>> that's the problem. >> with nuevo laredo can they walked outside the consulate? >> but they could be across the border to be a dairy queen very quickly i can wait to tell them that. >> i walked that ground and then look at our security every single day no one is more concerned with the securities and people than i am. >> i do not agree with you. don't get tighter high horse because you just cut their pay. when i went down there i didn't know this was an issue they a broad eppley sat them down in your room is it safe. write-off to the people who were there working in the facility it is so dangerous they cannot go outside. >> i start every single day looking at the threats to our people worldwide. >> you were getting mexico from. >> we will bring them up volume one. >> i have been there i looked at those statistics you cut their pay and i think it is wrong and people of both sides of the aisle think it is wrong. it was not useful or productive it cut morale is a necessary and i think it should be changed. i really do. it is it for lack of appropriation of management of the state department that is the question we will continue to work on that there are a lot of other issues we have to invade edge with meaningful immigration reform with the lawful way to get your we need to work on asylum reform actually have a bill but in conclusion i cannot think the border patrol for all the hard work that they do i have been down there it was a joy to go out with them as we chase people coming across you can watch them all day long coming across and they apprehend them in a very professional manner it is very hard and dangerous work i cannot thank them enough for customs and border control. ice is doing important work all across the board but my point is those people working in the state department also have a vital mission it is unacceptable that they would knowingly cut their pay when there are conditions there to say they just go across the border to a dairy queen? that doesn't cut it. that is not acceptable. i appreciate the hearing. we are adjourned. >> [inaudible conversations] good afternoon i and the associate director here at the romantic council on behalf of my colleagues there president i would welcome new for a tie the discussion on iran's role also our live audience you may be watching at home. is it is of critical juncture for the disease and allies and international community. after isolation in sanctions at the atlantic council iran task force serves as a comprehensive source of analysis to bring together the regional stakeholders to increase the understanding with the geopolitical a fax and until now free have heard perspectives but to date we will hear more about internal dynamics with the international community. these reports will be presented by the diversity of tehran. the senior fellow from the peace and security initiative at the atlanta council held take a broader view in today's event is part of that iran task force and led by our senior fellow. they give for your generous and continued support i will turn the floor over to barbara who will introduce our speakers and moderate the discussion. >> fakes are coming on this beautiful day. once again our timing is excellent with congress to hold its nose to go forward but how will iran behavior in the region? we'll take additional funds of sanctions relief march and double down for it i think it would be important to have a discussion because yourself lucky we have a guest from tehran. and to to to be a visiting professor and research scholar at asian languages and cultures department also held a prominent role for the center for strategic research and his areas of scholar include a arabia in contemporary politics and the nuclear program. with a phd in political science from the diversity of tennessee hawksbill. and then at the brass screw cross center having more than 30 years of experience working as an analyst in corporate management of the middle east expert with the arab states of the per-share engulf with the influence from the american university of beirut and also the university of maryland. our recommend to you in excellent paper he did a couple of months ago that dealt with the issue of containing iran. i will invite our guests to come up to take a seat to begin with a question. come up here. >> she has written a new paper that should be upon the web site you can read yourself but i will begin by asking cam did to pose a question to him. a few years ago i interfered an astute journalists and he told me we are not going to stretch our legs beyond the capacity of our carpet so my question is how big is the carpet? [laughter] how big should it be your how big will it be and what about what is taking place of the iranian regional policy in particular? >> thanks for inviting me through the eric nuclear program. but there was a time from every space in israel but to say it is in the middle. . . to be a stabilizing force in the region. insecure and unstable. in other words, what your seeing is enough. we have another problem. we have another problem with refugees, drug, narcotics in afghanistan, somehow a warning as well. and also lebanon to a lesser extent. so they argue that within the next ten or 15 years the primary objective of foreign policy should be stabilizing the region. iran should be the country at basic produces. the argument is cannot be dismissive of the insecurity around us. thethe official view of iran and the dominant view of iran. but there is an alternative you, which recently is gaining more