g washington to see what stands and what policy it, we'll choose what direction we'll choose. is it a maximum of pressure revert back to enforcement as they call it,

or they want to get to a real serious a reconciliation, whether you're wrong now or other issues, way in your including israel, a crane others. i think it's, it's very complicated, but provided that there's a, well, there's a way. well, let's pull that to, to treat that. theresa, is this a cause for optimism? is a deal that we don't know know you called at low hanging fruit earlier, but having listened to a gas, do you think there's an easy deal or is this going to be yes and the make it, you know, i don't think it's easy at all and i want to emphasize, i said, relative low hanging fruit compared to the others, it's going to be very, very complicated. i do think, however, that some sort of a framework or roadmap agreement can be agreed upon on a relatively short basis. and from there on see whether it can be filled out with all of the different details that are necessary in order for there to be

a final agreement. and such a roadmap or framework agreement. and in and of itself can be tremendously valuable because it can essentially stop the, the, the escalation that it's taking place. it can have a d s can latoria effect in and of itself to just reach uh, a framework agreement in short order. given the fact that the region is on the verge of explosion, given what these railways are doing and live in on, in gaza, increasingly in syria as well. the firing from the who teased to israel, the risk of a larger war. having that type of a framework agreement, that kind of puts a lid on the escalation is in and of itself tremendously valuable. and that i think can be achieved in relatively short order. well, all eyes on january 20th, then on the, you know, duration of the new us present. i wanna thank oh, i guess i'm fine. i'm again l. e, karen mae a entry to policy and thank you to for watching. you can see the program again,

any time by visiting all websites. i would, is there a don't come on for further discussion, go to a facebook page about facebook dot com, forward slash a inside story. and you could also join the conversation on x on handle is at a j inside story for me, around con, and the whole team here, bye for now. the in january on algae 0 status tom, the price of peace analyzes the failure of the u. s. mission to build a stable outcome state. in a new interview series we frame is searching for new conversations and perspectives about the world cause an in depth look at the pool to serve as president of the us . donald trump, as he says, to be another rated for his 2nd time wise explorers growing global movements. the challenge us to redefine how we see our role on the policy of the board reveals how

israel proffers from selling, cutting edge surveillance and military technology around the world. using occupied palestinian territory as a testing ground. january home alger 0. a report is retreat in a brutal civil war. if it hadn't been that the is ready and vision with not being so well for the coming door had become gentleness accent. you could be in the safe and safe, and then you went out into civil war. i started off leaving this one of the grand sweets coming to a hotel. the next room i was in was underground, tying the prison. so as a hostage bay was to come a dual rule hotels on al jazeera, the 1960 decade of change across the middle east and north africa in the 2nd of a 3 part series. alger 0, well explores, the explosion of oxen, culture, intellectual as we're building new dreams. and the idea is because the revolutions

of the 1961, the political parts of the mind for music to tv, the poetry of protest and revolution, like to make the sixty's in the arab culture. oh, no jews here. the, the showcase best documentary films from across the network on al jazeera, the hello, i'm elanda, vincent, i mentioned uh the top stories on al jazeera. israel has fullest 2 hospitals in northern garza to evacuate on the threat of attack stuff and patients are the indonesian and all out of hospitals have been told to leave immediately. more than

100 people, i believe, to be at the out of the hospital alone. while at the indonesian hospital patients say they are unable to leave the business, this was their decision and the problem is i can't walk, it hurts me a lot to talk to the.