captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> lehrer: good evening. i'm jim lehrer. b.p. said it's capturing about a fifth of the oil leaking into the gulf of mexico, more than three weeks into the spill. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. on the newshour tonight, scientists and lawmakers have new worries about the spill's long-term effects, including undersea damage. we have a newsmaker interview with jane lubchenco, head of the national oceanic and atmospheric administration. >> lehrer: then, we review today's supreme court decisions, including one that teenagers cannot be locked up for life.

ray suarez talks with marcia coyle of the "national law journal." >> ifill: we get the latest on the battle between two republicans for a senate seat in kentucky from joseph gerth of the "louisville courier." i won't vote for any budget that's not bald, republican or democrat. >> and i want to be a part of the solution. and whether it's doing it over a couple of years, i think that a more practical approach. >> lehrer: and judy woodruff looks at iran's agreement to ship uranium to turkey, and possibly avoid international sanctions. that's all ahead, on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

the national science foundation. supporting education and research across all fields of science and engineering. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> ifill: the oil company b.p. reported progress today in its struggle to control the oil spill in the gulf of mexico. but scientists voiced new worries about all the oil that's already gushed from the ocean floor. >> the word from bp was only slightly optimistic. a mile-long tube, the oil company said, is now managing to siphon roughly

one fifth of the escaping oil. then piping it to a tanker ship. the company says about00,000 gallons of oil are leaking each day. but other estimates peg it at as much as ten times that rate. >> what we're doing is slowly doing something called opening up the hoke at the top of the well to slowly increase the flow rates. we want to draw down the pressures at the bottom without bringing in the seawater because that creates something like hydrates, so we are doing this slowly and over the next day or so, we should have a better idea of the flow rate from the well. >> ifill: on sunday robot submersibles began siphoning oil by inserting the tube not broken pipeline. it took three tries. it was the first small success after a series of other stop-gap measures failed. the company also began drilling a second relief well sunday. as efforts to stop the leak continued, researchers working with the national oceanic and atmospheric administration reported finding gigantic subsurface

plums of what could be crude oil. >> it's not only the size of manhattan in area, but it's also several hundred meters depth. >> ifill: but no official said it is too soon to determine how far the oil has spread. >> that information has not been analyzed. none of the quantitative analysis has been done on that. we don't even know what for sure is in those samples irz marine scientists also said computer models suggest the oil has drifted into the gulf's loop current. that could take it toward the florida keys and it's frageic coral reefs. amid the questions about potential damage, the issue of culpability for the spill remained front and center. bp has blamed the well blowout on transocean, which operated the drilling rig deep water horizon that exploded and sank last month. but last night on "60 minutes," one of the last men off the platform said bp had pushed hard and ignored safety issues to get the well running. especially because bp had

lost time and money on an earlier unproductive drilling project. >> we always kind of knew that in the back of your mind when they start throwing these big numbers around, that there was going to be a push coming. you know, a push to pick up production, pick up the pace. >> there was pressure on the crew after this happened? >> there's always pressure, but yes, the pressure was increased. >> ifill: in washington bp america's chief executive lamar mckay was back on capitol hill. maine republican susan collins asked about bp's planning for disasters. >> that it seems that no one had really planned for this particular scenario. is that accurate? >> unfortunately, we're as frustrated as anyone. it's taken time. but believe me, the risk analysis around every single intervention is extremely important. and we're being diligent about that. so it's transparent as well. so everyone is seeing exactly what we are doing. so i would say we are not scrambling around. no, i cannot say there was a plan to hit all these

different intervention methods. >> ifill: earlier arizona republican john mccain also asked homeland security secretary janet napolitano about the progress fighting the spill. >> where is your level of optimism ? >> i'm just taking it day-by-day. and i think that's what we need to do. i think we need to just say look, we are in the middle of this crisis. we're not at the beginning, we're been at it a month, almost. but we're not near the end as well. >> ifill: meanwhile an environmental group asked the federal judge to shut down another bp oil rig in the gulf, the atlantis. that platform has had safety and engineering problems similar to the deep water horizon. and in other developments today the top official in charge said she will step down at the end of the month, an administration official said the white house will form a presidential commission to look into the disaster.

we to you take a closer look at what the government knows about the dangers lurking well below the surface as a result of the oil spill. jane lub chenko is the administrator of the national oceanic and atmospheric administration or noa. she joins me now. >> thank you. >> ifill: how do we quantified that-- quantify the extent of the damage seen since this oil leak began. >> this is an unprecedented oil spill and we are still in the early stages of understanding what the full consequences will be. the administration has been very aggressive in its response, throwing every possible resource that we have at it. trying, first of all, to stop the flow. secondly, to contain the damage, and then ultimately to make sure that everyone is compensated appropriately. so the name of the game has been environmental mitigation, and all of it has been strongly underpinned by good scientific analyses and guidance and strong monitoring.

