overture to iran in the context of the iran-contra affair. in which there were many arrests of people close to centers of power. we had the removal of ayatollah month certificate ri as khomeini's designated success accesser in 1989. that seriously shook the regime. we had a serious rift over whether or not to end the iran/iraq war in 1987-'88 when iran was losing, and there were many senior figures that said, no, iran should continue. that was a major rift. in 1999 we had major student riots, several killed. just in 2000 we had -- 2004 we had the council of guardians which vets the candidates, basically disqualified almost all of the major reformist candidates for the parliament, and there were sit-ins and various protests right from within the regime, so the idea of a rift in the regime is new i think is not correct. ayatollah rafsanjani was actually a key figure in many of these rifts. he is a very, very clever back-room operator. he tends to lose elections. he did win for president in '89 and then again in '93, but that was after khomeini

policies toward iran. according to one analyst, the gulf states in particular that will have a clear and defined policy toward iran only when u.s. diplomacy solidifies, because they find that u.s. diplomacy is vacillating between payment and cooperation. so what we find is a strong inclination toward hedging and accommodating with iran is sort of an insurance policy against it and swings in u.s. policy. deliberations about a u.s. withdrawal from iraq have only accelerated this trend. of sort of insurgencinsurgency and ambivalenambivalence. it's interesting to note that toward the gulf states iran has attempted to exploit this sense of u.s. transcends and temporality playing the drum part of a proximity and permanent. one gulf official noted to us that iran has told us repeatedly we are your neighbor, the u.s. is simply a passing visitor. if these arab states are ambivalent allies against iran neither should we consider them willing interlocutors. they have little interest in helping the u.s. completely fix

iran. the result is ms. it is that dynamic that makes the predictions that are made prior to a election. it is problematic. it is always the expectation it all -- that they but ultimately make the deal. the only reason they did not make a deal with the u.s. is the hard-liners did not want them to become powerful. they want to make sure they will be in power forever. i think a lot of that has to do with the iranian pathology. secondly, i think what has happened has completely changed. he is faced with a serious question -- not only has the undermined his office by taking sides, he is accused of mismanagement of a serious crisis. he has to find a way to address those questions that have to do with this leadership. it does not have to do with is he a leader or not. it has to do that he has mismanaged this whole situation in very consequential ways. until he can adjust that, i do not think he can raise his head and tried to address outside. iran will become introverted, at least for the next few lights -- at lea

in iran. >> the chancellor and i discussed the situation in iran. today we speak with one voice, the rights of the iranian people to have their voices heard, universal aspirations, and their bravery in the face of brutality is a testament of their enduring pursuit of justice. the violence perpetrated agains them is outrage jus. despite the government's efforts to keep the world from bearing witness to that violence, we see it and condemn it. as i have said before, the iranian people will be the ultimate judge of their government's actions, but if the iranian government desires the respect of the international community, then it must respect the rights and heed the will of its people. >> host: ambassador dalton, your thoughts about what the president had to say? >> i think it is admirable. it is the right stuff t makes clear that iran has two universal standards on human rights and civil and political rights are essential parts of the international human rights status, which all countries pay

another dynamic that we found in the region looking at sections of iran who was in the sense that iran is trying to promote pluralism and the fragmentation of the arab states system promoting and added a politics in saudi arabia and this is interesting that they are so concerned about it within their own borders and that you find a broad and i think the speeches that promote pluralism and the promotion of identity politics is an interesting dynamic. i'm not in saudi arabia the saudis are petrified the areas are trying to stir up not just the shia but the hijaz against the nedj. you go back to the '90s and there were a number of the iranian propaganda channels coming out the specific appealed to the hijaz against the nedj so it goes beyond shia, it is rejectionists and an anti status quo ideology here regarding the saudi i rating contest, it is a subject and i think the saudis now at the level of symbolic politics they are behind. they're fundamentally crippled by their association with us, but there are trying to outspend the iranians which is what they learn in the conflict in the con

to iran in the broader region. we will start with david thaler will be focusing on iran's military power projection and a capability is and will be followed by fred wehrey, another senior analyst will be focusing on it regional reaction to iran. so without further ado, thank you. >> thank-you all for being here. i am going to talk today about iran's defense strategy and a little bit about its military doctrine and then how well this has been able to operational as that doctrine to develop capabilities that will benefit that doctrine in the third occurrence of strategy. my key points are three fold -- first of all, it looks like from our perspective and that iran it is able to formulate a strategy and a doctrine that allies will with a strategy and i will talk about that in just a minute. the second piece is that while this is the case, a number of capabilities that they have developed or tried to develop have fallen short in some key areas. how far short of that doctrine but in other areas the third point i will ge

