we look forward to iran in response to our engagement. we want to bring about a concrete -- a comprehensive peace to israel and the neighbors in the region. they're right to exist in peace and security is undeniable and non-negotiable. hothey should be able to live in peace and security. arab states must do their part to support the palestinian people as they develop the institutions that will sustain their state. they must recognize israel's legitimacy and in doing so choose progress over a self- defeating focus on the past. the u.s. will never do anything to undermine israel's security. we do not believe that these two objectives are incompatible. we believe they are critical elements of a comprehensive and effort to secure peace. i hope you enjoy your first visit to the united states. i look forward to continuing our conversation and working with you more on these issues. >> madam secretary, i like to say to you how much the government of israel appreciates your support of israel. we value your friendship greatly. you made many contrib

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 combinati

and terrorist groups make voyages to iran to receive training at unspecified locations. this is the regime we are talking about. and this week the true colors of that regime are on broad display. we must rally the world around the cause of the iranian people, and i urge the administration, i urge president obama to follow the lead of this house to speak out on behalf of the iranian people and their quest for freedom and human rights. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: yes, mr. speaker. i want to yield myself 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. berman: the gentleman, for whom i have great respect, the minority whip, spoke about america's moral commitment to speak out on behalf of the people yearning for freedom. we have an even higher moral commitment and that is to the things that help extend and expand the extent of human freedom around the world, and it is in that context that i know that this house and this administration are pursuing t

but the fact regime change is coming to iran is it seems to me obvious. >> host: we had an interesting hour this morning with a woman that route reading malida in tehran and one of the callers talked about the iran and oil industry and how much chinese interests there were and the geopolitics of china's presence in iran. >> guest: china being a member of the security council and having these close commercial relations with iran, this is one reason why we are never going to get in my judgment meaningful sanctions to prevent iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. so the good news i have just given, regime change is coming to iran. the bad news is the regime, whenever it is will four or five years have nuclear weapons and we will have to learn how to detour iran until internal evolution of the society makes it a pacific condemnation. no one would care if belgium got nuclear weapons because the belgians are happy, cheerful, peaceful people. >> host: we are spending an hour with george will this morning. he's a fan of baseball and has written to topics on it. we are throwing pitches and he's

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

the revolution was in fact launched in order to have a great islamic iran and influential iran to be able to lead the pack to and important message to the world but in solving the problems of the country and in order to achieve the proper place i think there are two ways there can be to managements in this regard. one is on the basis of adventurism and instability and raising the slogans, imaginative moves and also superstition on the basis of selfishness, self-centered miss and not abiding by the rule of law and also on the basis of going to the extremes i am going to forward my discussion on the basis of this framework. okay, another method is logical and professional moves away from superstition and also on the basis of faithfulness and relying on the wisdom and being futuristic and also on the basis of moderation. if we want to have a powerful iran, i think that the second method is more suitable. we have to move on the basis of the second methodology. indeed, she talked about plans and i have written my plans and programs and i think i have three debates people like to just watc

like iran does, then it is reasonable to listen to voices coming from within iran itself as to whether or not those standards have been met, so, in my persons, iranians don't want violent change. they want peaceful reform leading to a stronger representation of the democratic elements in their constitution in decision making in their country, so that seems to me a very reasonable position, an we should be cawb tious about expressing clear support for that at any one time, there is no doubt that iranians want that form of peaceful revolution and they have a right to it. host: mike from colorado writes do you think the moral authority of the ayatollah and the clerics has been diminished as a consequence of the crackdown? guest: yes, i do. i think that the breaking of the taboo on criticism of the supreme leader is significant. i think the he refusal of the candidate who stood against ahmadinejad to stand against the outcome as presented by the election authorities is unprecedented and the fact is that it is the supreme leader's call, which is now two weeks old, for the results to be acce