>> ifill: people kept asking, lawmakers kept asking folks from bp today and janet napolitano on the hill why weren't we prepared for this, wasn't there a drill run that would have rehearsed some response to an accident like this. i guess my question to you is how do you prepare or cope with damage that you can't see? >> we're following the exxon valdez oil spill there was a unit, the oil pollution act was passed. and that laid out a series of steps that enabled us to be prepared for the oil spills that typically happen. within noao we have an office of response and restoration and we typically deal with around 200 spills a year this one is different, though, this one is unprecedented because of the depth from which the oil is coming and the inability to stop it. it's not like a tanker that is grounded where there is a defendant finity amount of

oil. >> ifill: and it is not on the surface t so far down. >> it's so far down. the oil that is at the surface we can deal with by burning and skimming to the extent that that is possible. and in fact, our response in doing so has been very, very aggressive. unfortunately, the weather has been-- has made it challenging to do that skimming and burning. and so use of disperseants has been the next best tool of choice. and the goal with the disperse ents is-- . >> ifill: when you say disperseents you mean a chemical mixture that is shot into the water to break up the oilslick? >> disperseents are not unlike detergent. it is sprayed from airplanes, for example, on to the surface of the very patchy slick that is there. and the idea is to break up the oil in to much smaller drop lets so that it can go below the surface and be

degraded by the natural microrobes in the ocean. so it speeds up the rate at which the oil can be broken down naturally. >> ifill: is that an environmentally sound way of doing this. don't you create more problems than you fix? >> oil is inherently very toxic. and given that we have a very bad situation to begin with, it's a toxic substance, this is a question of trade-off. and use of disperse ents is deemed to be much less of an evil than the toxic nature of the oil. they break down very rapidly. they are a lot less toxic than the oil. and getting away from the surface and enabling it to be broken down much more rapidly is probably considerably the lesser of two evils. >> ifill: does it rob the ocean of oxygen which might rob, like coral deep down in the sea of its ability to thrive. >> the microrobes that would be acting on and breaking down the oil do use oxygen.

but if the disperseents are acting properly, the oil drop lets are distributed over a significant area. and so there should not be an overall considerable impact on the amount of oxygen that's available. >> ifill: let's talk about this oil plum we've been hearing about today which sounds like a fairly scary idea that is way beneath what we can see, 300 feet thick in some places, ten miles long as we just heard someone say in some places, the oil is out of sight but to the out of mind. is that so? is there a way to quantify that? >> the research vessel that just returned from a trip, the pelican that we just saw, is in the very early stages of analyzing the samples that they took and looking at the information from the instruments that they had on board. the ship was out doing something, it was initially designed it to go do something completely different.

and when the explosion of the deep water horizon happen head, they quickly changed and brought on new instruments and went out there so they could begin to get information. but science is a process. we're in the very early stages of understanding what it is this they saw. it's clear that there is something at depth but we don't even know that it's oil yet. that's a good possibility. >> ifill: what else would it be? >> but the samples have not been analyzed. they've taken good samples. and we need to make sure that we're not jumping to conclusions. and that's part of the normal process that science has. we want to make sure that we have good information. >> ifill: so in short, they have seen something irregular. they think it's oil and that it's at a great depth and has great-- could have great impact but you're not certain for sure. >> that's right. >> ifill: you could not confirm that. >> and we eagerly await the results of their analyses, and the calibration of their instruments which will give us better information.

>> ifill: the other scary thing that we've been hearing about today and the last few days is the loop current, this gulf stream which could take this oil and wash it far away from where the incident happened, as far away as the florida keys, perhaps father, coast of texas, what do we know about that? >> we know that the loop current moves around a lot. it's very dynamic. we know that the bulk of the oil is dozens of miles away from the loop current. there's a very small stream of oil that is a very light shine that is getting close to the loop current. and it's likely that at some point it will be entrained by the loop current. but that current, if there is oil entrained in it, it would be probably nine to 12 days before that would reach the florida strait. and during that time, it gets highly diluted, parts per billion and it weathers naturally. and so any oil that would be reaching florida strait might be in the form of tar