, an ascendant iran. and i think to that extent, you know, there's a sort of incoherence because people are so critical on the government on the one hand and yet very proud and convinced that iran has sovereign rights and should have status in the region with its resources and its population so i think it does sort of lead to a kind of incoherent nationalism in a way that will sometimes rise up and then at other times just go quiet. when it comes to culture identity, and i write about this a lot because i think especially for young people it's been almost impossible to sort of create and to hammer out a sense of self in an environment that is on chaotic. when you have such a divide and such an increasing divide between public and private life, it's hard to have a sense of who you can trust and who your real self is. if you're one person outside and a different person inside the house and maybe a different person at university. and so i think it's tremendously difficult and i think this is why many iranian

try to set up a dummy corporation in iran. they used the influence of the british to obtain their objectives. there was an assassination during that time and ever since then iran has had trouble. currently, ahmadinejad has a statement that a standing strong and conveying the needs of the nation to be recognized as a super power [unintelligible] however, the conservatives seem to keep us focused in the need to have war. weather through loss of life or through israel whom we directly support. would it be better to assume that it is better for them to use a stronghold to keep him in office to preserve the potential for them to rise to be a super power rather than to open a dialogue that could result in their being attacked? host: in the short form a think his suggestion is that having ahmadinejad continue in office allows them to continue their desire to become a superpower. guest: the whole point is that being a superpower does not mean using violent rhetoric against the rest of the world, intervening in the affairs of other cou

not only iran. the united states has done this in many countries to keep in power the complex and all the republican-type people who are brain washed and said kill, kill, kill, take over the whole world to get resources. another thing, we have no right to tell people not to have a weapon unless we get rid of a weapon ourselves in the same way. also, as far as obama says, he's satisfied with the election, well, it is not his duty to say that. he should keep his mouth shut about it altogether and let the people over there decide what to do. because if some of the other groups beside the one that gets to take over, a riot will turn out just like in the united states from the ghettos of nomadics and alcoholics and prostituted and people that ruin the society. trying to keep the society honest and pure and not in the corruption and greed and ignorance. host: we will leave it there. guest: i think the situation of 1953 and u.s. involvement has been documented. i have to say a great deal of this was coming

week in iran. was it too timid? those comments come from sunderland's a gram. he -- those comments coming from senator lindsay graham. we will show you his reaction. >> certainly moving in the right direction, but our point is there is a monumental event going on in iran and the president of the united states is supposed to lead the free world, not follow it. other nations have been more outspoken. i hope we will hear more of this because young men and women taken to the streets in tehran need our support, the signs are in english, they are basically asking for us to speak up on their behalf and i appreciate what the president said yesterday, but he has been timid and pass of more than i would like and i hope the will continue to speak truth to power. >> you know the white house said in response, they say they don't want to become the players in this fight an act to limit the protesters seem like they are tools of the united states. henry kissinger agrees. >> well, these people and not told anyone.

iran has defied the united states, the u.n. security council, the iaea and continues its quest for nuclear technology. . it would pose a grave danger to the united states. focusing on iran should be a top priority of the united states congress and every minute we wait to address this issue, the world becomes a more dangerous place. the state department has not had an authorization bill since fiscal year 2003 and has continued to operate and while the authorization is important, stopping iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is far more important. the republican motion to recommit would replace the authorization bill with the iran refined petroleum sanctions bill that mr. berman introduced earlier this year, along with congresswoman ros-lehtinen. this bill would impose badly needed sanctions on iran. we feel that this bill is the right way to proceed and should be acted on immediately. the legislation currently has 155 co-sponsors, with wide bipartisan support. this legislation would mandate the state department to open immediate

doing what it is doing in iran, you know -- doing. and iran, you know? you cannot do this from the point of view of negotiations. host: what would you advise the president to do to change his status as a paper tiger? caller: they are terrorists. he needs to label them. he has been calling them people something other than terrorists. label them what they are, terrorists. no. 2, when you say that you are going to do something, follow through. no. 3, he has got to learn to negotiate -- learn to not negotiate with terrorists. remember when we were fighting the british and they would all stand up and we would shoot bali's back and forth? our guys protected themselves behind trees. you have got to learn different schemes of battle. i think that he is a paper tiger and he will not follow through. he has no leadership and i do not see anything. he has not followed through on promises from the campaign trail. host: this week, -- we have this tweet, "iran is a sovereign nation, it has a right to defend itself." brookings, south dakota. bernard, what are your thoug

