Iran, United States, President Trump discussed on BBC World Service


A sanctions on Monday all the sanctions removed for years. As part of a deal designed to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions were reimposed, President Trump wants Iran to change end its hostile to Israel and its USA proxies to influence weaker countries. Like, Syria and Lebanon. Sanctions have become so important to the current US administration that earlier this year the Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin record he was spending half of his time on them on Thursday. The US energy secretary suggested they could be used against Russia over its plans to build a gas pipeline to Germany sanctions may be extensive. But are they effective a public show of defiance for the Iranians was to be expected? We will proudly break the sanctions, president Ruhani said, but not perhaps such explicit rejection from America's allies, the spokesman for Theresa May, the British Prime minister said her government wanted to expand its trading arrangements, and is encouraging companies to take advantage of the commercial opportunities with Iran. Ronald Reagan, poorer BBC Persian and our dip. Automatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus. I'll be discussing the sanctions policy role the first does she think the rainy in leadership is worried? I think they are politically they're very pleased with themselves. I think they played their cards. Very well as residential Honey says, it's the first time that the international community, it's on Iran side, except for the United States on a couple of other countries and from day one they said that if their demands are met, they will stay in their nuclear deal JCP OA, but it will create difficulties Iran, not only needs to sell its oil. It needs investment in its oil industry and BP has gone totality is gone, and that will have both short term effect and longtime effects on Iran's capability of producing oil, and that's certainly very worrying for and politicians and in terms of the situation in Iran at the moment, what existing pressures is this coming in addition to so already. Iran was struggling. Partly because of the mismanagement of the economy and widespread systematic corruption among the politicians, but more importantly because of the fear that the sanctions created among the population, many people exchange there, we als- into dollars which pushed the value of dollar is very high. Iran is highly dependent on imports, and the fact that the dollars are very expensive. Now, it's gonna create more inflation. We are in touch with people in Iran, and they say that that they feed it every day and every now, and then we see protests in different parts of the country. So internally it's going to create a lot of trouble for the government. A lot of this Johnson is about pressuring the regime change rather than presumably expecting the regime to simply crumble for the revolutionary system to vanish in a puff of smoke for what realistic prospect is there of changing Iran's behavior strategically the way it relates to its neighbors. The way uses organizations like his bullet to promote its. Agenda. I don't think there's any great evidence of that is likely to happen. Iran sees itself as being in a region where it is reasonably isolated the Sunni Arab countries by large oppose it Israel opposes it America opposes it. And therefore, this kind of outreach this involvement with allied movements and groups around the region is an important outlet. Of course, how these internal tensions actually play out is the crucial question might lead to a collapse of the regime. One day might simply lead to a takeover by harder line voices. We simply don't know how much harder run. I think it makes the argument that has been pushed by people I president Ruhani in the past. And those who we for want of a better word would describe as more liberal voices. When this kind of sanction regime is introduced extremely that. The United States decision to leave the nuclear deal. Suddenly changed the tone of president Rohani and his reformist followers. They started to sound more and more like the hardliners inside the regime specially because they proved that they were wrong. So that's supremely let them negotiate the nuclear deal, but he was very suspicious. He said go and do this. But I personally do not trust the Americans. Even if there's a deal they're not gonna implemented properly which also turned out to be true. And I think over the next couple of years it will put the sound of reform in the country on their more pressure because they feel they're all under attack. Jonathan the other question that rises particularly with an economy like United States is its own reliance on oil and particularly petrol is there a risk for President Trump in this domestic political risk. Or is it all at this stage from his point of view a win win? There are asks him one of the reasons there are waivers allowing certain countries to buy oil from Iran is because key American ally is Taiwan Japan, South Korea Turkey, and so on that is an important part of their energy mix of the deal is kinda if they reduce her chances to a certain level they can still carry on buying it sanctions free. If you like repercussions free. I think actually the the real impacted all of this is going to be a much longer term ones. There are many voices in America expert voices who have been saying for a while. Now that sanctions are being used to frequently. They're being used to indiscriminately an already now with this Iran situation, you have the Europeans talking about trying to establish mechanisms to allow companies to trade with Iran. I think a lot is going to happen there. That's going to be very significant. But the mere fact that talking about it matters Russia and China a talking about new international payments systems that would separate them from the the dollar system in American banking institutions it's early days for these things. But you know, we could look back at the position of this new round of sanctions without the consensus. That is needed to really make them bite and say that this was one of the first moments when other countries began to take steps to make these US sanctions. The sanctions tool less useful, Jonathan Marcus and Ron Rog book Sunday marks the one hundredth anniversary of the armistice the agreement to stop the fighting signed by the competence of the first World War in the four years of conflict around nine million died from combat injuries. This was a war in Europe. But it was not fought solely by Europeans. Australians Africans Indians North Americans as well as the Japanese and Viet. Newbies recorded among the war dead warded much to reshape the world that followed the monarchs of Germany address, your abdicated to other imparts, the Austro-Hungarian and the Ottoman disappeared entirely. From the map, the redrawing of borders was arguably more dramatic and after the nine hundred thirty nine thousand nine hundred forty five war and has caused a long and bloody shadow of a parts of Europe and the Middle East ever since. A week of commemoration reaches his apogee at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day in the eleventh month, the time that the Alvis took effect. No one who served in that war remains alive. The last combat veteran died seven years ago. Yes is the BBC's Allen little he's been in Berlin this week torch Germans about the war. Explain to be commemorating World War One has if anything become more significant, even as the events themselves have become more remote. Well, each generation has reinterpreted the history of the first World War in the light of its own values. So for example, in one thousand twenty eight ten years after the end of the whirlwind L Hake. The field. Marshall led British troops in France and Flanders from nineteen fifteen to nineteen eighteen when he died his funeral procession the streets of Edinburgh, the city of his birth and London were lined with hundreds of thousands maps, many a million people he was buried as a national hero. The man who delivered national Sal. Ovation to a grateful nation and yet by the nineteen sixties. He's a villain is the butcher of the song who sent hundreds of thousands of young men to their deaths needlessly in what became known as the futility narrative. So each new generation looks a fresh at the first World War. So it's in nineteen sixty eight for example, nineteen sixties for example that the war poetry Wilford on and Siegfried Sassoon gains popular, traction really for the first time. Those points would note in the nineteen twenties and nineteen thirties. But they weren't known popularly didn't enter the national puncture snus the national discourse until the nineteen sixties a time with exploding youth culture. Vietnam, protest, growing anti war sentiment. And that's when those poems poetry found. It's time. And so since then in the fifty years since the nineteen sixties that interpretation if utility narrative horror the pity of war has again received and again this generation of revisionist historians are saying, wait a minute. The song was not futile the song. The beginning of the path to victory and the process by which the is delivered Europe from German militarism. Sometimes we get done we perhaps in Europe where we're focused on what it means for us that this was a global war. And there were soldiers fighting on the battlefields of Europe. And indeed the what we now turn the Middle East from match of the globe. Indeed. And I was in the first World War cemetery northern Greece not long ago, and there are thousands of Indian then buried there and those whose bodies were never found commemorated there on memorial freezes the African troops fighting with French forces in France and Flanders. So it is the first truly global war drew in people from the colonies held by the United Kingdom and France. So this was not on the first truly global war. It was also the first total war the way in which entire societies have to be mobilized to meet the challenge of war. No one who, sir. Served on the battlefields of the first World War is to with us. To what extent then is this commemoration a moment of change to think that one hundred years through some sort of line, Android, or or has its meaning kind of evolved yet again for our present generation. Yes, I think he's meaning as evolved from the very beginning. It's no longer simply of the first World War reading the second World War. I think it has come to mean something about war in general. This is only anecdotal impressionistic. But I think in my adult lifetime the commemorations in the United Kingdom have changed in ten or nuts. Partly because of what has happened the major events that have happened in those decades, it's become about all warm, particularly the wars that have been fought in our own time was not was at national survivalist, the second and first world wars were but wars policy options, and I think the public has grown used to the idea of separating the cause which the war is fought from the experience and suffering. Of those who fight them. And I think we've now elevated in the United Kingdom in particular, the idea of remembrance almost to a civic duty, and it's become very widespread. And I think that was not the case thirty years ago at a time when the first World War was already slipping from living memory, US, speaking to us from Berlin how different to commemorations feeling Germany as compared to countries like Britain or France. It is an interesting question. How do you remember your own war dead when you belong to a nation that turned out twice to be on the wrong side of history? How do you grieve? For those you lost without appearing to whitewash the crimes committed in their name, or in some cases, by them or indeed condone those tribes, and this has been probably nothing for Germany since the end of the second World War in particular..

Coming up next