balls, for example. and whether it ever comes ashore or not, would be a function of whether there were good on-shore winds bringing it. >> ifill: you say tar balls, you mean tar balls or tar balls. >> probably little, very little tar balls. and-- . >> ifill: are you saying it is highly unlikely that the loop current could bring substantial damage to far away beaches or shorelines. >> that's correct. >> ifill: how about to far away animals and underwater life? >> by the time the oil is in the loop current it's likely to be very, very diluted. and so it's not likely to have a very significant impact. it sounds scarier than it is. >> ifill: are you satisfied at this stage, based on what you know, that bp and transocean, even the mineral management services which was the federal agency which is in charge of overseeing all this, that they were doing all they could to prepare for an accident like this? >> it's highly unfortunate that this happened. and i think there will be

lots of analyses about what could and should have been done. i think we won't be satisfied until the oil has been stopped and that the impacts of the oil have been mitigated. and all of the claims that are legitimate have been processed. >> ifill: jane lub chenko, head of the national oceanic and atmospheric administration, thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you, gwen. >> lehrer: still to come on the newshour, big decisions at the supreme court; the republican battle for a kentucky senate seat; and tehran's nuclear deal. but first, the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan in our newsroom. >> sreenivasan: general motors has posted its first quarterly profit in nearly three years, thanks to strong sales of new models and expense cuts made during bankruptcy. the automaker said today it earned $865 million from january through march. g.m. hopes to make a public stock offering later this year to repay the government loan of $50 billion that kept it alive

in 2008. >> lehrer: chrysler remade 1.5 billion out of a $4 billion loan, the rest was erased in bankruptcy proceedings. wall street went down hard today, then came back swinging. the dow jones industrial average fell more than 180 points over concerns about the falling value of the euro. later, as the euro rallied, so did the dow. it ended up gaining 5 points to close above 10,625. the nasdaq rose 7 points to close at 2354. and the price of oil kept falling to $70 a barrel. it's down 20% in two weeks. protesters in bangkok, thailand offered a cease-fire today after five days of violence and 37 deaths. the government said it would accept, but only if street battles end. in the meantime, the protesters defied an ultimatum to go home. we have a report from nick paton walsh of independent television news. >> reporter: these men donned democratic grad laters seemed to have guts

if little else in the face of what could be an advancing army. but inside civilians grieve the death this morning of one of their more combative leaders, praying to wish his soul a safe journey. this shows the moments when major general, cornell red was shot in the head on thursday. he died from his injuries this morning and was carried to a temp el. to some he was an eccentric, to others, their protector. today on the roads near the protest, soldier and demonstrator continued their high octane game. this fuel tanker set a light. these home-made rocket launchers fired towards the army. and inside the protest zone, there was evidence of the first looting. this 7-11 robbed of alcohol and cigarettes last night.

tonight prot test civilian corps was smaller but still would not budge. some wanting power and politics here to shift from the old elite to the new rich and their supporters in the rural poor. >> i want a new prime minister, the current one is just a puppet. >> reporter: some wanting broader social change in thailand all together. >> i want all thai people to have equal rights and then change will come. >> reporter: but if their divided leadership fails, so far to negotiate an end to the standoff, one thing unites these people, despite the army's threats and deadlines, they remain defiantly here. >> sreenivasan: more than a quarter of thailand is now under a state of emergency. in central india, maoist rebels set off a landmine under a bus, killing at least 35 people, most of them civilians. it was the second deadly attack in the region in as many months. the rebels have stepped up attacks in response to a government offensive. they often attack railways and mining operations to cripple economic activity.

a passenger plane crashed in northern afghanistan today, with 44 people on board. their fate remained unknown, as heavy fog hampered search efforts. the plane was en route to kabul when it went down in the salang pass region, about 50 miles north of the capital. six of the passengers were foreigners, including at least one american and three britons. volcanic ash from iceland disrupted more flights across parts of europe today. london's two major international airports reopened after overnight closures, as did amsterdam's main airport. but passengers still faced long delays and cancellations of 1,000 flights. meanwhile, travel experts in britain warned the ash could snarl travel plans for months to come. >> it is going to keep coming back through the summer and the volcanologists tell us this may not be the only volcano, that could potentially explode up there. so i think all of the travel industry and traveling public are looking at this thinking how is this going to affect what is going on. i think is without doubt, everybody is now gearing up for the fact that there will