. -- let it be known to the iran yeens and there is a pre-disposition on the part of some to argue that the formula, that all option are on the table ought to be emphasized which is a say to say to the iranians if you do not accommodate force may be used against you. there is certainly a pre-disposition which perhaps has been even intensified not intentionally, but de facto by something that obama said to put a time limit on the negotiations. and certainly, there is external pressure in favor of that from the israelis. and the president was actually extremely clever in the way he fashioned his acceptance of that suggestion, but, in a manner which is so callfied if he so chooses he can also ignore it. nonetheless there is an effort obviously on the part of some to say he has accepted time limits and the time limit is the end of the year. and last but not least there are still inclinations to combine entry into the negotiations with something which in terms of the -- diplomacy amounts to explicit insults, namely repetitive charges of the iranians with active pursuit of terrorism, and, alt

we will take you live now to the national press club concerning iran. it is the morning news event. the speaker is an advocate for the campaign for civil disobedience against the regime in iran and will call for a secular parliamentarians and thademocracy there. . . [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]. . . dÑ@ÑdÑdÑúÑ@Ñ@ÑdÑ@Ñ@Ñ@ÑdÑdÑúÑdÑ@Ñ ññññlÑ ññññññññ ññññññññññññññ >> waiting here at the national press club for remarks from iran's former crown prince, reza pahlavi. coming up in a couple of hours, president barack obama will be making a formal announcement, welcoming the weekend agreement by the pharmaceutical industry to help close a gap in prescription drug coverage under medicare. we will have that live for you as well. now to the national press club. >> i am a former u.s. a foreign service officer, a fortunate enough to be stationed in a a speakers country buca. before introducing the speaker, some announcements -- there will be a

north korea and iran to advance their nuclear ambitions? thank you. >> i think it is important to distinguish between the two countries and what they have been doing of late. north korea's actions over the last several months have been extraordinarily provocative. and they have made no bones about the fact that they are testing nuclear weapons, testing missiles that potentially would have inter-continental capacity. and in fact, we're not intending to continue a policy of rewarding provocation. the parties that are involved in the six-party talks, we have contacted. they issued a very clear statements and are now in the process of working on a very clear resolution condemning north korea's actions. you have not seen china and russia respond as forcefully in the past on these issues, because i think there is an indication that they recognize how destabilizing north korea's actions have been. my preference is always to use a diplomatic approach. but diplomacy has to involve the other side engaging in a serious way and trying to solve problems

needs to continue to pursue iran as if there is no palestinian israeli conflict and then if they really think it is important to pursue the conflict as if there is no iran beverly pursue both on separate tracks and not make the link there should not be linkage. if it is an. >> two go after both duet but i was in this specter of every nuclear-weapons should overshadow everything at this point and i should be the focus of the u.s. at this point. >> i think that is about all we have time for so let me thank jonathan schanzer, the author of a "hamas v. fatah". lemme think c-span and thanks booktv. i am cliff may for the and the foundation for intensive democracies -- again, thank you all of you. [applause] >> jonathan schanzer is the deputy executive director of the jurors policy center and a former counter-terrorism alice for the treasury department, the author of "al-qaeda's armies: middle east affiliate groups and the next generation of terror". for more information visit schanzer.pundicity.com. >> de capo press is one of the imprints of the perseus books group annalisa wharf is vice pre

will continue to use all avenues to convince iran to meet its obligations. and with that i will take your questions. >> you have any reason to believe the allegations of fraud are apparent? >> as i said we are concerned by these reports. they are deeply troubling but we are in a position as is the rest of the international community right now, we are in a position or still assessing what went on. it is difficult to assess because there per not in the international monitors. >> right. but it given the developments the run-up to the actual election on friday, was the administration's surprise to the announced results? >> i think as the vice president said on sunday, there was such concern expressed by a number of the candidates that's of course, it led to doubts regarding the election results. >> so you have doubts? >> we do have doubts. >> in the european countries the germans and britons have called for an investigation into the voting irregularities does the united states supports that? >> i have not seen these reports of calling specifically for an investi

there are people in iran who would love not to make about one side and iran versus another but to make this about iran forces the west, iran versus the united states of america. it worked great for years. the president is not going to do that. i think many others, democrat and republican have discussed the wisdom and that stance and the president is quite comfortable with where he is. >> iran is concerned the president has been preaching to everyone in that part of the world including the speech at cairo's a clear message democracy and changes in those part of the world. do you think the president's voices are not being heard and his message because -- changes must part to the common that part of the world and the u.s. or elsewhere. >> i think that the actions the administration has taken and the voice of this president in reaching out, whether it was interviews early in the administration, messages to the people, directly to the people of iran, the speech in cairo. i do think that people have heard the president's message. the president understands five months of activity or an interv