popularity. in the think tanks, and of course the university among the pundits, they would argue that iran is already -- we don't have any more resources. and basically we are the primary force in fighting daish. and that is not our fight. basically. and they would argue such a fight would make us the target of a daish attack if daish has not yet attacked. it is not because they are not capable the because they have not made the decision to do so. vital and necessary. with a rack and domestics -- damascus, basically in syria so if sunnis are really interested to have daish as the representative, why we should bother. but after all, it's not all that much concern for us. i mean,, if they consolidate power, basically this can be a threat for the saudi's, jordanians, to some extent. the argument also because they know that if they want to come i have to fight, and is going to be a serious fight. normally if we assume they are not totally crazy, just partially crazy, you know, the national trajectory will be toward saudi arabia, jordan, and human rather than the area, i have a fight. so the argument would be basically we're better off and to make our engagement a minimal level. but the 1st argument will be, this is somewhat naïve. also that issue is very important, what would happen. in other words, if they lost their independence and what would be the new opposition. i can argue most important country has called for preservation of iraq in syria and the supporting arrangements. so if iran withdraws from that position, very easy. the positions toward iraq if they announced or claim their independence, all of the opposition. of course a 2nd groups argument will be, we have relations, important intelligence, security command commercial infrastructure. we can benefit from the situation, and they are going to cause a major threat for us. but as i said, naïve arguments. the independence is basically opening pandora's box in the region, and then we will face an entirely different middle east, not just one, two, three of the many areas which may claim for independence, thus it is not appropriate to basically support the organization or support the independence of anyone on the territory, any of the independent territories. the territorial integrity's. >> okay. thank you, nasser hadian. most people in washington are not ignore that there is a debate going on. as you have mentioned been written in your paper, the dominant view still is not iran must be a force for what it cost position. you know well that what iran call stabilization arab countries call meddling a worse in the affairs of arab countries. how you think the iranian debate can bethe somehow factor in the debate in the arab world how they can be influenced to see iranian activities in this to have less negative light. >> my wife tells me my speaking skills have regressed. iranian intentions and capabilities. what they want to do. regardless of what it wants to do and what is capabilities are. the issue of iranian intention is it ?-question-mark for me. i listened carefully and read with great interest the papers that he wrote, but whenwrote, but when i here of a significant debate happening islet to two things, evidence of the debate, news commentary statements by leaders, and even some reporting about it and also look for a clear description of what the players are and what their views are. i understand that there are certain limitations with which you have to deal with, but i think it would be extremely useful and important, and i cannot overstate this will for the public policy community in washington in several key players in the region to know who is advocating for what they want. this is hardly an academic exercise. let me turn to the issue of capabilities. and i think i have that in case i'm very quick. the issue capability is important because in the american policy debate about a ran and its regional role, those capabilities are either completely misdiagnosed or neglected. if like to offer a little bit of nuance because it is important.important. never underestimate what if i can do in the region. marine barracks bombing 1983. declassified pentagon documents, iran-iraq war. thethe very end of it the other side, the iraqis were heavily financed by some arab gulf states and armed to the teeth by the west, that was the site on life support the iranian nation survive very well. has blocked, the most successful nonstate actor in the world,world, most lethal and this one is all because of iran. hamas, palestinian islamic jihad for probably the most important security threat to the israelis to this day. let me say it bluntly. lebanon will not have a president unless iran say so. has below has no meaningful future without the decision of iran. hassan's fate is a function of iranian design. israel's national security is a function, among others, iranian design. gulf security overall is a function of iranian design. iran has succeeded in entangling its main adversary in a vicious trading human. iran has a dominant influence: you like it or not. the only actors that can credibly threaten his kaythree. finally, they're can be no major wars without iran having a say in it. major questions of war and peace is an iranian decision because of these accomplishments iran today has considerable power in the region. if you are sitting in toronto day you are feeling good about your regional position. however, iranian capabilities are a very mixed bag, and this is where the bad new starts. the proxy wars and which iran is involved today have stabilize not a single state and have failed to build peace. iran may have succeeded in bleeding and saudi adversary , but that comes with a heavy price, the price of telling the world that it is supporting an illegitimate militia that has resulted against an elected and legitimate president. today, and the support for another reconstruct the country or help us achieve a political solution. the iranians have been successful, but that comes with heavy casualties alienating almost the entire city world and perhaps causing some military overstretch for the rgc. the, so terrific piece about that. maybe they are exaggerating, but there is some truth to it. on a rack, whoever said it was okay to give him a free hand was clearly wrong. some of the most important and influential people today where has it fired an angry letter to his counterpa complaining about the iranian commanders handling of iraq's sunni politicians club has alienating them and not handling them with care. rumor also has that the former commander is now back in action to hold them in check or perhaps just watch over his shoulders. therethere is also price for awakening gulf and arab nationalism. because of this excessive intervention in their affairs anti- iranian is him is at an all-time high today military effectiveness for the arab gulf states, because of him in some of these countries are learning how to wage combat some of the most important and powerful weapons on earth which is never good news for the iranians. all the talk about tehran and there prowess in asymmetric warfare, we have to remember the country has very modest conventional capabilities also. the iranian air force is irrelevant in any military scenario or any dogfight with arab gulf fighter jets. iran has considerable skills and land warfare due primarily to the iran-iraq war, but if you think about the iranian military threat, the last thing you should be worried about is iran's land capability. territorial conquest should not really be on the top of our list of concerns. iran's missile arsenal is quite impressive. it is not reliable. it is not precise. it is not as leasable -- lethal as we think it is. moreover, its adversaries have been not to be defenseless also. some of the most powerful missile-defense systems in the world command they're has been some progress of integrating those missile defenses regionally. so in short, iran is getting asymmetric warfare, whether it is on land or at sea, the most that i couldi could do is create problems command not necessarily when wars. let's put to rest any notion that iraq is close the strata from was anytime he wants. it simply cannot. i know i've taken too much time. matters less -- it matters less what the sanctions are. we try to assess the countries regional role at this nuclear deal, what matters much more is action which speaks much louder. those uranium capabilities i described are clearly not inadequate or inferior, but they also do not match the rhetoric coming out of washington, and some of the arab gulf states we are about to witness a rising regional hegemon bent on conquest and domination is simply not true. there may be a debate going on today, but an equally important, if not far more important debate that should be happening is between iran and the arab gulf states. how it happened to my don't know. it does not matter with the intermediary is but that it should happen as quickly as possible. >> there is a lot obviously to respond to. i think one thing we all have to keep in mind -- and you wrote about this in your paper, iran's policies are based on iran's threat perceptions. as you.out, iran feels the major threats come from the us and israel and asymmetric policies are based upon that. i would argue a couple of things. hezbollah will continue because it is such a strong component of lebanese society,society, but i will let you tackle some of his other questions. >> you know, i am sure there are many who would love to hear what you say. you know, they really think that they have such a capability. but the 2nd part of your talk, i guess, anyway, let me go, the number of issues which you raise. first of1st of all, you know, regarding saudi arabia and gcc and yemen, they are all different. our relation with them. yemen, for instance as far away. the impact is minimal. to be frank, it is mostly the failure of gcc policy. of course, i'm sure they would love to get the credit yes, but the reality is, only a few millions of dollars to be a quagmire. we are not under any illusion anymore, no organization, and are there any illusions that we cannot do anything command gcc with all the resources they have have not been able to stabilize the situation, how possibly iran with far less resources will be able to. lumping all this together and saying that they are basically meddling in the affairs, ii expected to hear from the saudi's, but not from you. but because two fun-loving, yes. but is it too far? even, i mean, the americans have commented repeatedly. is very limited, very limited. anyway, the gcc, subject to talk on, you know, to me, the saudi's have been basically adopting a policy. and in fact, i consider before, the containment policy. they try to contain. important infrastructure & command a number of other provinces, you know, training, spending money, giving money, building mosques, so forth and so on. and there have been, the trying to build infrastructure all along the border. in other words, the saudi's and pakistan, it is there basically because they feel they have a base to contain a ran. there