be potentially a summer of disruption. >> sreenivasan: forecasters said they expect winds to push the ash cloud northward tomorrow, away from british and northern european airspace. nearly 90 teachers are going back to work at a rhode island high school that fired them. they ratified an agreement today that restores their jobs. last february, the central falls school board voted to dismiss the teachers over poor student performance. the action was even supported by president obama as an example of accountability. the new agreement requires the teachers to work longer days and provide more after-school tutoring. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to gwen. >> ifill: the supreme court handed down three decisions today. ray suarez has that story. >> suarez: the justices ruled on major cases involving the sentencing of juveniles and sexually dangerous offenders, plus they looked at the boundaries of an international child custody treaty. and as always, marcia coyle of the "national law journal" was at the court, and is now here to walk us through today's decisions. >> suarez: marcia, how did the court breakdown when ruling on life without

parole sentences for people who committed the crimes as minors, short of homicide? >> the court ruled 6-3 that that sentence violates the 8th amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. the three dissenters were justices thomas, scalia and alito. >> suarez: answering very broadly the question, can you ever impose a life sentence without parole for crimes short of murders on a minor? or ruling very narrowly in the case of this one man terrance graham? >> it was not a narrow decision, ray. the court announced the categorical rule that this sentence violates the constitution. but justice kennedy who wrote the majority opinion said this doesn't mean that a juvenile may never spend life behind bars. he said that the decision means that a state must give a reasonable opportunity, some meaningful opportunity, to the juvenile to show that the juvenile has matured and

has been rehabilitated. he said that the constitution simply says the courts and the states cannot make the decision at the outset. there has to be some opportunity while in prison to show rehabilitation. >> suarez: and in the case of murder, life without parole stands unchanged? >> that's correct. >> suarez: now at the same time as it was blocking such sentences with this ruling, the court was also dismissing an appeal from a man with a similar case. now an adult, but he was serving life without parole for a rape committed when he was 13. it seems sort of contradictory. >> well, it really isn't. joe sullivan's case was dismissed today. and the problem with joe sullivan's case was a procedural problem that prevented the court from getting to the merit. but conceivably, joe sullivan could try to take advantage now of the ruling in terrance graham's case. >> suarez: so bring it back to a lower court and in light of the supreme court's

ruling today, say hey, this means i should be able to be released. >> that's right it would probably be a reseb tensing hearing in which the juvenile-- they are no longer juveniles would have to show that they have been rehabilitated and matured. >> suarez: let's move to the case giving states more power in retaining in prison a convicted sex offenders. what was the ruling today? >> this was a 7-2 decision. and the security in an opinion again with-- the security in an opinion again by justice kennedy said that congress had the authority to enact this law. and it was an examination of a rare clause in the constitution, the necessary and proper clause which authorizes congress to enact laws to help it enforce, implement, powers that are specifically named in the constitution. and the court upheld this law. it was the adam walsh child protection and safety act of 2006. the challenge was brought by

five federal prisoners. and they challenged it on various constitutional grounds. the justice kennedy and his majority opinion, he said that-- i'm sorry, i think justice brier wrote the majority opinion, excuse me. he state in his opinion that this law was actually a reasonable and modest addition to the mental health, prison related statutes that have been on the books for decades. and it was necessary and proper to the implementation of those laws that the federal government have the authority to confine these men beyond their prison sentences. >> suarez: so you serve your full-time that are you given for the commission of a crime after you are found guilty, and now a state can legitimately continue to hold you if they, what, determine that you remain a danger to the community? >> well, states have that power now, ray. even before the supreme court decision. this was a federal case,

federal law. so now the federal government clearly has the authority to do that as a result of the opinion today. >> suarez: so 7-2, that means some people who don't normally vote with each other must have voted together today? >> it does. the only dissenters were justices thomas and scalia. and justice thomas in his dissent said that he did not see any specific power in the constitution that delegated the authority to congress to enact this law. he said sexual abuse is a dispicible act but he said the constitution doesn't protect society from every bad act. >> suarez: did the ruling require that there be some uniformity of assessment so that once you serve your time, there has to be a way they figure out whether you are still dangerous? or it's just one person's decision? >> no, there is a civil commitment procedure that takes place in federal court. and the government has to meet certain requirements

under the law in order to confine these inmates beyond their sentences. >> suarez: and finally, a ruling involving international custody disputes. what did the justices rule in this case? >> this was another justice gwyn dee opinion today. this case involved an american woman who was married to a british man. and they were living in chile with their son when they had some marital problems. they separated. the mother did receive almost full custody of the child. the husband received visitation rights. but he also got under chilean law something called a ney exiate order which gave him the right to refuse or consent to the child's removal from the country. the mother eventually returned to the united states with the child. the father found them in texas and moved to enforce that ney exiate clause. so the supreme court had to decide under this international child abduction treaty whether that clause gave the father

a right of custody or whether it was just a right of access. and it was-- the difference was important because if it was a right of custody, the father could move under the treaty to have the child returned to chile. today justice kennedy, looking at the text of the treaty, looking at other courts, foreign courts how they had interpreted it and also looking at the u.s. state department's interpretation said that it was a right of custody. so the father can now petition our courts to return the child to chile. >> suarez: marcia coyle, thanks for being here. >> my pressure, ray.:a- - my pleasure, ray. >> lehrer: four states will hold primaries tomorrow, including kentucky, where voters from both parties will choose senate nominees. the republican race has drawn the most attention, nationally as well as in kentucky.