and iran that is integrated with the world. then there is the generation that fought in the world with iraq. there were famous for their sacrifice during that time. the veterans of that war feel they fought for iran, and they made the sacrifices. the world is dangerous and hostile. that group in the military and in politics is pushing for a more aggressive nationalist militarize iran. then there is the youngest generation, people under 30, who simply want more personal freedom, more equality for women. they are more educated. they see the kind of harsh rule imposed by war veterans. the regime does have considerable -- considerable support from the military and the militia, and from those who still feel the world is a threatening place, and iran has to be strong. host: be read about the domestic economy have been all sorts of problems. following that line of thought, you mentioned the potential for a general strike. that could trigger regime change. an economic tactic. guest: unemployment is very high particularly among the youn

time magazine, iran verses iran. that is the cover story.rom the washington times, violence erupted in protest. from "the new york times," this story and photograph that has been getting a lot of attention over the last 24 hours. "mir hossein mousavi called for a general strike. if arrested, he said that he would be ready for bardem. opposition protesters swore to continue pressing claims of a stolen election. this has been called iran's worst crisis since 1979." from "the washington post," their focus on the media coverage and conflicting accounts coming out. suggesting that mr. mir hossein mousavi was taking a confrontational stance. waiting to hear from you on what is next from iran, the first person is joe on the republican line. massachusetts. caller: unfortunately i think this will be a massacre. there is no other option for the ruling elite in iran. this is a great opportunity for us to get hold of those nuclear weapons in iran. host: ted, democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. i think that this is going to be a

there was no election in iran this year. there has been no election, no democracy and ran for there has been no election in iran for decades. the candidates and winners were picked in advance by the regime. regime. real reform, real democr this regime replies on -- relies on so-called shattered by the protest taking place in iran this week. the brutal nature of the iranian regime is well documented. on tuesday, i had the honor of attending with secretary of state hillary clinton the state hillary clinton the release of t inside iran as a tier 3 country, among the worst, as a regime that does little if anything to prevent men, women, and children from being trafficked for sexual exploitation and involuntary servitude, slavery. likewise, the state of burma's human-rights report for 2008 reported iran's poor human- rights record worsened and it come continue to commit numerous serious abuses. the government severely limited the citizen's right to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections. authorities he

cannot back iran protest. she writes that some conservative politicians and pundits are demanding that obama backed the demonstrators. other was a future president may have to apologize to iranians for mr. obama's lack of involvement just as obama apologized for u.s. involvement in the overthrow of an elected iranian leader. the first call this morning on the president's approach thus far -- lancaster, pa. on the independent line. caller: at the heart of all america's problems in the middle east is america's creation of israel back in 1948 which was essentially an invasion of muslim territory. it has been muslim territory for 1300 years. these jewish people in europe and in north america thought there were entitled to invade palestine. to take over that territory. there has been a war ever since. host: connected to the iranian election? caller: i america does: iran just the way it did not like iraq because they are the biggest enemies of israel. host: a republican as a line from minnesota. caller: good morning

>> yes. >> one more on iran? i will run out of material. >> we will supply the material. >> do you think it is appropriate to have the people -- the iranians coming on july 4. is there thought of taking back the invitation? >> no. >> it is important to have a social dialog? >> we have decided to engage with iran on a number of fronts and we tried many years of isolation and we are after a different path. >> the president keeps saying -- that it is important for the u.s. not to be seen trying to influence iran. but the government is blaming the united states and the british for meddling or making social networking available. by simply saying that they stand with the people. this morning, we heard from the press, essentially asking obama and the state department to say more about this. if this -- is this going to be the pathway? >> what you can see, they are using this as a foil, the great satan, to justify policies and gain public support. we do not want to get into this necessarily, but what you saw over the week

and it's been an opportunity for everyone who thinks about iran and covers iran and is related to iran to stake and pause about this revolution and where it may ago. it's also a relevant moment to be talking about iran because there's a new administration in washington who is reviewing this country's policy on iran. there seems to be a recognition of the fact that the previous administration's policy of ignoring and belittling iran has been a failure. and there's a sense there may be at least a willings in no, sir consider other ways of dealing with iran and perhaps reaching some sort of place of comfort to talk of the issues that are of mutual interest to these two countries. of course, there's an election coming up in iran later this year, in june. it's a presidential election and it will be a profoundly important one. certainly, for iranians everything that matters will be at stake. their relations with the outside world, the economy, and how the government conducts itself and how iranians and their daily lives feel the presence of the state. so for all these reasons, i think it's q