is no reason. not even the arab countries. in other words, i don't think being arab muslim or whatever, the entitlement intervene, but you know how much money their spending there. if you are in iraq, syria, lebanon, it is basically on the basis of threat perception, the threat coming from israel and the us. on the basis of that threat perception we define a strategic depth of forces. the strategic depth would be lebanon, syria, iran, not human, of course. but we have basically to have an infrastructure to do the two most important things, critelli israelis taking military action and basically retaliation in case of an attack. they are not they're because we are challenging the saudi's. they are not in lebanon are syria or iraq because we want to challenge the gcc or saudi arabia. i threat perception, we don't see saudi arabia as a threat. we don't prioritize them as a threat. after two years, you could not find anything. we don't consider them as an item, don't consider them to be a threat. we have not developed infrastructure or not they're because we want to challenge the israelis. if they're in a rack they are not challenging. that is because they want to challenge us. so in all these areas, the saudi's are challenging us, consider them as a threat. then coming am blaming iran, it's really strange for me. but it can easily balance, as you mentioned, combine the population migrated in iraq. saddam to balances relatively easily in terms of the population. far more sophisticated than saddam, superpower behind it , a lot of economic wealth why there scared? why they cannot balance? it is inherent in the political system. the matter how many times he says were behind you and will give you this and that no matter how much we tell them you are no threat to us , inherently because we're sourcing the security that he's insecure. anyone will feel insecure. and that is natural and happened throughout history. possibly but the side. trying to pay a higher price for the americans. they are going to be left. so unless they rely on there own resources to provide security for themselves they are going to feel threatened no matter what we tell them. it's about the result. we are convenient enemy for them. for the pundits, personal the policymakers, for some of the journalists, you can attack us paying any costs. attacking americans has a cost. even israel, but we are to five on the now a number of psychological desires, basically in this country. otherwise just look at our behavior. just tell me the action. tell me the action. the last 30 years. okay. number two, number one. it taken in the complaint. after all, we have a very good relationship, the most secret talk, very good relationship. in the saudi arabia. the only country is the uae. ironically more than 20 flights a day. practically a very good relationship. since makes is there. you look at it and you deconstructed. >> i did not want to become just aa debate between you two, some going to open it up to the floor and asked the say your name and wait for the microphone and please ask a question. wait for the microphone. appear in front. you will. you will. >> the atlantic council and of the privilege of being on the task force. thank you very much. i have likened the jcp into an arranged marriage between two parties that don't trust each other and the prenuptial agreement that only deals with the dowry, not how to make the marriage work. what do you think really convinced her on that this was a good time to have a spectacularthis particular agreement? what can i do over the long-term to succeed? people will be coming out of the woodwork to try to make it fail. i think that the jcp you was the fastest but the administration. the things in place. the stink of execution. come back to the strategy, the pivot to asia, all, while this nonsense, they can screw that up execution. what would you recommend for the longer term of the part of the administration to do that and make sure this agreement has every opportunity for success and if it does feel what would be plan b command how would you put in place depressed implement that? >> so quickly we've already discussed that issue before. i said there are three reasons which make the diplomacy a necessity. two reasons, facilitated. the three decisions which facilitated, number one, we thought war, no matter how much the chances, but a country, they can experience it, basically is not a good thing to have. to eliminate the chances, even the slim chances. so that is the number one reason without diplomacy was a necessity. from the human side, more cannot achieve their objectives because basically i'll discussed three scenarios. as you know, reported since at least 2007, the argument is different. basically in 2,003 to 11 as a nuclear program. guarantee, and other words, it will have mostly at a couple of years and after that is going to basically wholeheartedly go for the ball. in pakistan, for limited resources. human and material equipment they start to make a bomb. if they have not made a decision is because it does not serve our interest. t

Related Keywords

American University , District Of Columbia , United States , Damascus , Dimashq , Syria , Iran , Afghanistan , Toronto , Ontario , Canada , Lebanon , Washington , Nuevo Laredo , Tamaulipas , Mexico , Pakistan , Jordan , Beirut , Beyrouth , Iraq , Tennessee , Israel , Tehran , Saudi Arabia , Maryland , Dallas , Texas , Yemen , Jordanians , Americans , Iranian , Saudi , Israelis , Lebanese , Iraqis , Palestinian , American , Iranians , ,