there are six candidates on the ballot, with surveys putting ophthalmologist rand paul ahead of secretary of state trey grayson by double digits. here's an excerpt from last week's republican debate that aired on kentucky educational television. >> philosophically are you, mr. paul and mr. grayson, in agreement on some of the areas that you espoused and did you too, mr. paul, there is certainly agreement but there is disagreement. where is that disagreement? >> i would say that, you know, for example, i've said i won't vote for any budget that's not bald, republican or democrat. trey said that that he impractical and talks about a ten year plan to balance the budget. i think we've had too many career politicians come in with ten year plans, 50 year plans. i think that is essentially admitting defeat before we start. so i think we really do have to do something about it. the interest alone on the debt, $383 billion this year,

is more than we'll spend on all the roads in the united states. the deficit is consuming us. and if interest rates rise, we could well be in a debt crisis like greece is in now. >> mr. grayson, do you disagree with him about that? >> no, i think we need agree we need a balanced budget. we both agree on a balanced budget amendment. we both agree that the-- were bad ideas where we have disagreement, are national security. i support the patriot act, he doesn't. he thinks nuclear iran is not a threat, i think it is in economic eluded to my comments about a balanced budget. my comment was in year one, going from a 1.4 trillion dollar budget deficit to 0 in 1 year isn't practical. and i want to be a part of a solution, and whether it's doing it over a couple of years, i think that's a more practical approach. it will result in a balanced budget. i don't think starting from the get-go saying i will never phot-- vote that way is ever going to be a part of a coalition that will get us closer together. that is the kind of guy that will go and have a press conference and talk about

stuff and i want to actually get things done. >> lehrer: more now from joseph gerth who covers politics for the louisville courier journal. joseph gerth, welcome. >> thank you. >> lehrer: paul has a big lead now at least in the polls but it didn't start that way, did it? >> no, a year ago he was kind of a novelty, almost. he is the son of u.s. representative ron paul of texas, 2008, president all-- presidential candidate and nobody gave him much chance which is a somewhat libertarian views. but he, for using his dad 's campaign financing network and getting the support of the tea party, he's made himself a player and has really taken this race by storm. >> lehrer: you say the tea party, is that what has made the difference here for him? >> i think in part it was that. in large part it was probably that. because you know, he does agree with the tea party on the issues of smaller government.

he believes that the congress should be limited to the 17 enumerated powers in the constitution, which things that the tea party loves. we've had some very big tea party rallies here in kentucky over the past year, year and a half. and it seems to be making a difference here. >> lehrer: now trey grayson was the quote establishment candidate. >> that's right. and he has not run from that. he is opposed to term limits. he is in favor of earmarks. he has run an ad with mitch mcconnell, senate minority leader mcmcconnell who has endorsed him in this raise. and he hasn't had anywhere to go to the right. so he is kind of stayed mid force and accepted that role as the establishment candidate. >> lehrer: well now, as you know, joseph, people outside are now portraying this race as some kind of referendum on mitch mcconnell, the republican leader of the senate, because he did endorse grayson.

is that a fair way to look at this? >> you know, to some degree, it is. mcconnell for years has helped pick candidates, republican candidates here in kentucky. and for years he has angered some republicans by doing that. going back a dozen or more years. and so there may be a bit of mcconnell fat agency out there. but at the same time mcconnell did not jump with both feet into this race until late after the die was already cast and paul was leading in polls by 15% so it may be a bit of an overstatement to call it a referendum on mcconnell. >> what really separates, we saw the little piece of the debate but really separates these two guys? >> i think largely what it is, more than anything is just this idea that paul is the outsider. he's not part of the establishment. he's not part of the problem