overture to iran in the context of the u.s./iran contra affair. we had the removal of one ayatollah as the designated successor of khamenei in 1989. but seriously shook the regime. we have a serious rift over whether to end the iran/iraq war in 1987 and 1988. there are many senior figures who said no, iran should continue in 1999 we had major student riots, several killed. just in 2004 we had that the guardians -- basically disqualified all the major reformists candidates to the parliament. there were sit-ins, various protests right from within the regime. rifts are not new. rafsanjani was a key figure in many of these and he is a traditional, back-room operator. he tends to lose elections. he didn't win in 1989 and in 1993 but that was after khomeni died. people were just looking for continuity. after he left office in 1997 he has consistently lost. he lost to ahmadinejad in 1995. he is not popular. he is an underground, back-room operator. all of the senior figures, the reason why i think there will contain these and he'll these rifts is because

the second thing -- iran is very important. at the beginning of last century and brought the first constitutional revolution, the creation of a modern civilization. at the end of the century you brought theocracy. at the beginning of this century a running people are using democratic, non-violent means -- iran in people. that is to bring about a pluralistic iran and it will have long-reaching effects. host: here's analysis from glenn with this headline. what do you think about what you have heard from the administration so far? guest: i do believe that intervention of support of one group against another is not helpful as a strategy. at the same time, the u.s. should be nuanced because the support of millions of people who were peacefully pouring of into the streets and demanding an end to dictatorship and asking for freedom of expression and of their rights should be supported. there is a difference between support and intervention. sometimes the two are blurred and should not be. definitely -- you see all the suns with the ir

they're going to be discussions that continue around iran pose a nuclear program. -- and iran's nuclear program. i think we're going to have to see how that plays itself out in the days and weeks ahead. on iraq, obviously any time there is a bombing in iraq, we are concerned. anytime there is loss of innocent life or the loss of military personnel, we grieve for their families. it makes us pay attention. i will tell you that if you look at the overall trend, despite some of these high-profile bombings, iraq pose a security situation has continued to dramatically improve. when i speak to general cody are now or our ambassador in a rock, -- when i speak to the general or our ambassador in iraq, i think there is still some work to do. the government is not only going to have to continue to strengthen its security forces, it is also of have to engage in the kind of political give-and- take leading up to the national elections that we have been talking about for quite some time. i have not seen as much political progress as i would like to see. there are always going to be -- let me not say

in iran. the iranian people deserve a democracy that counts every vote and treats its citizens with the utmost dignity. they deserve to trust their own government. however, these are not free and fair elections by any stretch of the imagination. and it's our imperative to speak out whenever and wherever our freedom is oppressed. frankly, we have honest differences with the iranian government no mat whore is elected. any iranian government that speaks nuclear weapons is a threat to the united states and our allies. that's why the united states has not taken either side this in this conflict. it is for the iranians to choose who leads them. indeed this struggle belongs to them. however, the message we send today is, the world is watching. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. campbell. the speaker pro tem

>> [inaudible] -- about iran? >> yes, she has. >> on china -- >> one more on iran. >> i have several more. >> i'm going to run out of material. [laughter] >> this isn't a frivolous question. do you think it is purported to have iranians come to the july 4th parties under the circumstances? is there any thought given to the rescinding the invitations? >> there is no fault rescinding the invitations, >> it's appropriate to have a social dialogue? >> we have made the strategic decision to engage on a number of runs with iran and we tried many years of isolation and we are pursuing a different path now. >> the president keeps saying -- >> i don't know. >> the president keeps saying it's important for the u.s. to not be seen as trying to influence events inside iran when we or another but the iranians government has begun blaming not just the u.s. but also the british, french and the germans for meddling offer making social net working tools available, by just simply saying they stand with the people accusing them of m

it is carefully targeted to focus only on financial ties with iran's energy sector to hit iran where it is economically most vulnerable and the bill includes a sunset provision to lift this authorization once the president certifies, certifies, that iran has ceased providing support for acts of international terrorism and has ceased pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. i am proud to have assumed the lead democratic role on this legislation tacking over for president obama, then senator obama, who served the lead role when he was in the congress. mr. president, secondly, let me also take a brief moment to comment on the iran refined petroleum sanctions act of which i'm proud to be a cosponsor with the majority of the senate. the bill would clarify existing legal ambiguity by authorizing the president to sanction foreign firms involved in supplying iran with refined gasoline and or assisting aran with increasing its refining capacity. iran is forced to import as much as 40% of its annual gasoline consumption due to the fact that the refining infrastructure was destroyed during the i

