hello. i am a host of what house

chronicle, coming right up. in foreign-policy there are cliches in which we talked. we talk about sticks and carrots. it doesn't make a horse do anything in a way accept look for another character. and a stick. you can't get much -- a horse to do much with eight stick except show it to a horse. the whole thing is just a message. in foreign policy, it tends to be otherwise. wheat also assume that we are the people with the carrots and sticks, not that we are the victim of other people's carrots and sticks. i have assembled three of the

great minds of journalism to deal with foreign policy. we will write back to apply sticks and carrots and other remedies to the ills of the world. and now the program host alan king and linda gasper allow. s/ i promise you three remarkable people and here they are.

a widely syndicated columnist in the washington times. it is a pleasure to have you. i am joined again iro by ron marks. i am delighted to have john lewis of hearst newspapers here in washington. a long time journalist, and someone's usually respected. what is the big international news at the moment? i would say it is still iran, whether or not israel will bomb iran, whether the u.s. or the obama in the session will go along with it.

that policy has not been there. joe biden, with a little slip of the tongue. he also understands the power of aipac better than anyone. anybody who has served in congress as long as joe biden knows this. this is a crude way of going after anything. he would have to overfly parts of iraq. saudi arabia will do a wink and and nod. they have 11 air-to-air refueling tankers. what the chairman of the joint chiefs, mike mullen and others,

and i'm sure the president feels the same way, that iran has asymmetrical abilities up and down the gulf. you can have oil at $300 almost overnight. take bahrain, two-thirds of the population is shia, and they are under a ruling family. >> let's clarify these terms. and their position as oil exporters. it is not just that they export 1.5 -- two 0.5 million broke -- barrels, but the nation's waterways. >> they had a major naval base in there, they can hurt her u.s. and our friends interest up and

down the gulf. that doesn't even begin to mention hamas. >> seven or $8 a gallon for gasoline. that would be a catastrophe. >> that would put us in a worldwide tailspin. it is still not clear how far we would drop. if you bring that up to $300 a barrel, all bets are off at that point. >> i used to be involved with an aspen institute study on this. at a much lower level, and they had a growth rate of 23%. total, economic, collapse is very close to it. >> one assumes that the israelis will attack iran. what are you looking at that will lead to to that conclusion? >> they are going through an

existential crisis. by virtue that they have nuclear weapons ambitions for the last 25 years, they have been helped by the famous black marketeer. the bombing of iran, if it takes place by israel, it is six-nine months away. >> this is inspired by the success, is it not, that israel had been bombing iraq in 1982? 1981, where they struck two reactors? >> the famous reactor in baghdad. the israeli air force pulverize it, and put the iraqi nuclear program totally out of business. despite the weapons of mass destruction, i don't think the iraqi nuclear program ever

recovered from that. >> isn't there another way? is it you let them do it or you bombed them? you used to work in the agency, the cia. are there other ways of interrupting the electric supply, causing the enrichment process -- >> what alternative what i take -- would i take? they know where the sites are. they could engage in some forms of disruption. i would say about the program -- they talked a lot about producing uranium. they talked a lot about structuring the bomb. there is a certain chart that goes with this about what gets develop and how far it goes ahead, how do weaponize it.

they could kick the sting out of a c130 and have the same results. i think it is a little longer down the road in terms of weaponizing it. >> it is also tough to give sanctions. 60% of their gasoline has to be important. >> i don't think people realize how open they are to sanctions. americans tend to dismiss sanctions. from a banking standpoint, from the sands point the standpoint of squeezing the economy, their economy is not in a good condition. they have had internal problems. >> if you deprive them of their gasoline, that is an act of war. that means blockade. >> you have in the past on this program suggested that it is not

entirely irrational for the iranians to seek weapons. >> if they have a neighbor called pakistan, with 60 years of existence on this planet and they see that five of the eight world nuclear powers are in their nuclear vicinity, they say they are entitled to it also. >> i think american planners ought to assume that iran will have nuclear capability. we have to get over this -- what we are going over now. we need to assume that they do have nuclear capability, and then what are we going to do? we will make them more of a community of nations, and not rattling their swords all the time. listen to the iranians say they are all interested in peaceful