that brought us bailouts. and not part of the what has gone on in washington with health-care reform. he is completely from the outside. while grayson is not an inside never that respect, he has support of the establishment. he has been in office now for seven years and he is almost viewed as the incumbent. >> even though he isn't. he was secretary of state. he was a state -- holding state office but he is viewed as an incumbent for political purposes at this point is that correct? >> yes, that's pretty correct. now the democratic side, he hasn't got as much attention as republicans, describe that part of the race. >> it is actually more interesting race, at least for me right now. because polls show that it is very, very tight. lt. governor dan mongiarto has a slight lead in the polls that we're seeing these days. attorney general jack conway is his main competitor. there are three other candidates in the race who

aren't expected to get more than five or seven percent of the vote. but it's been interesting in that this is largely been a race that mongiarto has framed as the have and have not. he has done a pretty good job in doing that. he now is up in the polls. but conway who has been better financed, making a late push here we'll see tomorrow just exactly how much that money is bought. >> is there any way to look ahead to november to see what might happen? >> we've been seeing some poll numbers. my newspaper has not done any polls on the november race yet. but we've been seeing some poll numbers that indicate that the democrats would do better against paul than they would against grayson. but at the same time, either paul or grayson has a lead in that race right now. >> lehrer: neither one does s that what you are saying. >> well, either paul or grayson has the lead, but the democrat does better

against paul. >> lehrer: in general, finally, how would you characterize the state politically right now? is it possible to even do so? >> yeah, i mean, we are a democratic tate that votes republican in national elections. kentucky is about 60% democrat by registration. but if you look at the fact that for the past 12 years, we've had two republicans in the senate, that four of our six members of congress are republican, it's a state that traditionally has been democratic but is trending more and more to the republican party all the time. >> lehrer: so would it be correct to put kentucky on the list as a state to watch very carefully come neff, right? >> yeah, i think so, yes. >> lehrer: okay, joseph gerth, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> now >> ifill: now we turn to iran, and today's agreement on nuclear fuel. judy woodruff has the story.

>> woodruff: as flash bulbs pop the leaders of brazil, turkey and iran celebrated a deal today to shift some of iran's nuclear fuel out of the country. iran's foreign minister said his government would outline the details within the week. >> on the basis of receiving a positive response from the vienna group, which includes the u.s., russia, france and the international atomic energy agency, further details of a fuel swap will be elaborated. >> woodruff: under the terms, iran would send more than 2600 pounds of loewen richard uranium to turkey, in exchange ryne would receive 265 pounds of uranium fuel rod for use in a research reactor. iran has long denied u.s. claims that it's bent on building nuclear weapons. and many analysts said today's announcement was aimed in part at staving off a new round of u.n.

sanctions. in fact, the deal resembled a u.n. fuel swap proposal that the u.s. endorsed last october. but u.s. officials voiced skepticism today. state department spokesman p.j. crowley. >> the united states continues to have, you know, concerns about the arrangement, the joint decollaration does not address the core concerns can of the international community. iran remains in defines of five u.n. security council resolutions, including its unwillingness to suspend enrichment operations. >> woodruff: elsewhere, britain's new government said it's support for new sanctions is unchanged for now. russian president medvedev said he would like a small pause in the push for sanctions to find out more about the iranian fuel swap. and brazil and turkey said the agreement means new sanctions may no longer be necessary

. >> achieve a great success, showing that there is room for diplomacy in any case . we produce this paper which guarantees that the iranian -- to turkey in order to open a constructive base for nuclear cooperation in the future. >> woodruff: brazilian president and turkey-- turkish prime minister negotiated the final deal in tehran over the weekend. both nations have expressed a willingness to engage countries at odds with american policy. >> you don't choose with whom you have to deal. >> woodruff: brazil's foreign minister spoke to the newshour's simon mar nes 2008. >> we are able to have dialogue with people with whom i believe the united states doesn't want to have

a dialogue or can't have a dialogue. it's not for me to judge. and in the end, if you want a piece, you have to-- peace, you have to have dialogue with everyone. >> woodruff: in tehran today iranian president ahmadinejad said the announcement shows power is shifting from the post-war structure that the u.s. dominated . >> united nations and security council has lost its efficiency and credibility. some of its permanent members still act as if they are in the same environment as 65 years ago and expect other governments and nations to obey them. >> woodruff: the iranian regime also insisted that even with the fuel swap it will continue enriching uranium to higher levels. for more on for more on all of this we get two views. henry sokolski is the executive director of the nonproliferation policy education center, a think tank focused on the threat of nuclear weapons. he previously served as the deputy for nonproliferation policy at the pentagon during