very quickly we realized it's not just the iran program in isolation, but as ilan said once iran opens this door, this pandora's box, there will be a cascade of nuclear proliferation in the middle east, and that's not exactly the most stable region to begin with. so i'll just quickly coover the ten recommendations we came up with in this report, and if you're watching at home it's available on our web site and also in our iran briefing room which is a web site attached to the heritage.org web site. our first recommendation was to adopt a protect and defend strategy aimed at neutralizing iran's nuclear deter rent. we need to strengthen deter reasons against the threat once it emerges by deploying enhanced missile defenses, especially to our allies in the region, israel and other countries threatened by iran. the u.s. navy also needs to be ready to deploy missile defense cruisers at appropriate places and times in the event of a crisis. and given iran's growing ballistic missile capability, we think it will be very prudent to invest in missile defense. not only for regionally-deployed an

and iran. someone referred to it as a grand agenda. it is not so important what you call it, but it is important that you do it. i am concerned that they want to reach out diplomatically and that it will not be strategically bounded. host: should iran have nuclear weapons of their own? guest: they say they do not want nuclear weapons. there is a dispute going on about the nature of their civil nuclear program and whether that is ultimately aimed at giving iran a nuclear weapon or not. i think that what is important here to remember is that certainly at this point, the idea that iran is going to give up its civil nuclear program, including uranium enrichment, as part of the deal with united states is a pipe dream. what we will have to do is basically be willing to accept that iran is going to have civil nuclear activities and work with iran to implement international verification mechanisms through the international atomic energy agency that would give the world confidence that the risks associated with those activities are being contro

ambassador, you're very familiar with iran, obviously, and the squeography of iran and we've heard for the last few years, especially the 8 years of the bush administration, and the right wing elements in israel that perhaps we should bomb, carpet bomb, the nuclear facilities if they confine them in iran, and as a former ambassador there, is it not true that if the west gave israel the green light or actually participated in a bombing of the so-called nuclear facilities, wouldn't iran immediately, with their mobile missile systems, totally blockade the strait of hormuz, which would shut off about 50% of the world's oil, raise the price of oil up to $400 or $500 a barrel, and in addition, free up the revoluntionary volunteers from iran to take on our $130,000-member army currently next door in iraq and next door in afghanistan? host: ambassador dalton. guest: i agree with you the consequences of a strike on iranian nuclear facilities in the present circumstances could be much as you suggest. it would be an extremely negative and dangerous thing to do, but there's an underlying issue her

arrived in iran. arrived in iran. iranians need to iranians need to know who stand with them and who stand against them. as much as the people demand that, elements starting this regime know they can no longer -- they also have to make the position clear. it ties back to what i was telling you. the element of constant pressure on the system to bring this movement favoring the likelihood of more peeling away from the regime rather than the reverse. this is why it is so critical for the iranians to know that throughout this entire process, and as i say, there may be some at san flows, but the unconditionalebbs and flows -- ebbs and flows, but the unconditional elements of this needs to be known. we have seen some internal fragmentation. >> i am from a neighboring area. the streets of teheran, tehran -- of iran, tehran, because the official figures to not seem to reflect the real level. and how the events going to develop? >> it is very, very difficult to have an actual headcount, because some of the victims' bodies are

there are some elements of hezbollah in iran.cond question, what is your opinion about mousavi exactly? >> well, the regime will obviously have the ability to call upon proxy's it has set up for -- from years ago. hizbollah in lebanon, for instance. speaking of hezbollah, there are elements that are recruiting, as far as the venezuela and colombia members for hezbollah. can i call them back for additional help? evidently, they are doing that in some cases. it has been reported that hamas elements have been called by the regime for suppression inside iran right now. it is no longer question of any particular candidate, it is about the sanctity of the ballot box and sovereignty and the legitimacy of the regime as a whole. the fate of people like mr. mousavi lies, in my opinion, as it clear demarcation from the regime. you cannot on the one hand be a candidate of people demanding justice and peace of the the regime -- demanding justice vis- a-vis the regime and upheld the system. that will be the question of whether or not he has ac

iran has the same interest. going back to 2001, there was effective cooperation between the united states and iran in an effort that produced the current government. we will be waiting to see that once we get through this, that is one of the areas where we will see what iran has -- is prepared to do. we have the ministerial meeting coming up next week on the margins of that. it will be focused on afghanistan and pakistan. iran has been invited to attend that meeting. we will see if they accept. >> [unintelligible] >> i am not aware of it. >> there appears to be a significant division within the administration when it comes to darfur, and whether or not there is a genocide occurring there. yesterday, they say they are seeing the remnants of genocide implying that the worst violence is behind the region. on monday, ambassador rice -- can you clarify where the administration stands on that? >> edit there is no question that genocide has taken place in darfur. we continue to characterize the events as genocide. we w

the president densey in iran matters, people should give a chance to iran to pursue the path to dem crassy host: can i ask you, if it does happen that mr. ahmadinejad wins, how will that path continue in your mind? caller: i think he will see a lot of iranians are not happy. i think he will method rate his stance and be more a meanable to make a certain deal with the west, particularly the united states and his views will be moderate towards israel. host: we had a reporter join us at the beginning of the program saying in her words, he was still pretty defiant as far as making changes in his policies and certain attitudes that he holds. she said she didn't see that changing. caller: i believe that's right. mr. ahmadinejad is a very hard-headed individual. the reality will force him to change. he's going to be hearing from supreme leaders and others in the government that he needs to method rate and tone down and slow down his harsh language and approach the west and solve the issues iran has with the west. there is a zanger that iran might be attacked by israel and america and a combinatio

you mentioned the north korea-iran formulation and iran, saying we don't want, don't seek and the religious connotation, but the same nix report you mentioned in 2007 argued with high confidence that iran was seeking ostensibly did want nuclear weapons and so how do we prevent them from prevaricating and drawing out negotiations such as they have been doing and there by pursuing the technical timeline, such as a time if and when they assess they want nuclear weapons. thank you. >> first of all, the report said they were seeking nuclear weapons at one point. >> were seeking. >> were. were and they were not at this present. >> said they were keeping the options open. >> that is a rather different thing from what you said earlier. and they are keeping their options open, that is rather different and i think the point of the e negotiations is that these options are at some point closed. that is the whole pointed of the exercise. the negotiations, presumably have as their objective, an arrangement whereby we have confidence that what they are ostensibly claiming is true, because the option is fo

iran should be no exception. how honored i am to be with a long line of heroes here who are speaking on behalf of the iranian people, who may feel that they have no voice, but they are being listened to internationally. for decades, the people of iran have been denied the most basic fundamental human rights and civil liberties by an impressive -- and oppressive iranian regime which uses a sham process and candidates handpicked by the ruling apparatus. real reform and real democracy were never an option. the machine relies on so-called elections to provide them with a veneer of legitimacy, but that aside has been shattered by iran -- in iran by the protesters that took to the streets this week. the state department's human rights record noted iran's human rights record worsened and it committed -- continued to commit serious violations. it severely limited citizens tried to change their government peacefully through fear, free and fair elections, using smear tactics and fear and intimidation to try to squelch the

that newsmaker is the former crown prince of iran, the st. -- the son of the late shah of iran. mr. pahlavi,

in iran. the iranian people deserve a democracy that counts every vote and treats its citizens with the utmost dignity. they deserve to trust their own government. these are not free and fair elections by piece -- by any stretch of the imagination. it is our duty to speak out wherever freedom is suppressed, whether by our allies or by our foes. any iranian government that seeks a nuclear weapon and spread to state-sponsored terrorism as a threat to the united states and our allies. that is why the united states has taken either side in this conflict. it is for the iranians to choose who leads them. the struggle belongs to them. the message we send today is, the world is watching. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and i yield back the balance of my time. >> i am pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from california, a member of the budget and financial services committee. >> i think the lady from florida. this country has always stood with those around the world yearning f

all his rivals have been attacking him for what they say is humiliating iran, attacking iran's dignity, undermining its dignity through turning iran into a state so the nuclear program isn't addressed directly because all the candidates say that they are for the nuclear program and that they would not send uranium enrichment as u.n. security council resolution have been demanding. but more generally, foreign policy is a major issue in the election. >> what will do the six debates play in the election? >> well, there was a very heated debate last night between mahmoud ahmadinejad and mir-hossein mousavi, and i think that this is the first for iran. iranians have never seen such debate. and i think that it will make a difference, although, you know, it was difficult last night to decide whether one of them had won the the date. but i think that it does introduce them to the candidates much, much better. you have to remember that the rifles to the president have only been given tv time for the couple of weeks before that the president essentials and had on television and all media. >> tel

i think another issue to put iran in context is that iran is not the iran of the 1980's. during the war with iraq, iran, to to a situation where they were a low work middle and come -- a lower middle income. their government had social policies and policies with a number of economic relations. there was the unification of the exchange rate, but what it said was that prior to this, if you had contacts with the regime, you got to buy dollars or euros at much lower exchange rates than someone would on the local market. by unifying the exchange rate, they eliminated the extraordinary opportunity for corruption and level the playing field. that ended up improving economic efficiency and help spur a steady growth -- helped spur a steady growth. these reforms, many of them have blasted cut -- have blasted, -- have blastlasted. these foundations are owned by some of the religious establishment. we have seen more distortions in the economy. growth has been rapid, but much less so than you would see in other countries in the gulf and there has been all lot of losses in terms of eff