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 number of different reasons that they come up with certain statements such as this one. i am glad, however, that at least it is only to the extent that they're condemning violence against p

who see iran's attempts to acquire a nuclear capability as potentially leading to iran acquiring a nuclear weapon. they're very nervous about that. a nuclear iran, they feel, will definitely destabilize the middle east. that school of thought exists more in the official circles in the middle east, in egypt and saudi arabia, some of the gulf countries. among the populace, it is different feeling. among the populace, they see is real cause nuclear capability -- israel's nuclear capability as the real threat. the president alluded to a nuclear-free world. when he talked specifically about the danger that iran poses in this area, without mentioning israel by name, i think he rubbed some people in the muslim world the wrong way. host: good morning. caller: good morning. just commenting on the previous discussion about the iran issue and nuclear arms, i think in a lot of ways, the iranian issue -- while it is a real issue, it is a diversion, the same way that the iraq war was a diversion away from dealing with terrorism. posted -- focusing so much on iran acquiring nuclear weapons has ignored th

but that these changes are coming to iran is obvious. host: we had a woman who wrote reading alida in tyrann and one talked of the china presence in iran. guest: sure china being a permanent member of the security council, and having these close commercial relations with iran. this is one reason why we won't get meaningful judgments of sanctions of iran. the good news is regime changes are coming to iran. the bad news is the regime whater it is will have nuclear weapons. we will have to learn to deter iran into eternal revolution or the society makes it a pacific nation. no one would care if the belgiums had nuclear weapons because they are peaceful people. host: we have our guest george will and we are throwing baseballs at him and taking the swings. next we have kevin. caller: good morning, this is my first time for years to call, i am batting a thousand this morning. mr. will, i respect your opinion and i believe you are left in the journalism industry that have quality respectively. and here is my concern, i think we have lost sight

thank you. >> i would like to refer to a former question concerning the future of iran. when you look at people who have an important role like mr. mousavi, mr. rafsanjani, mr. kasai me, they are all part of the regime. but this movement go far beyond -- does this movement go far beyond? 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: cal

so they began to cut back and as they began to cut back, specifically, with hamas, iran rushed to fill the void. and began to provide hamas with more funds and more assistance and then by the time the elections took place in january of '06 and sanctions were put in place by the west, it was iran that completely filled whatever, you know, hamas was not getting from outside actors. >> i'll ask you one more question and then i'm going to begin to go to the audience for questions as well even though i have about 30 more questions here and about 40 more in my head and that is you also have at this point and the interesting predicament that saudi arabia and

regime change is coming to iran. the bad news, the regime will, in four or five years, have nuclear weapons. we've got to learn to deter iran until internal evolution of the society makes it a pacific kind of nation. no one would care if belgium got nuclear weapons because the belgians are happy, cheerful, peaceful people. host: we're spending an hour with george will, and our conversation is akin to a baseball game, we're all throw, pitches at him, he's taking swings. let's get a call from kevin. caller: i'm pleased to be on, i'm very happy. i have a very quick comment. mr. will, i respect your opinion, i think you're one of the few intellectuals left in the journalism industry that comes with a quality perspective and empirical data with the things you say. here's my concern. i think we have kind of lost sight of governing our own country. in the bush administration, we were out promoting democracy with weapons, now we have an african american president in office, the rise of this underlying racial disparity in our

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 case of natural evolution. we do not know yet halthat the ayatollahs will not seize control in a hardline wave. if not this week, next week, maybe even next year, but people change in iran like i feel that would have changed in iraq. this is almost a statement of how mistaken our former president and defense secretary were when they undertook the war in iraq. ultimately, iran will go in a way that will be more humane. i hope that it not -- it does not take 20 years. host: this front page of "the new york times" photograph is from tehran. we have been monitoring video on youtube, some of it over the weekend. we are not absolutely certain of the dates. we will show you some of the pictures as we listen to john from maryland. caller: that democrat that just spoke, his analysis of the situation is totally wrong. i think that the iranians, if they are able to overthrow the regime, a h

troops to be in iran or anything like that. it is unclear exactly what the republicans are looking for and why what the president has said so far is weak, and then stopping short of a call for a regime change which would be complicated and a part of the world. i think it is just a big, not out of hand. the president said yesterday he believes john mccain is passionate, but he does not agree with them. host: is he doing with foreign policy compared to his domestic agenda? guest: i think the american public has a lot of confidence in what he is doing. he is getting high marks in the polls. higher than in some of his domestic policy, particularly his managing of the federal budget. health care now is on capitol hill. i believe there are five different committees writing this legislation now people are concerned about this complicated subject. he addressed that yesterday also. at this time many of us are hunting for an ideology. the bush administration had a very clear sense of the way that it saw the world -- freedom as represente

but just to reiterate, there is a path available to iran in which their sovereignty is respected, their traditions, their culture, their faith is respected but one in which they are part of a larger community that has responsibilities and operates according to norms and international rules that are universal. we don't know how they're going to respond yet and that's what we're waiting to see. >> should there be consequences for what's happened so far? >> i think that the international community is, as i said before, bearing witness to what's taking place. and the iranian government should understand that how they handle the dissent within their own country generated indigenously, internally from the iranian people, will help shape the tone not only for iran's future but alsoity relationship to other countries. since we're on iran, i know niko pitny is here. i know that you and all across the internet we've been seeinging a lot of reports coming directly out of iran. i know that there may actually be questions from people in iran who are communicating through the internet. do you have a

the good news is regime changes are coming to iran. the bad news is the regime whatever it is will have nuclear weapons. we will have to learn to deter iran into eternal revolution or the society makes it a pacific nation. no one would care if the belgiums had nuclear weapons because they are peaceful people. host: we have our guest george will and we are throwing baseballs at him and taking the swings. next we have kevin. caller: good morning, this is my first time for years to call, i am batting a thousand this morning. mr. will, i respect your opinion and i believe you are left in the journalism industry that have quality respectively. and here is my concern, i think we have lost sight of governing our country. with the bush administration and promoting democracy with weapons and now we have an african-american president inos. -- in office. and this underlying disparity has manifested itself. i see a problem, not a dichotomy but hypocrisy, the crimes that have taken our country down has been executives, predominantly white executive

for 15 years the european said we want to criticize the iran aunt raise issues that iran is not observing human rights. asking two questions about the holocaust into questions, to questions-- the whole human rights system in the west. they are crying, the israelis are shouting in the people in the west are shutting. some people say i have rans dignity is being pushed. how can you say that? how can we wait till the enemy comes to our soil? today the threat is not directed at iran. of course all of this is thanks to people steadfastness and the sacrifices of the great nation of iran, and the leadership, and i am surprised-- takes a trip outside of adarand and can see how he is greeted by governments and nations. how many performances did he make as prime minister? was iran humiliated then? in the eyes of our willing powers, it was not so. if mr. mousavi thinks we should try to favor and please three or four major powers this is against the late imam's ideas and the values of the islamic revolution. if we are going to have ties with the great masses of people and governments around the world

>> i wanted to ask you to examine the scenario of iran that doesn't come back to the u.s. and agree to negotiations even after the civil down after the elections. but should the u.s. attitude be? hillary clinton already spoke of crippling sanctions. haven't we some how box ourselves and all ready with comments like that and even the dateline of the end of the year? what should the response be in this country if they don't come back and then just a question about obama speech yesterday there's been a lot of criticism that he was a bit too squishy in terms of his use of language he talked about violent extremism. he never talked about islamic extremism. he didn't talk about terrorism. did he go to far on the other side in his effort to reach out? thank you. >> well, if iran chooses not to come to the negotiating table, then it will set in motion consequences we do not need to talk about before they take that decision. i certainly am not so and i need a person has to think if they don't come to the table it should have no effect whatsoever. it will have an effect obviously bu

you have to understand in my view, north korea is a test lab for what iran is trying to do. north korea is desperately in need of cash. iran is desperately in need of data. will their nuclear weapons work? will their ballistic missiles work? they're working hand in glove with north korea and so if this missile launch goes off, it's not a threat because of north korea's potential capacity to reach the western coast shores of the united states, but because it's data is likely to get regime that's talking in this matter about the end of the world and bringing it back. you have to understand if iran gets nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to deliver them, mahmoud ahmadinejad could do in about 6 minutes what it took adolph hitler six years to do and to kill 6 million jews and that is not his major objective. it's one of his objectives but israel as i mentioned is only the little satan in shia muslim eschaology. the united states is the great satan so israel is an objective but we are the ultimate objective because iran's leader receives us as an epicenter of christiandom.

in trying to -- to iran. in trying to see what is going on in iran. this country will not change. it is not a democracy. we don't know what went on. it is another time to be tough on iran. iran is a real threat. iran is not becoming more moderate. they're not reforming. this is what we should focus o not the sentiment. host: republicans on the line from florida. caller: i have a couple of things i want to address. one of them is i believe that if he wants the respect from the rest of the world, he needs to stand strong on to his beliefs, stop giving in. israel head given in to every whim of every president and they have gotten nothing back. they gave up gaza unilaterally. they have terrorists on their border. what would united states do if they had rockets flying every day, day after day where they have to build underground schools and everything? that is number one. everything they have ever given the central palestinians -- i'm a little nervous. there is no such thing as a palestinian. it was palestine a long time ago. [inaudible] was a palestinian. anyone that lived there was

we look forward to iran's response to our offers of engagement. of course, we also focused on efforts to bring about a comprehensive peace between israel and her neighbors in the region. israel's right to exist in peace and security is undeniable and nonnegotiable. both israelis and palestinians deserve to live in peace an security in two states that will entail both parties fulfilling their obligations under the road map. building on the peace initiative arab states must do their part to support the palestinian people thand musthey must recog israel's legitimacy and choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past. the united states will never do anything to undermine i's security, and the united states also supports a viable palestinian state. we do not believe that these two objectives are incompatible. in fact, we believe that they are both critical elements of a comprehensive and secure peace. mr. lieberman, i hope that you enjoy your first visit to the united states as your country's foreign minister and i look forward to continuing o

i've been to iran. my family is from iran. the outcome is very important to me with talk of possible invasion of iran and that type of thing. i agree with the caller from tehran university. i don't believe this in any way that ahmadinejad would lighten his stance. i believe the reporter from iran is correct. he is who he is and that's the stancele take because he's a media hound. that gets him on the map. i really do believe that there is a desire for change. the youth, the kids are just as western as any other country. my cousins all know the latest rp music and are up on fashion. you don't see this through most of the publications you see here in the united states. it's very much underground but it is there. host: question for you. we had a caller saying the average american may not be interested in this issue. caller: i totally disagree with that statement. that's really sad. this does affect our lives. it's an economic issue. if the economy stabilizes in iran and we are able to do business there. that means the middle clas

critically to the youth of iran, i want them to know that we in the united states to not want to make any decisions for the armenians but we do believe we do not want -- we do not want to make any decisions for the iranians, but we are watching and supportive. host: this morning jeffrey jedmund, whose radio station is funded by congress wrote tin today's paper what iranians want. he said it would be foolish to believe that the west has no role to play. and the people we hear from one of the united states to engage. president ahmadinejad says that he is confident he won these elections. they say the government should permit free media and respect the free flow of information and ideas. the bbc and the voice of america are important, independent, truly indigenous media. again, the numbers are on your screen if you want to call in and comment about the last comment of protesters. this is from the guardian newspaper. this is based out of tehran. dayton, ohio. kathleen honor democrats line. caller: jane hamsher, is incredible. i encourage your public to go to that blog. i have read comment

and obama is right to say i speak to iran, but he didn't say i speak to ahmadinejad. he said i speak to iran and the leader of iran is not ahmadinejad. the leader is the grand ayatollah and he is much more moderate. he is not moderate, but more moderate than ahmadinejad. and i hope that someone else will win. i think it's in june, in two months. >> one more right here. >> thank you so much for your moving, eloquent and passionate expression of your desire of peace. i'm wondering, in germany you have at the street level and large muslim population from turkey and from other countries. and i'm wondering if there is any dialogue between the german people and these newer citizens, perhaps they are not full citizens, in terms of understanding these cultures and developing processes of understanding each other. i had a very interesting experience the other day where i went back to a neighborhood where i used to work and i used to eat lunch from a sidewalk stand, which was run by an afghan he got. i went back after three years. i happen to be back in the neighborhood and i w

iran was concerned about availability to enrich uranium. they bought 13% in a french operation in southern france that enriched the uranium. when the revolution came, the nuclear power generation plant -- the french took over the 13%. they nationalized in it. the iranians say, wait, we need energy. practically self-sufficient in gas. they need electric generation. now the question is, is this nuclear power for energy, or are they lying? iraq is in a different -- iran is in a different situation from korea. the iranian said we do not want a nuclear bomb. we do not have a nuclear bomb. we do not have facilities for that. it is against our religion. they may be lying, but that is a situation for us to go in, supervise. mousavi said i am willing to see an iranian enrichment operation in iran in a joint venture. multinational companies. the russians, the japanese. i think that is about the best we can do. they want to have at least 10 nuclear-powered plants. they want to invest $1 billion or $2 billion per plant. they want electricity. they are

to iran having some -- civil nuclear power. is that a change in american policy? if i'm correct, secretary of state condoleezza rice said if the issue that iran wanted was in power, we could solve the problem. but i do not think there are any differences between the president and the former administration on the need to stop iran from getting in a car bomb. what is crucial to point out are the people that are the most worried, are not just israel, but it is all the arab states due to a historic enmity with iran, these regimes are very nervous and quietly working with united states. when the president was trying to see yesterday as we have got to end the gap between what you say publicly and what you say privately, because privately, these regimes are very nervous about iran. but publicly you do not talk that way. , and that has to change, i think the president said. host: we have a history dealing with nuclear power, certainly with china, the policy of deterrence. would that work with iran? guest: when you think about it, you h

response to iran will be affected by the events of the last release and i wanted to see if you could add a bit to that, what he means by no doubt there'd of what has definitely changed at this point and what is still remaining open? >> i figured the presidency at his news conference earlier in the week at right now the focuses on what is going on there in the ground. and obviously it was passed to daschle lot of things have to going to have to shake out and get figured out obviously as we watch that. i think the president has been clear on matt. as i have mentioned here, there are multilateral invitations and looked, a lot of this is the iranians have been offered and a path away to meet their responsibilities. in many ways their actions are up to them and i think that's what the president said today. the g8 last night reiterated their multilateral invitations through a statement based on an ongoing invitation from early april. >> i understand you have been saying that the events have to play out of the u.s. is watching but when he says today there is no doubt that a direct dialogue

i meant to do that fried. i apologize. >> back to iran. what is the best -- back to what, sorry? >> iran. >> i didn't hear you. >> what is the best case scenario after watching the activities this week for levels of engagement you had hoped for prior to the election? what's the best case scenario? >> in terms of whether they happen, the outcome? >> keep the levels of engagement the way you had anticipated prior to -- >> look, there are events happening on the ground right now that are the focus of the administration's effort. but again our long-term -- long-term interests and our long-term goals haven't changed. whether or not the iranians will accept all responsibilities is something that can only be measured when that starts to happen. >> we understand it's about levels of engagement after what happens this week and my question is, again: i understand the administration wanted to have open lines with top officials but what is the best case scenario to keep that happening? >> let me just say this: the p 5 plus 1 has a request in to speak directly with the iranians and that is no

to not be seen as trying to influence events inside of a iran one way or another. the iranian government has begun blaming not just the u.s., but the british, france, and the germans for meddling and making social networking tools available. or simply saying that we stand with the people. accusing them of meddling. we heard from the former crown prince this morning. they were asking for president obama and the state department to say more. is this narrow path that the u.s. it is treading going to be the path, and if so, why? what you saw on friday is what you have been seeing all along. that is using this as a kind of foil. using the great satan, using the u.s. as a way to justify the policies or to gain public support. we do not want to get into this. what you saw over the weekend was a very strong statement by the president. setting out these fundamental principles that our country was founded on. these are the, the principles that we are going to stand up for, and wherever we see them being violated. >> if the iranian government is going to go ahead and accuse t

and we remain committed to doing all we can to try to prevent iran from becoming a nuclear weapons power. so we're going to watch this, and we are going to gauge our actions accordingly. >> in way that these events may have enhanced the process? >> i am not going to make a value judgment on what they may or may not have done. i am going to reiterate that everything we intend to do is in light of how we view america's long-term interests and security as well as those of friends and alleys -- allies, not just in the region but around the world. >> if i may return to honduras, the u.s. provides aid both under the foreign assistance act and it is millennium challenge. even there are coups, you are not going to cut off that aid? >> we are assessing what the outcome of this will be. this has been a fast-moving set of circumstances over the last several days. much of our response is conditioned on the integrity of the democratic system. but if we were able to get to a status quo that returns to the rule of law and constitutional order within a relatively short period of time, i think that would

. >> first i would like to say a few words about the situation in iran. the united states and the international community have been appalled and outraged by the threats, the beatings and imprisonment of the last few days. i strongly condemn these unjust actions and i joined with the american people in morning each and every innocent life that is lost. i've made it clear that the united states respects the sovereignty of the islamic republic of iran. it is not interfering with iran's affairs. but we must also bear witness to the courage and dignity of the iranian people and the remarkable opening with an iranian society. we deplore the violence against innocent civilians anywhere that it takes place. the iranian people are trying to have a debate about their future. some in iran, some in the iranian government in particular 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 patently false. they are an obvious attempt to distract people from what is truly taki

>> to what extent to the protesters represent the people of iran? >> you have people from all walks of life walking those streets. even including the clerics and members of the militias that are part of the system, who also show solidarity or some kind of coordination with complicity. i think it is very broad based. it is not limited just to the intelligentsia or a group of students. no, it is people all ages and all walks of life in the society that are in defiance, collective defiance, of this regime. >> mondawmin for middle east truth. as you know, mir hossein mousavi was a member of the republican guard and had to be selected by the clerics even in order to run. you really feel that this is about the election and the corruption of the ballot box, or that what we're seeing in the streets is just the final straw on the back of the pressure cooker of people that are yearning to be free? >> iranians will examine with much scrutiny after the hold dust settles, so to speak, everyone's track record one way or the other, and the ultimate judgment rests

i'm not going to be judgmental about anyone who today wants to be with the people of iran. let the peel at the end decide who belongs and who doesn't in a position of political framework or responsibility. this is not our argument tonight. our argument today is anyone -- and i welcome anybody else who has been part of the system, if they choose today to join with the people in a realistic way, not just by words but by actual proof to earn people's trust that you are really on our side, to join that group, i welcome that. i encourage it. this is what this is all about right now. we know as long as this regime is there, as long as the system is in place, we will not see as a nation the light of day. we know this regime must go. many iranians have tried. rewind the tape back to 15 or 20 years ago with the hope that reform may be at least attempted. remember the administration? they attempted it. it did not work for obvious reasons. so now, there's no question that iranians under clearly that the only way we are going to rid ourselves of all of our problems is a matter of this

. >> i wanted to ask you a question directly from iran. we have got some questions tonight from people who are courageous enough to still be communicating online. under which conditions would shoot except the election, and if you do except it with without any significant changes, is not that of a trail -- a trail of the -- a betrayal of the demonstrators? >> we cannot say definitively what would happen. what we know is that a sizable percentage of the iranian people themselves consider this alexian illegitimate. it is not an isolated instance, a little grumbling here or there. there are significant questions about the legitimacy of the election. ultimately, the most important thing for the iranian government to consider is the legitimacy in the eyes of their own people, not the eyes of the united states. i am very clear that this is up to the iranian people to decide who their leadership is going to be and the structure of their government. what we can do is to say unequivocally that their international principles about violence, about dea

thank you. >> i would like to refer to a former question concerning the future of iran. when you look at the people who have not an important roll, like mr. moose wie and others, they are all part of the regime. how do you envision the future of iran? is it going to overthrow it? it is probably not going to be a return to the old monarchy, and what role do you envision four receive and your family? >> as i partially explained earlier in the question, the situation has grown beyond the result of an election. as a result, most iranians are quite aware of the fact that having always been limited to prescreened candidate of the regime's choice as to who they get to vote for to begin with. they are stuck in the position of having to choose between the lesser of two evils. in that sense, i think that today if it presents an opportunity for such prescreened candidates to join with the masses, it will be very difficult for us not to anticipate that at some point, surf candidates will be faced with an impasse. either they have to really take the side of the people, peeling comple

host: back to the iran in elections specifically. there is much about the president's response to all this. obama reaction stirs debate, says this headline. some say he should so more support for protesters. this is from yesterday. >> i have said before that i have deep concerns about the election. and i think the world has deep concerns about the election. you have seen in iran some initial reaction from the supreme leader that indicates she understands the iranian people have deep concerns about the election. it is not productive given the history of u.s.-iranian relations to be seen as meddling, the u.s. president meddling in iranian elections. what i will repeat and what to say yes today is that what i see the violence directed at peaceful protesters, when i say peaceful dissent being suppressed, wherever it takes place, it is of concern to me and to the american people. host: flynt leverett, some are writing that the phrase deep concern is not enough. this is "the washington times." then you go to "the philadelphia inquirer." "u

is gone out of its way to not interfere in the election process in iran. i am not concerned about mr. ahmadinejad apologizing to me. i would suggest that he think carefully about the obligation he owes to his own people. he might want to consider looking at the families who have been shot, that is where mr. ahmadinejad and others need to answer their questions. >> [unintelligible] >> first of all, i have to discuss with the chancellor our interest in closing guantanamo. it has become a symbol internationally, our very legitimate pursuit of our national security and our concerns about international terrorism. we will be looking for the help of our friends and allies, as we execute that process. it will be admittedly difficult politically. in the past i have spoken not only to the chancellor, but other european union's who are pleased that the e you provided a legal framework on how to deal with the detainees in guantanamo, and we have received a positive response from countries across europe in the general sense of wanting help. i think that particular spec

in iran, they need to take these concerns seriously. they need to look into them. i am not going to stand here today and predict how we're going to judge whatever the outcome is. >> of the supreme authority in iran has indicated that an investigation will be conducted by a specific body in iran. you pleased with that development? >> well, again. >> are those of the concern you're talking about? are they being taken seriously? >> it is difficult for us to assess not having had access as many international monitors have in elections to what exactly happened. i am not going to be able to really say one where another parade >> you have no response to the supreme leader of's announcement that he is convening a probe? >> iran needs to take in these allegations of misconduct or of the election irregularities seriously. >> is the fashion that he called for an investigation a positive development in taking it seriously? >> let's see how things work out. a lot will depend on the kind of -- kind of investigation. i am not prepared right now to pro