the administration of president george h.w. bush. and cliff kupchan is a research director at the eurasia group, a political risk consulting firm. he previously dealt with russian and eurasian policy at the state department under president clinton. >> woodruff: gentlemen, thank you both for being with us. and i'm going to begin with you henry sokolski, what's going on here? what is this deal all about with turkey and brazil, working out an arrangement with iran? what do-- what does each side get out of this? >> well, 9 brazilians and the turks get a chance to show that they can do what the united states, france, and russia couldn't. and they get closer ties in the case of turkey with a potentially hostile state, iran. in the case of brazil, leadership, leadership for the nonaligned movement. many states sympathize with brazil's view that america is trying to pressure iran. and in addition, brazil has

a nuclear program of their own that they do not really want to have thoroughly inspected. so they have a little bit of a nuclear chip on their shoulder to, without. iran on the other hand gets time to continue its push to get nuclear weapons capabilities without the threat of being isolated or stigmatized by sanctions. and they get this all before the ieae gets to reveal even more how much progress iran has made towards getting more bomb material. >> woodruff: cliff kupchin, you have the same take on this, and is it good that turkey and brazil have taken the lead on this? >> i think mr. sokolski did a good job of summing up what each side gets. i think it is good they've taken the lead though. because i think we potentially, the united states potentially gets something out of this too. look, the priz here is not the sanction iran. the prize here is to find a diplomatic solution to this worrisome crisis. now it's just possible that through this swap we could build more confidence than we have now, which is virtually none. >> woodruff: more

confidence. >> more confidence, yes w iran in a bilateral relationship. and possibly move forward to talks it is still a long shot. but on friday it was a no-shot. so i think we've somewhat improved the prospects for that. >> woodruff: but again, going back to iran, is iran better off in terms of getting toward that nuclear enrichment that it clearly wants? or not? >> iran has delayed sanctions. so iran has more time to develop the capabilities that could be used either for nuclear fuel or a nuclear weapon. now that time can be use todz develop a nuclear weapon or it can be used to negotiate. and it's up to us to direct it in the direction we want. >> woodruff: do you see that clearly one way or another? >> i would say they are going to do both. they where going to negotiate and move closer to getting a bomb. one of the differences with this deal from the october deal that the turks and the brazilians agreed to was it allows iran to call back its null at any time for any reason if it determines the deal is to the being

respected. so this one is a bit of a joker. hang on, there's a reason why paris and washington are quite reserved in their enthusiasm for being dragged into having to honor this deal. their heart is not in it because their head tells them they should have taken this deal off the table. and they didn't. and they got caught. >> woodruff: was the u.s. caught off guard by this. >> the u.s. was caught off guard by in. the u.s. has been focused on this swap deal since last october. i would agree with mr. sokolski that we probably should have taken it off the table. but we didn't. and right now if we turn out to be the spoiler, if we say no, we could well get no votes at the united nations from brazil and turkey. we could well see china and eventually russia running towards the no camp too. so we're in a stick y wicket right now. >> woodruff: so in he sense, does this undercut the u.s. or you are saying it remains to be seen, depends how the

u.s.-- . >> it undercuts the u.s. drive for sanctions. if we play it right and skillfully and if the iranians for the first time are serious about finding a solution, it opens the door that didn't exist before today. >> i worked at the defense department. we were paid to be more dour. my read's different. i think this is pretty embarrassing. it was not a great idea, the original deal it made more sense as weak as it was. >> woodruff: the original deal was a swap just like this. >> but it was obligatory there was no going back. and there was nor material coming across as a percentage of what it is they had. they've made a lot mohr and they are making a lot more per month then they were back in october. >> woodruff: the iranians. >> the iranians. and so i think i agree we are in a bad place, and we're going to have to swallow this. you would kind of like to figure out how the heck did we get this far. why wasn't this thing taken off the table.

and you know can we learn anything from this. >> woodruff: cliff kupchin, where does this leave the whole idea of sanctions? >> it leaves the whole idea of sanctions in trouble, in my view. i think moving forward sanctions before we smoke out what the iranians really have in mind, is going to be impossible. now again, we have to keep our eye on the prize. the prize is not to let iran become a nuclear power under apartheid like sanctions, to be really wins there. so instead of sticking, you know, to a swap deal that was stuck, now we have it unstuck and let's see where it goes. >> woodruff: come back to turkey and brazil in this. are they enhanced by the fwablingt that they've been able to work this out? >> with a country like iran? >> look n the short run they look very clever. and they have he bested us. and they've put news an awkward place. by the way, the prize in this case isn't just, you know, somehow persuading iran to give up the bomb. good luck. it's persuading everyone in the neighborhood that this is the kind of treatment that they're going to get.

