Table. I am pleased to have him back on the program. Welcome. Thank you. Could you characterize for me today the relationship between iran and the United States . Deal, andeir nuclear the president says that you are in accordance with it but not the spirit of it. You suggest that in some ways the United States is violating some of the tenets of the deal. But where does the relationship stand overall . This administration has been pursuing a hostile policy. I think it is a misguided policy, i think the allegations against iran are tired and dont stand any tests of reality. It think it would be best for the United States it should look at its achievements in our region. And see what it has achieved. It has made all the wrong choices to read its allies are accusing each other of supporting terrorism. I believe the United States needs to take a fresh look at this is situation in our region and see where its interests are. Is dealing with important issues of stability and security in our region. Know, in the conference in riyadh, saudi arabia, and some of the arab state allies, asked the United States to join them in isolating iran. So, they believe you are engaged in these activities that the United States suggests you are. I just wanted to ask you, who are behind the 9 11 terrorist attacks . Individuals . Or was this an attack by saudi arabia . Whence we certainly know that 15 of the attackers came from there. The wahhabi 2001 tillcheck from now, or even from 1998, till now, almost 44 if not more of terrorism throughout the world has been instigated or perpetrated by people belonging to that school of thought, the official ideology of saudi arabia and promoted by billions of billions of petrodollars across the globe, spreading extremism everywhere. We believe that we need to have good relationships with our neighbors and we want to. But they need to decide their policy. Unfortunately for the United States, the yardstick is not which country whether a country supports terrorism or not, but whether they are buying beautiful that beautiful military equipment from the United States. Do you think this is a test for the united dates . I believe that the president did not go to saudi arabia until he made sure that those deals were made under the table. It is good that they create jobs but that should not be one thing i hope to have with you and i think is important for the American People, is what exactly is a terrorist and who is a terrorist . For example, al qaeda is a terrorist organization, would you agree . Yes. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, would you agree . No. But they are on the terrorist list. Yes, the United States list. Nations,e the united as an excitable acceptable mechanism or machinery to define who is a terrorist and who is not. At least accept a mold to lateral a multilateral thing. We cannot expect the United States to be the judge, and that rip cantioner to provide various yardsticks. One would bes to see one would be to see who is on the terrorist list in the Security Council. The United States, a permanent member of the Security Council we are not a member of the Security Council. Andtaliban, al qaeda, isis, alnusra as a terrorist organization, as well as iran. But unfortunately, u. S. Allies, saudi arabia and uae, two of the three states that recognize the taliban, only three states recognized the taliban for the United States or her through them in 2011. Saudi arabia and uae were two of the three states. Saudi arabia i dont want to engage in saudi bashing. I am talking about the United States accusing iran of supporting terrorism went its own allies have been on the record but now they are exposing each other about who was first in recognizing isis as a terrorist organization. Let me clear up one thing. A question on the minds of Many Americans like think. Do you believe that saudi arabia supports al qaeda . Hasorts alnusra, which it which has new names now . Do you believe they support isis . A lot of saudiat money went to support these organizations. Are children of Saudi Intelligence Services. Was aw that al qaeda child of Saudi Intelligence Services during the fight with the soviets. Which wasn government sponsoring al qaeda, was only recognized by three dates two of them were saudi arabia and the united arab emirates. What about pakistan . That is a neighbor. As a neighbor they have a problem. But for saudi arabia and the united arab emirates, staying far behind and far away from the actual scene because iran is a neighbor and pakistan is a neighbor and other countries in the former soviet union our neighbors, they are not even close but they support it. They recognize the government. The money, ask any intelligence person, the money that went to isis to alnusra, most of it from came from these countries. That not from the government, per se . That is to be investigated. Im not here to accuse anybody, we have been accused by a lot of people for a lot of things and i do not know whether it is good to accuse people. What i am saying is that the ideology came from saudi arabia. These people belong to the wahabiphy salafi and ideology and it is being spread across the world. Everybody who engages in an act of terror, in one way or other has been affected by within islam, there had to be an understanding of what elements of who was using were hijacking the religion, to engage in terrorist activities, and that all muslims should be opposed, whether shia or sunni. I would i believe that everybody should come together and actually fighting these extremist ideologies. And fighting them does not belong does not mean only through the military. This is deeper. It should be a comprehensive strategy to deal with extremism at extremism and terrorism. They emanate from lack of hope, in addition to ideology based on hatred and exclusion. There is a necessary for a girl Fertile Ground for these ideologues or demagogues to recruit new soldiers. New terrorists. Work that Fertile Ground and the way to do it is provide identity, hope, identity education. And economic future. This is what is lacking in the region and beyond. Even in the west. It is mindboggling that some people who behead innocent human beings, speak french and english in a perfect accent. It is because they have been disenfranchised in their own societies. It is because they feel that their identities are being attacked in their own societies. That is why they are misguided into believing into delving into this extremist violence. We need to have a comprehensive strategy to deal with that. What you just said, the United States, i think would agree with. The idea that there has been a need to find the root cause for people turning to misguided efforts to get them to engage in s that they were not necessarily headed for a writ whether it is despair of identity, or a sense of loss of hope it is a combination of various factors. Why can there not be any Common Ground . I believe there should be Common Ground. I believe that these terrorists are as much a threat against us as they are against saudi arabia and others. Which is why time and again iran has called for dialogue. Every suggestion for dialogue has been welcomed by iran, including an initiative that was delivered to iran at the Kuwaiti Foreign minister. Our president went to kuwait to respond to that initiative. Unfortunately, as soon as iran accepted it, saudi arabia which was part of the group that initiated this idea, rejected it. Now, we have to see what we are moving to words. I think we have a common destiny in the region. I think we have a common destiny across the globe. Where youa situation can win at the expense of others. Let me tell you what they say, i have talked to many leaders across the arab world, ad iran, a state that is persian state, not an arab state they say, in the famous words of Henry Kissinger iran has to decide whether it wants to be a revolution or estate, whether they want to be a cause or a nation. That has to choose is kissinger. The arab states in the neighborhood say it are coming to our neighborhood and trying to meddle in our country. Iraq, they are trying to have an impact in saudi arabia, and in the emirates. That is their principal accusation against iran. Nofirst of all, we are in country without the invitation of their government. In iraq, the government of iraq, but alsoin baghdad, the kurdish government, asked us to go and help them fight isis. In syria . X by the invitation of we were in syria because of the invitation of the government in damascus. That had it not iran iran and russia rushing to the assistance in Iraqi Kurdistan, today you wouldve had, instead of being forced to Liberate Mosul from you wouldve had to fight for erbir and baghdad. There responding to written we have had a consistent policy of supporting those who are fighting terrorism and extremists. In aid, the people who became the government of palestine. The iranians rid we are the ones supporting terrorism and extremism in syria. We are not involved in saudi arabia. This accusation from the crown prince of saudi arabia is trying to take the fight to iranian territory. That is what they have said. That you are coming after us, and that is why we must bring the fight to iran. We would rather fight in iran and saudi arabia. Cannot neglect his own admission that he is trying to instigate terror inside iranian territory. They say they want to stop you from trying to be the dominant player in the region. That is their agenda. Our region will not have a power player. I think that efforts to become a hegemony in our region are doomed to failure as efforts to become a global hegemony in our hegemon areobal doomed to failure. Cannote United States, be the global hegemon. In our region, nobody can be a hegemon. We understand that. I hope that saudi arabia understands that as well to read we are not trying to exclude saudi arabia that is their complaint. That is what they want to use as a cover to explain why to have made the wrong choices. Question,very clear why have they been on the wrong side, whether it was set Saddam Hussein invaded Iran United States supported saddam. Ask why did they why did they make that wrong decision. Saddam finished his war against iran, he turned his weapons against the people who had financed him. At that time, we went to their aid. We supported kuwait, after it was invaded by Saddam Hussein. They did not learn the lesson. Unfortunately they went to support the taliban. Then they went to support al qaeda. Then they supported alnusra. The United States and you must share and common enemy in the taliban. In fact, the United States cleaned up the taliban after 9 11, as you know. Yes, but i am talking about saudi arabia and united initially made them wrong choices too. We both opposed the taliban, whether we were on the same side or not, it is important. Charlie when you look today, what does iran want, what role does it want to play in the world . Javad iran is a country that despite able to survive pressure, despite a war, despite sanctions area we have been able to make progress. To make scientific achievements, despite of the fact in spite of the fact that every restriction was imposed on our country and our people, even our students who are prevented from studying physics and mechanics. At western universities. But we made advances for one reason. Our