nuclear program is total baloney. >> that is all nonsense. there is a process going on, this is 80 million people, 600,000 square miles. the u.s. will not take them on militarily at this strike -- at this time. sometimes you blow the roof off of something and things survive. >> one is really bomb on iran will be seen as american. >> this will play out over time. the u.s. will continue to hold them back. the hope i have at this point, we saw in the last month or so after the election in iran, i think at this point in time, but the same as the situation we have in poland and next -- 1981. it will not be pretty, it will take a long time at this point. we will not necessarily have a

state of missouri happening here or canada. we will have people who have a different orientation and the world. >> that is the argument against it. this is a process, this is the shipyards. we have gotten through this and we are in the next page. the legitimacy of the government is now in question. south tehran, we were there which is a bit more impoverished area. you have lost the intelligence, we have lost the middle class who are already getting squeezed economically. that is why the embargoes are important. >> we would be thinking iran has a means of helping us in afghanistan. >> let's go to the political side.

obama, when he was running for election said basically, i will sit down with the devil. we now have this very awkward election in iran, where the devil is more of a double that he was before. do you think of obama will be able to deal with the iranians? that the diplomatic engagement that they favor has been postponed? >> it has been the experience historic fleet, that in the end it is a bad guy you have to sit down with, not this mythical moderate. all the journalists love and mythical moderate. >> i have been searching for one since 9181 over there. >> -- since 1981 over there. >> that is how we describe

khrushchev when he defeated solid. >> while he was more modern. -- when he defeated stalin. >> as the empire was disintegrating -- >> i would like to take this opportunity to remind our listeners that on a serious back some listeners i am joined here by these journalists. back to sitting down with our enemies. sanctions. margaret threat -- margaret thatcher said they did not work.

and they have not. they have results that are not desirable, unintended consequences. >> the germans have man -- have made 1700 deals in iran. >> you don't know what they are doing in the dark. how do you feel about sanctions? >> the only sanctions i have seen that makes sense would be to deprive them of 60% of the gasoline they need, because they don't have sufficient refining capacity. >> nothing else? >> they all drove around in cars these days. i think there ascensions and there are sanctions. i go to world war room one, a blockad i, that wasn't just a ll

document. it was in war-time also. >> i was in world war ii. the blockade of iran would be a serious form of sanction, it would require an act of war almost, blocking a country. short of that legal sanctions and diplomatic sanctions and economic sanctions have a limited opinion. here is a major oil producer that still relies on imported gasoline to fuel its economy. >> it is extraordinary. >> that makes them vulnerable in that respect. i am very skeptical of that sanctions have a long impact on

a place like iran. iran is a very sophisticated country. it is much more sophisticated than iraq. the engineering community in iran -- many have been a educated in america. they do sophisticated things. i am surprised they are so slow in getting to the nuclear age, but i expect that will happen. also there are millions of iranians in the united states that are in touch. >> the analogy of the stick and carrot which always seems to come up in foreign affairs. ron, we apply these. we are talking about applying the sticks to iran. who is applying the stick to us? we know that russia has applied the stick to your.

who is applying it to us? >> we're talking about cooperation. europe has been silent or cooperatives, france, germany, certainly in the u.k. -- what are we getting out of this? there is a part of me that sympathizes with this. you start to make people sick, or whether or not you can finish them off with any kind of change of policy or approach. i think that is a real trick. we will not get rid of the regime. at least not for a while. you are looking for behavior modification at this point. i think shifting from the bush administration to the obama. ministration has left them a little less to beat up on. in terms of the overall

sanctions, we can't continue to play that game on our own. if the europeans do not cooperate with us, and they are making money, the french in particular, it is a cottage industry of diplomats going back and forth over, how do we solve the problems of korea? of to iran? how many wars were started by diplomats lane two generals -- at 1.60% of the american people feel that saddam hussein was behind 911? >> i am afraid you're right? . >> you have to get behind some behavioral change. that will take time. the fact is, that is our

audience right now. they are susceptible to the kinds of technology that we can use over by the -- tax, i am not sure if we're doing very well with it. >> one of the interesting is about iran is the internet and other communications tend to have brought in a liberal opposition there. this has not always gone that way. some of the other muslim countries, conservatives who have used communication to push the radical view. the extremes of islam have been fed by modern communications, where we naively thought these people continue to see cnn, these people are liberals. >> we had a meeting recently,

and we were told that the pentagon had been hit 6 million times in one hour. it was a hailstorm. >> now we are very suspicious by north and -- of north korea. >> it is surprising that they have that degree of sophistication. >> it's not today's state of the art. >> it doesn't take very much. i only understand technology enough to understand my blackberry. i can get it on and off, and that is about it. it doesn't take much to do this. it is just sending a lot of messages in one direction. a well-trained 16-year-old can do this. if you arsis -- paranoid, you can put the following items

together. the fact that they let him on the air like that, his son is being lined up at this point, at age 26 which is awfully young for him to get in there. you have him firing missiles off. if this cyber thing is true, a lot of them -- a lot of this has to do with internal battles in north korea. the mayor tell it -- military, they are the ones that limit -- >> chocked, let's come back to washington. how do think the state department is doing? how was the administration doing in its foreign policy? >> we are seeing a team of rivals jostling for position these days. we have vice-president biden who looks like a secretary of state, traveling overseas.

>> i think he looks the way to himself. >> we have senator mitchell with a special portfolio to the middle east. we have ambassador holbrooke, another special portfolio for iran. i wonder what secretary of state clinton is doing these days? she is having a hard time finding a niec --iche. i am told from some sources that she is being isolated, and she tends to be on her own, not close to the people around obama, and not close to the vice president. >>. it is not true that richard holbrooke is seen running from the scene. >> former marine general jim jones, he should have obama's

here --ear. there have been a number of stories saying he is competing with obama's campaign staff to help run the white house. jim jones is having to compete with this younger cadres of campaign workers to get space. >> that is that -- not the way it is supposed to be. eveready said he will bash heads together, he is one that looks bloodied at the moment. >> what we have in this white house, a strange thing, special envoy. we also have inside outside people in energy, someone on

health care. in the white house, which leads a agency and the cabinet member with a layer between that person and the president. >> i must be the only one that happened -- that knows what happened to the czar. i have heard complaints within state department that there is a shortage of space to put all of the special envoys' in. this whole thing is beginning to looked a little bit more like the first clinton administration. it was driven very much by the political. it would also be a national security meeting. to some extent what you are seeing, he looks good on the world stage. gates has good access.

>> the secretary of defense perry >> hillary is isolated at this point, panetta was put over at the cia to make sure that things go quiet, and jones is running the day to day shop. >> i would not so jones short. he is a formidable personality. he has not shown his hand so far, has he. >> he is as straight as an arrow, maybe two straight -- maybe too straight. the high point here is that action in iran is not going to be immediate. >> the high point is that in spite of all the fuss you are hearing, this is an internal battle. we will keep our cool on this one. >> i have a neutral point. i think we should know the

passing of former defense secretary robert mcnamara. a historic figure in all of this. all of the analyses and appreciation for ever think about what he did, i think it is a great time to be in the news business right now. >>chuck, we see him as a tragic figure. do you think he saw himself that way? the man who got it wrong? i think he did see himself that way. people need to understand that he had a blood that that he could never bring himself to say. he was responsible for thousands of america -- americans. you cannot look into the eyes of those thousands of people and

say, we made a mistake. people wanted him to make a huge apology. people do not realize the blood debt he felt. thank you very much. that is our program for today. thank you for coming along. you can hear us on x and radio -- serious and some radio. sirrus xmradio. until then, cheers.