and if people think that that's the kind of treatment are you going to get, will you have a hard time stopping other countries in the neighborhood. >> woodruff: what do you mean the treatment they are going to get? >> this not a very firm hand on misbehavior, there is a u.s. resolution, after all, that says they should suspend making nuclear fuel. we have not enforced that. that is what the sanctions are about. there is a bigger set of issues. how many other countries will follow iran's model. on that front we're not looking good. >> henry's right. that we're not looking good. on the other hand, in my view, the you ranian nuclear train has left the station. you know, they are an incipient nuclear power right now and to pretend otherwise is just to fool ourselves. on the issue of brazil and turkey, i think this is good for the u.s. and it's good for the world. brazil and turkey are major economies. they're increasingly influential. and as the u.s. becomes slowly, possibly overshadowed by their economies, certain countries have to step forward and

become stakeholders in the global order. and to me brazil and turkey doing that, maybe they got over their skis a little bit here. but i think all in all t is a good development. >> woodruff: and u.s. options going forward? >> you know, i think that the united states has to start really bearing down on how close iran's getting to the bomb. when the ieae comes out with its fix reports's got to denigrate the value of the swap deal and get on with the business of upholding the u.n. resolution. if it doesn't, it's going to lose a lot of influence, not only in the region but in the world. and the president has sworn to dedicate this administration to reducing nuclear threats. whether they get the bomb or not, he's got to bear down on this bad behavior much more than the swap deal will do. >> woodruff: ary's going to leave it there henrey sokolski, cliff kupchin, gentlemen, thank you both. >> lehrer: finally a second iran story about a renowned poet and her struggle

>> lehrer: finally tonight, a second iran story about a renowned poet and her struggle amid the recent political turmoil in iran. her story is told by a scholar in this country who translates her work. >> i teach at the university of virginia. and i have been there for a quarter of a century. my area of specialization is women's rights in iran. i also have the great and distinct pleasure to be the translator of iran's foremost poet alive. with my colleague. over the last six decades, she has published 19 books of peoples. she is the most prolific female poet in iran. a country in which poetry is the national scripture. my country, i will build you again. this is one of the most an

thol gized poem s-- anthologized poems. my country, i will build you again, with bricks made from my life. i will build columns to support your roof, if need be, with my own bones. i will inhale again the per assume-- perfume of flower s savered by your youth. i will wash again, the blood of your body, with torrents of my tears . >> she recognizes the power of words and she has used them to write a different kind of history of iran. i sincerely believe that the history of the last three decades of iran, especially

after the revolution, can be best studied through her poetry. because they is not an idea log, because she does not belong to any political party, because she loves the country she lives in, she has presented an image as sincere that complicated and multilayered. these are portrayals of iranian history from the street level up. the islamic republic confiscated her passport on march 8th, as she was leaving tehran airport for paris. she had been invited there to deliver a speecand read a few of her poems on the occasion of international women's day. despite her physical fragility and age, she was interrogated all through the night and told to report to the revolutionary court.

for now, she is under country arrest. she is virtually a prisoner in her own country. once more, the darkness will leave this house. and i will paint my poems blue with the color of our sky. there is director of old bones will grant me in his bounty a mountain of splender in his testing grounds. old i may be, but given the chance, i will learn. i will begin a second youth alongside my progeny. i will recite the-- of love of country with such fervour as to make each word bear life.

there still burns a fire in my breath to keep undiminished the warmth of kinship. i feel for my people. >> lehrer: again, the major developments of the day. b.p. said a mile-long tube is siphoning about one-fifth of the oil gushing into the gulf of mexico. on the news howe jane lub chenko of the national oceanic atmospheric administration said the oil will reach a current that loops around florida in 9 to 12 days. g.m. reported its first quarterly profit in nearly three years. and iran agreed to send some of its nuclear fuel to turkey. it also insisted it will continue enriching uranium, despite u.n. pressure to stop. the newshour is always online. hari sreenivasan, in our newsroom, previews what's there. hari? >> sreenivasan: on the 2010 elections, find our reports on the pennsylvania and arkansas contests.

plus, we'll track results and check in with local stations on the rundown. we've updated our oil leak tracker to reflect the amount b.p. says it's capturing now. on today's supreme court decision regarding juvenile sentencing, students in austin, texas, filed a story about how the u.s. compares to other countries on the subject. that's part of our student reporting labs project on newshour extra, our site for students and teachers. and see a photo gallery of images from thailand's political unrest. all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. gwen? >> ifill: and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm gwen ifill. >> lehrer: and i'm jim lehrer. we'll see you online, and again here tomorrow evening. thank you, and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions