now on bbc news it's time for dateline, presented by shaun ley. hello and welcome to dateline london, the programme which brings together leading british commentators with the internationaljournalists who send home their stories under the dateline london. this week — no blue wave for us democrats so no mid—term blues for donald trump. are his sanctions on iran subject to the law of diminishing returns? and as the world commemorates the end of the war that was supposed to end all wars, do we remember too much? joining us today are: the iranian—born writer amir taheri, bronwen maddox — former international editor at the times, now with the uk's institute for government — agnes poirier from the french magazine marianne, and the us journalist stryker mcguire, from bloomberg markets. warm welcome to all of you,

and thank you for being with us. meet donald trump, the magic man. it's the pundits verdict on the us president which he most appreciates himself. he re—tweeted it approvingly, after tuesday's elections, the results of which will help shape the presidential election due in 2020. mr trump's republican party lost control of the house of representatives. a democrat—majority there will make it harder to introduce new legislation. the strengthened republican grip on the senate, though, makes it unlikely he'll be successfully impeached. it will also make the path to securing supreme court vacancies for conservatives a lot safer. bronwen, how magic were these results for donald trump? they were a relief, that was how they were portrayed, as very good news for him. it is not great news, in that the democrats have the house, and license

or the ability to harass him and demand tax returns and so on. the question for me is whether the democrats really put their energies into that, as well as bucking some as well as blocking some of the legislation that he may want to get through. i also think of the start of the next presidential race, you've had a lot of contenders coming through, or talk about them, particularly on the side of the democrats. potentially that is exciting. and jeff flake from arizona dropping more than a few hints about his career in the senate, he feels someone in the party should challenge donald trump. it's not like it is a midterm where he got hammered? no, but he didn't get hammered and he clearly did help in certain races. he went to places where, i think he knew that he could make a difference. and he did. and of course, all of those places were, i was going to say in the middle of nowhere but i really shouldn't say that! they were outside of the urban areas and suburbs. that is where, i mean, look at the map. it is vastly red.

but, it is blue in pockets of, you know, those populations. with high income and higher education. clearly, he came out of it feeling more emboldened immediately then he has been in recent days. something changed, first of all in arizona. it looks like a democrat could in fact win the senate. but also because i think the reality of what it means to him to have a democratic house is beginning to dawn. the idea of what these subpoenas could mean to him personally, a lot of these questions that the democrats are asking about him personally, and about money that he has made as president and so forth. but in the sense of the democrats, they turn all of their fire on the president because

he riles them so much. they end up almost saying to the american people, "you voted for this guy, so you were wrong." and also, they miss the bigger political battles that perhaps need to be fought? well, now they have the house, they need to be diligent and focused. but, i mean, i'm not the only one to have given hope on saying about trump being impeached. we should set our eyes on the 2020 horizon. what the democrats have achieved is nothing out of the ordinary, you know? anyway, they should have won more massively. the democrats need to put their act together. and realise, perhaps, that clinton, that is finished. even though there are some very good and very dignified and competent people like john kerry and joe biden and elizabeth warren, bernie sanders, now you look at texas. we all look at texas!

of course, beto lost. but actually, he won. it's a laboratory of ideas. it was the testing of a candidate? they were very close and it frees him up... and when you look at the figures in texas, the number of 18—to—29—year—olds who cast an early vote, that's five times bigger than in 2014. and how he raised money. $70 million through the smaller nations, no big donors. this guy is in his 405 and could go nationwide for 2020. but only if the democrats get their act together. there is this tension in the party between the old guard, who are very old! and wonderful. they need to step aside, absolutely. you need the kind of energy

that beto had in texas to really get the democratic vote out in 2020. and not only their gender gap, it was key in the mid—term figures. you don't want john kerry orjoe biden. even back in 2016, if only women had voted... trump would not have won. what are your reflections on what happened this week? in the united states? well, it's in deep crisis. there is no opposition party, the democrats have no programme, they have no leader. and they have fallen into donald trump's trap ofjust attacking him. none of the main issues are debated. no alternative is offered. there is no solution? so yes, he's in a fantastic position. saying that they have the house? they don't. 25 of the democrats are conservatives. who, in fact, ask conservative leaders like bernie sanders

and elizabeth warren not to come to the constituencies. the us politics is not so black and white. and in any case, trump does not have any domestic agenda now. he did in the first time, in the first two years with tax cuts and all of the other things he has attempted to change, like 0bamacare. that has been stalled. now he will focus on foreign policy because he controls the senate. one of the battle grounds appears to be immigration. but that is also good for donald trump. possibly, because it is proving more popular. but that seems to be one of the things that really is in play. 0bamacare, now the democrats have the house, there are key elements of that which are safe but there is domestic policy still out there.