i have maintained that if change -- if there is a need for change in iran, given the history of iran,i mean, we have had past experiences of -- we just marked the century of the 1963 uprising, the revolution 30 years ago. if there needs to be a change in iran, it has to be from within. it has to be the iranian people on a daily basis have to live the life that they're living, calling for it. i know it is extremely difficult to do that in an oppressive regime where they go out and unfortunately at times, do the kind of things they do to put down these kind of concerns and questions, even if it is in a peaceful manner, which generally it has been in the past week. be that as it may. for it to have a longstanding impact, i think it really has to be done internally. on the other hand -- again, having been here, understanding the way the politics of this country and particularly the hell, i can see why there would be these movements to try to come out in support of a certain group, for a number of different reasons. you know, i think we are all aware of how congress works. there are a numb

the streets of iran were on fire. when khomeini took power and on then on april 1st, 1979 he declared that iran was going to be the first islamic republic. the first country in human history to be governed by shari'a law, by the laws of the koran. now, on that 30th anniversary, iran marked that time, israel had a change of network on the day before. benjamin netten -- nettan yahue was sworn in. i had the privilege for working for him back in the year 2000. i announced i am a failed political consultant. i was on his comeback team in the year 2000. now, do the math. it took nine years for him to come back and when i was with him last year, i noticed he didn't ask me to come back and help him. [laughter] >> so that's why he won. but he faces an extraordinary challenge and i don't envy the role that he has now. his first interview that he gave as prime minister was to the atlantic magazine, an "american" magazine they put up on their website right away. the headline was this, he said to obama, stop iran or i will. [appla

how do you envision the future of iran? will it be an overthrow of hypocrisy -- will it be an overthrow of the theocracy? but will do you envision for yourself and the family? -- what role do you envision yourself and the family? >> as a partially explain earlier, the situation has grown just -- has grown beyond just the result of an election and a candidate. most iranians are quite aware of the fact that having always been limited to prescreened candidates of the regime's choice as to who they get to vote for, to begin with, they were stuck in a position of having to choose between a lesser of two evils, or multiple evils, whenever it is. it presents an opportunity for such prescreened candidates to join with the masses, and it would be difficult for us not to anticipate for caller: calleat t we would be faced with an impasse. you cannot at the same time hold allegiance to the regime and claim that you are with the people. a decision will have to be made pretty soon. the legitimacy of such candidates is the direct result o

our guest will focus on iran. he will be jack goldstone of george mason university at about 745 a.m. eastern. in the meantime we will get an update on iran now joining us by phone from to buy. -- from dubai. is the middle east correspondent for the los angeles time. when did yoyou last leave iran? guest: friday morning. the situation in iran is extremely tense right now. it appears the protests have died down. there was a series of mass protests as well as sporadic rioting, clashes in the streets among security forces and demonstrators as well as the sydney-official pro-government militias. -- semi-official pro-hamas militias. there is a sweeping crackdown. supporters of the mousavi . there are many people being harassed. many people have heard the news. yes debate eight staffers of the british embassy, local iranian staffers have been arrested and presumably some continue to be jailed on charges or accusations that they were fomenting this recent unrest. host: it says the government is deeply concerned about the

you mentioned the north korea and iran formulation and in iran there by saying we don't want, we don't seek the religious -- connotation but the same report you mentioned in 27 argued with confidence iran was seeking and did want nuclear weapons so how do we prevent them from the assimilating and chewing out the negotiations such as they've been doing their by pursuing the technical time on such as the time if and when they do ss the debt they want nuclear weapons? thank you. >> first of the reports said they were seeking nuclear weapons. >> were seeking, correct. >> and they were not at the present. >> you said they were keeping options open. >> that is different from what he said earlier. that's right. they are keeping their options open. that is different. the point of the negotiations is that these options are at some point closed. that is the point of the negotiations. the have as their object of an arrangement whereby we have confidence that what they are ostensibly claiming because the option is closed and that's the whole objection of the oxides. whether that will succeed or no

do you think it's good to keep iran in isolation? >> jaw i think perhaps too much was made of the cooperation between israel and arab states. i mean, i'm -- i'm not sure i completely understand your question of -- i mean how the two are linked. >> well, if israel feels a threat from iran and that's why it's cooperating with mad rid arabs so keeping the threat of iran alive might have some benefits. to resolve some conflicts in the region. is that a true assumption or no? >> that's an interesting take. you know, i mean, i think, you know, our interviews in the region, when we looked at, at arab perceptions of, of the iranian threat, one kuwaiti rights activist said you know address the palestinian issue and you'll defang iran in the region. and i think much of its mobilizing capability, the vocabulary that it uses is is related to the arab-israeli issue. it's not completely and i think the fundamental issue is governance in societies and the gap there, the tension there is often expressed in the terms of the arab-israeli conflict. tha

are there elements of hezbollah in iran? and a second question, what is your opinion of mouse wie -- mousawi? >> well, the regime will have the ability to call on things they set up years ago. speaking of hezbollah, there are elements that are recruiting as far as venezuela and colombia members for them. so it is not just in the region. this can they call them for help? evidently they are in some cases. i don't have any specific information on hezbollah, but it has been reported that hamas elements have been called in to help with repression inside iran right now. as i told you, it is no longer a question of a particular candidate. it is about the contingent sinthity of the ballot box, and the legitimacy of the regime as a whole. the fate of people like him lies in my opinion as a clear demarcation from the regime. you cannot on the one hand be a candidate of the people who are demanding justice and at the same time say you are there to preserve the system. this no longer is tenable. what answer he gives to that question wou

it is not an issue in iran. the revolutionary guards are in much more powerful positions then we think. if that is the case, we are moving towards a dictatorship. we are moving into not a military dictatorship, but they dictatorship of thugs. the military is completely out. the past 72 hours, there have been military maneuvers. the army, the navy, the air force -- i have no idea what that means. the military is having maneuvers. if we're going to go towards a dictatorship of the thugs, that is very frightening for us and for israel. i do not know what israel is going to do. i think discipline is waiting. we do not know which direction we are going. >> we are both at a crossroads and out of time. let me underline the fact that one of the themes of the presentations is how much we do not nel. being -- we do not know. being in that situation, we are best device to collect as much information as we can and not take any action right away. please join me in thanking our speakers and thank you all for attending. [appla

some in iran -- iran government are trying to avoid that debate by accusing the united states and others in the west of instigating protests over the election. these accusations are false. they are an attempt to distract people from what is truly taking place within the borders of iran. this strategy of using old tensions as scapegoats of other countries will not work anymore. this is not about the united states or the west. this is about the people of iran and the future that they will choose. the iranian people can speak for themselves. that is what has happened over the last few days. in 2009, no iron fist is strong enough to shut off the rest of the world. despite the i iranians governed to expel journalists, powerful images have made their way to us through cell phones, computers, so we watched with the albanian people are doing. this is what we have witnessed. we have seen the time this dignity of thousands of iranians marching in silence. we have seen people of all ages risk everything to make sure that their votes are counted and heard. we as a courageous women stand up to the br

he is the former crown prince of iran and the son of the former shah of iran. pahlavi, welcome back to the national press club. if i say welcome back because he has spoken here at least twice before. one of them was on march 4, 2006 when he discussed the situation in iran at that time. i was to thank for rolled, mr. pahlavi and all of the people whose names i cannot pronounced correctly. mr. pahlavi will give us his view on the post-election demonstrations in iran and the reaction by the government and the threat that they pose to the ruling clerics. he thinks fayette show a change in the attitude of the iranian people to the regime and what the west should do about it. as he speaks, he will take your question. please mock-lined up at the microphones. when you ask a question, please give your name and affiliation. we have this room until of a clock 30. he will be available for one-on- one interviews -- 11:30. he will be available for one-on- one interviews. please add your names to the signing sheet outside. -- sign in sheet outside. >> thank you for your time

the leaders of iran, not the iranian people, you have to make that distinction, but the leaders of iran, mahmoud ahmadinejad, president -- i want you to say that five times quickly with me -- i'm just kidding. i want you to call him mahmoud-genocide. [laughter] there will be no spelling tests. these men and they have surrounded themselves believe the end of the world is near. they believe that the arrival or the appearance of the islamic messiah, known as the 12th imam are believe his appearance on earth is eminem. the actual word they are using is imminent. furthermore they believe the way to hasten or speed up the islamic messiah is to annihilate the two countries, israel as they describe as the little satan, and the united united states they describe as the great satan. to quote we've drawn together and put in the book i want to share with you so you understand a little bit what they are singing in their own words. now this is from january, 21, nine months before 9/11. i happened to be fighting the last jihad. iranian supreme leader ayatollah khamenei said it is the mission of the is