size, ourh geography, and our national resources. And we you have no you have no global ambitions. And most importantly rely on our own people. We do not rely on foreigners for our independence. For our security, for our economic robbers. We would love to work with the outside world, but we do not rely on them. We derive our security from our people. We derive our legitimacy from our people. Just remember that secretary mattis, the other day said that irans president ial elections were a sham the cause someone chose who should run the who should run in the elections. He forgot that people in the wrong waited in line for 10 hours, to vote for a sham. Even worse, people in los angeles, waited in line for four hours he was remembering the fact that there were people who wanted to run who werent allowed to. You are talking about the ability to vote for those who were allowed to run. 1200 people registered to run for president , can anybody anywhere in the world run an election with 1200 candidates . There has to be a process through which some who may not be qualified for the job, could be eliminated. There was an argument that they were to moderate in their views to be allowed to run. The fact is that in all democracies, you have a process through which candidates are excluded. Here you have the primaries and the caucuses. Others have other means. But they were all allowed to run in the primaries you still need a number of signatures to be on the ballot. So in every place you have a mechanism. Inont want to engage interference in internal affairs of other countries. Observer, i can tell you that if you dont have money, if you dont have the necessary financial contributions from big corporations and others, you may not be able to stand for an election in many sanders who had a very successful campaign, primarily raising money from i have a lot of respect for senator sanders but at the end of the day, you had a betting process. Vetting process. You have abilities and the United States that only members of the establishment and run. At the end of the day it is for the American People to decide whether they have the necessary choice. They showed that by coming to the polls, and iranians could estate home. If they wanted to stay home in iran, or if they wanted to stay home in los angeles even, just answer this question. Why would iranians having lived in the United States for generations, stand in line for four hours in los angeles in order to vote for a sham election . Why, let me tell you there is always a love for the soil you were born. But you do not engage in a futile exercise. Of course there is a love, i know that the love of my comp archer compact who live in the United States their love for their country in some cases they have been insulted by the revolution in some sense. Maybe they lost their property just a small segment. That is a historical fact. Bureaucracy needs to address that. But, at the same time, these people who live in the United States, not simply out of love for their country, but out of the recognition that they had a real choice, that there were candidates who presented different perspectives. Haderent outlooks if you understood persian and watched our debates, you would have seen to yourg similar, debates, taking place in iran. That tells you, going back to your question, we rely on our people. That is why we are content with our size, our population, with our geography. We want stability in our region, we want stability within the countries in the region. We do not want turmoil in the countries in our region. We have shown that in our support of people in iraq, in syria, and in our support for the people of kuwait when they were invaded by Saddam Hussein. Charlie several things about that influence. The german intelligence, for example, said that you still have great desire to have nuclear capability. Javad we do have nuclear capability, but we have foregone eight Nuclear Weapon option. Charlie did you do that because of the pain of sanctions . Javad no, we did that long before the sanctions. I believe the sanctions were misguided and missed placed. The wisdom of almost everybody is that you were hurting so badly from the sanctions that you were willing to come to the negotiating table, to take the sanctions away. Javad charlie, i presented a proposal to the french, the on marchd the germans 2005, before all of these sanctions were presented. At that time i was ambassador to the u. N. , and the Nuclear Negotiator, and the chief Nuclear Negotiator was our current president. I was negotiating on his be called and i on his behalf and i resented the proposal. Years i presented the proposal at that time ambassador bolton was sitting in the state department present preventing that deal from taking shape. Representing the Bush Administration and today he is trying to do that all over again. Charlie but he is not part of the government. Javad there are quite a few of them. Issues there was great with the nuclear deal, as you know. Javad the United States decided that the zero in option which it had pursued from 2003 until 2013, was not going to get it anything. What interventions do, they produce a lot of economic hardship. I grant you that. But, was that the objective of the sanctions, or was it to change irans policy . Charlie what do you think . Javad i think it was to change irans policy on centrifuges to read everyone knows that in 2000 have an, you had a National Intelligence estimate in 2007 there was a National Intelligence estimate that iran was from their perspective no longer pursuing Nuclear Weapons. This is during the Bush Administration, before obama. It was established that iran wa