the republicans, they have mixed feelings about immigration too. take the republicans in the border states, they have mixed feelings. so do the democrats. absolutely. that is donald trump's main issue. if immigration becomes the main issue, that is donald trump's main issue. "i am defending you against these hordes, and the democrats..." and where is this caravan? what hordes? picking up on your point, is this a risk for the democrats? that, in a sense, if they spend the next two years attacking donald trump and he plays the victim, "they're stopping me from doing what i wants to do," and it appeals to voters.

you are absolutely right, they are saying to people, you were wrong to vote for this. they are assuming more support than they have been able to show and it could backfire. it is a question of whether they just do that but on the other hand, their own supporters would think they missed a trick if they did not use control of the house to harass and demand publication of his tax returns. it's amazing, the number of things that donald trump has made the new normal like hiring your family, not publishing your tax returns! they've got to get their tone right and the degree of it right. and be positive. absolutely right. beto o'rourke almost didn't mention trump, trump was mentioned the day after, he was extremely positive and that is how he galvanised... in the early part he did not mention his opponent that much. he said we are positive, great people. there is something to be said about how he went about his campaign. you mentioned donald trump's foreign policy agenda. earlier this year, mr trump's treasury secretary steve mnuchin estimated he was spending half of his time on sanctions. the latest, applied against iran, are also some of the oldest.

they restore long—standing restrictions on trading oil and obtaining finance, lifted three years ago when iran agreed to restrictions on its nuclear programme. the intention is to change iran's behaviour, its repression of internal critics, its use of proxies like hezbollah to undermine its neighbours. let me ask you first of all, amir, what do we know about what is happening inside of iran? some sanctions were restored six months ago now, when president trump walked away from the iran nuclear deal. have they had an impact on day—to—day life? the us has imposed 35 rounds of sanctions on iran, sincejimmy carter, and 2a of these were imposed by democrats and presidents. ii of them only by 0bama. the defence was that he would impose the sanctions but not implement them. so, he would have his bread buttered on both sides!

now we don't know if the trump administration wants to really impose these sanctions and implement them or not. it is too early to say. trump is very unpredictable as a leader. tomorrow, someone could turn around and say, i will take a photo with you, and he will say, ok! mission accomplished, job done! but in terms of the levels of protest that happened in iran, we had those reports in the area of spontaneous protest erupting in a number of cities, has that largely died away? no. we've had protests and uprising before these sanctions, during the so—called green uprising. last year and the year before. they were not only linked to sanctions. one thing you should know is the iran economy is an economy that does not depend much on foreign trade, you know?

it doesn't import more than 11% of food, it has its own domestic economy and they can live in a bunkered economy. even though oil is 80% of government revenues, that matters less because they do not use the money to buy other stuff? oil is 10% of the iranian gdp. it's important in the budget of the government. if the dollar becomes expensive, as it has done, it's good for the government. if income is in dollars, and expenditure is in the iranians currency, it works. it sounded like it on saturday morning, when the president said, well, they haven't made a difference. it's more of the same, we cope with the sanctions and it will not make things work. what is this about, the sanctions? is it about bringing iran to its knees or a long—term change of behaviour?

0r playing to domestic policy? 0r playing to domestic politics? i think it's all three! i hate to do that to you! it is definitely all three, and saudi arabia comes into play as well. you are talking about balance. and, of course, israel. but i think amir made the point, they have been imposed but will they be implemented? because there are a lot of exemptions. eight countries on the list, yes. and europe will be wondering what is going to happen. but they came into force supposedly on monday, right? so has anything actually happened? some things have been tougher than i expected. iran have been shut out of the swift international communication banking system, a lot of people were arguing against that. it has posed problems for iran.

because it is a payment method? yes, but i cannot see what kind of behaviour this is really going to change. i don't think iran will give up support for hezbollah or their missile programme, which they see as necessary for security in the region. if the us is pushing for regime change, which is what iran thinks, what regime does want to change to? it is not as if there's an iranian opposition sitting... they made that mistake in iraq, believing that there were these kinds of us sympathetic characters? yes, and i think it was misled and misled itself on that. but there isn't really an equivalent in iran. the us strategy has a lot of mystery about it. we haven't talked about europe. when i say europe, in that nuclear deal, it is france, germany and the uk. there has been talk of a european agency based in france or germany

that would trade in euros and bypass, would help bypass. nobody wants to host it. the uk cannot because of brexit and it will be in euros but this could be in france. apparently, france has been leading talks about this agency with washington. but it hasn't come to any reality. the only players are not the government, either the us or the european union. the real players are companies. they are boycotting europe. over 400 western companies have withdrawn from europe. is that because they are frightened they will be penalised and cannot do business with the us if they don't? yes, and they have problems with the situation because iran is like doctorjekyll and mr hyde. you don't know under which law you operate because there are two parallel governments and two parallel ways of living, if you like. president rouhani and the parliament

and all of that... iran as a nation state and iran as a revolution. they are two different things. when i spoke to a swedish steel baron there, he said that iran has more fantastic engineers than we have in sweden, and we would love to work with them doesn't know who to talk to. it has nothing to do with trump, iran has a problem with itself. as long as it has decided not to close the chapter of the revolution, nobody can help. nobody can solve this problem. to what extent is this strategy about only using the stick, whereas the european approach and the 0bama approach was the carrot and the stick and will that work better?

ultimately, from what bronwen was saying, iran feels rather as israel does, a country surrounded by hostile forces. the round of sanctions before this did work in the sense of getting the nuclear deal. that happens not to be to president trump's liking but they still got its aim. it was a particularaim, and iran signed on to that nuclear deal. not brilliant but better than having no deal. it can work. and, particularly when coupled with the financial system, some people talk about the golden age of sanctions rather than military action, but this rather mixed message, i think combined with mixed aims on the american side, it's hard to see that working. it is very much between a mix and a mystery! we just don't know what, when trump says something, we really don't know if he will carry through. he has carried through on chinese tariffs but remember all of

the stuff that he was going to do, kill nafta and so on? he just rebranded it and it is back to what it was. we had to wait for two years! and after two years, another four years! is there a realistic sense, it's coming to the 40th anniversary of the revolution next year. is there a desire to become that kind of country that people in the west seem to want it to become? one part of iran definitely wants that. iran cannot do what trump wants, forces inside of iran neutralise each other.

you have to nurse it and be patient, and use lots of drugs, homoeopathic ones. iran is a very complicated situation. a cure has to come from within iran itself. all the outside world can do is really help. i think donald trump and his sanctions are relevant in the long run. there are 35 rounds of sanctions and all of those have been revived. but he did not impose them. they have been imposed before, and didn't work! there are many parts of the world where the paper poppy i'm wearing on my lapel would mean absolutely nothing. in the uk it's way of commemorating the nine million who died from combat injuries during the first world war. sunday is the centenery of the armistice which ended the fighting. no one who served in that war remains. the last combat veteran died seven years ago. it weighs into the thought, agnes, as to whether we sometimes remember too much? i think there is a short and a long answer to that. the short answer is it is extremely important to remember. a nation that suffers from amnesia

is condemned to repeat mistakes of the past but also not understand the present and undermined the future. so yes, remembrance of things in the past is very important, and it is the knowledge of history. and the capacity to remember. now, i'm going to give a very french point of view. national tributes, national homage, they used to be very rare and are very powerful in france, until the charlie hebdo attacks. in the last five years in france, we have seen a deluge of commemorations. they are very important, they are moments of communion and extremely well organised every time, for the november attacks, i'm not going to give the list now. it sounds limitless of islamist attacks in france. each time it was taking place

at the tomb of the great napoleon. they were necessary moments, but we had so many of them. we've almost... we've almost got used to them. almost liking them. actually, it has extended to any great french person who died. charles asnavou was the last to have a eulogy given by the president and it was been fantastic. and the wonderful french politician who entered the french government, a wonderful ceremony. watching your tv set, shedding tears every time we hear la marseilles. it is too much, it's become too powerful! over the last five years, we all thought, we need to end this. president macron has been touring the country

for the world war i commemoration for five days. i think that is four too many. you had to strike a fine balance between the past, present and future. at some point, you might get stuck. the important day is november the 11th. it is sunday. the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month. you have 12 heads of states... when the guns fell silent. exactly, important in paris. the whole week, i want my president to be at his desk and work, not commemorating all the time. i was struck speaking to the german actor sebastian koch when he came in a few weeks ago, and he said he could not remember when they had marked the first world war until this year, for obvious reasons. there is a different perspective in different parts of europe about this. it seemed to be more than whether you are on the winning or losing side.

it's a big part of it. not triumphalism, but the countries which were on the winning side do celebrate or commemorate it much more. i don't think we remember too much in this case, this horror changed our societies profoundly, and shattered the class system in britain and began to democratise things. in a sense, the family is still conscious about how they were shaped by it, the brothers, uncles and grandfathers lost and people now descended from the bit that survive. that is very real. these 100 years frame a sense of what europe has gone through. since it is remembrance day, let us remember that it was a world war. it was not a european war. iran was invaded by the ottomans, the german side and by the russians on the british side. their invasion created a fantastic famine in iran,

i don't know exact figures but hundreds of thousands of people died. and also, people from more than 40 countries, and colonies, they fought and died. you will find japanese... india... algerians... it is a world war, often in european territory but also the middle east. it shows currently dominant civilisations, because of its own intent and contradictions and problems, created a tragedy for everybody. for example, iran was neutral, we had nothing to do with it. we were invaded and took us 50 years to recover. it's a world war, and president macron has not remembered that. he has only invited the western allies together. and i think that is a shame. the turkish president was invited. and one african president to mark the african soldiers who fought.

we need to talk about what has happened in the elysee palace this weekend with president macron and trump, the united states helped to pick up the burden and came into the war and helped the europeans, and helped shape the geography of europe in the middle east that followed. many of the consequences of those decisions made after the war had ended, and the treaty of versailles, the peace conference, are still with us today. and some of them are bad consequences? when we do remember, we've remember, as bronwen said, a huge event. but we also remember, we are remembering... it has become emblematic of war in general. and remembering it in some way helps us to address that. but what bothers me, just to return to agnes' point about dilating this... by doing it too much? what happened after charlie hebdo happened in america after 9/11. suddenly, everybody had

a american flags everywhere. people put them on their cars, and i was back for a few weeks recently, and there were flags all over the place. in america, you cannot, i think, we risk diluting the symbols when we do this, and the american flag for every politician in the united states, city council people feel they have to wear it. it'sjust a bit much, i think. and in terms of this weekend, we will see a whole range of commemorations. this has become a less controversial symbol than it was a few years ago, before afghanistan and iraq. it has come to stand for military casualties generally. i think that is welcome. i'm not for underplaying this particular commemoration. thank you all very much, as ever. that's it for dateline london,

on a weekend in which the world looks back in the hope of moving forward. we leave you with pictures from the tower of london this week. until the same time next week, from all of us here, goodbye. . they started across west wales became more widespread, some of them heavy with rumbles of thunder. there will be some clear spells as well and if this sky stays clear for long enough across the northern half of scotland with winds following a little lighter, they could be a

touch of frost but most places holding up between four and 10 celsius. tomorrow, we see a mix of sunshine and showers. the showers organised themselves into bands, one moving across england and wales up into southwest scotland through the morning. turning wet across northern ireland later in the day. between the showers, some spells of sunshine and highs of ten to 14 celsius. this is bbc news. i'm chris rogers. the headlines at 5pm: one of the key commemorations to mark 100 years since the end of the first world war has taken place in compiegne. some 70 world leaders are in france for the centenary. the french president emmanuel macron and german chancellor angela merkel signed a book of remembrance inside a railway carriage that's identical to the one where the original ceasefire was sealed in 1918. the former transport minister, jojohnson, says more ministers may

resign over the prime minister's brexit plans and voters were sold a "false prospectus" in the referendum. we're not going to get greater sovereignty, we're going to cede sovereignty, we're going to lose control over how rules affecting swathes of our economy are shaped. it's not the british parliament that's going to gain control from this, it's the french, german and european parliaments.