 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today we have with us Ambassador Bhadrakumar who's been a keyed follower of the developments not only of all international issues but particularly of West Asia, Central Asia and this entire geo-strategic part of this region. It's a pleasure to have you with us. It's always a pleasure for me also an old friend more than anything else and to be with you. I feel very comfortable talk chatting with you. As you know, the Iran-U.S. standoff particularly with Mr. Trump cancelling the nuclear deal which not only had the U.S. and Iran but also other states. It was not just a deal between Iran and the U.S. What are the ramifications of this in terms of what's likely to happen in the West, on investment? You see it has different templates at the core, very core. This has been a project which dates back to the Bush administration, Rumsfeld, Cheney and so on. The attack on the invasion of Iraq was not accidental and at that time the subtext was actually Iran. After finishing that they would turn to... So you know the project is about disposing of emergent powers in that region which would someday be in a position to challenge Israel's supremacy in the region and Israel is the main instrument for the American hegemony in the region. So stakes are very high. Now the project was completed in Iraq but then towards the second half of that occupation it took a very unexpected turn and it didn't happen and then the regime changed in Washington. You had Barack Obama who had a very different attitude towards engaging the Muslim Middle East and you know his famous speech in Cairo University in 2009. So the Iran part and he had a very different approach to Iran. So as I say it the project got actually postponed by 80 years and when history is written my feeling is that this would be coming up as a singular failure on the part of the Obama administration that the President Obama I don't know what prevented him. He didn't follow up the nuclear deal of 2015 July because if he had provided the underpinnings for the smooth implementation of this a certain new normal would have come to exist in the US-Iran relationship and so on. Like for example what he had to do was to implement the deal from the American side. Now therefore what these people have done is they have actually picked up the threats. Now this has to be clearly understood and the Iran nuclear deal rejecting it is a pretext for it. The real agenda is to my mind regime change in Iran. You know there have been a lot of arguments that even the Obama administration's agreement was essentially to dismantle Iran's centrifuge program and also remove as you know the fissile material which had been made up to I think 20% richness, enrichment had to take less than 20% and that all that material was taken out. There's a condition of the deal. I think 98% of the fissile material was removed potentially fissile material and most of its centrifuges from I think 18,000 they came down dramatically to much lower figures. So that was the intent but the Americans would never really going to be very honest in accepting their side of the deal. This was some of the arguments of the deal and the second part of it if you think of it that one of the reason that they did not go too far on implementation is the kind of attacks to receive from the Republican majority at the time in the Senate and the Congress that they that that was could be also part of the reason Obama was not really didn't want to get too far once he dismantled Iran's capabilities. You're right you know the I'm not blaming Obama. I'm saying that this will stand out as a failure because this part of it the epilogue should have been thought through because this deal otherwise didn't make sense. This deal should have led to a constructive engagement between the United States and Iran and that would have been the underpinning. You see Iran should have been made a stakeholder. There's no point in talking about a like Trump is demanding that Iran's regional policies are unacceptable. But the point is why is Iran Iran has not precipitated a single conflict in that region. Iran has had a role to play but why is it that Iran has pursued this politics of resistance. That is because it is been besieged it's under siege ever since the Islamic Revolution. So a construct only through a constructive engagement and I feel I was reading the other day again this Cairo University speech by Obama. I think left to himself. He apologized for the CIA overthrow of Mossadik. Now that was an extraordinary gesture you know. So he he was with his sense of history. He was quite aware of what the problem area was and then he was wanting to win their confidence and the irony is that you know that the ruling elite in Iran their demand is really that they want to be integrated with a western world. They want technology capital for building themselves up. I have no doubt in my mind that they are not wanting to develop nuclear weapons because knowing their system and their ideology and so on there is this fatha by Imam Khomeini and they attach that most importance to that kind of thing because it is linked to the legitimacy of the regime. So that's not the issue there. The thing is they want to develop their economy because there's a lot of pressure on that front you know the people's expectations and the this is a this is a regime which is characterized in a certain way by the western analysts in western media but which has a representative character whether you like it or not and just to take up the point that you're raising that they wanted engagement and therefore they wanted really the kind of economic sanctions to be lifted and the reason they built up the nuclear capability was more a bargaining attempt in order to bring the United States to the negotiating table rather than the route to nuclear weapons. This is I think the point that you would say is the reason why they developed this nuclear capability. Yeah you know the nuclear program that they had you know it made a quantum jump when Bush just flatly refused to talk to them it greatly forward in fact you know every time they have tried to push sanctions absolutely you quoted the numbers you look at the rising curve of the numbers you know it tells the story by itself because the jump is taking place whenever they were snubbed absolutely and there was a refusal on the part of the Americans to engage them. This could have been done actually by Bush they had made the offer Iran if you remember had made the offer at that time yes we'll cap the nuclear program you should normalize there are things we overlook for example they cooperated with the American intervention in Afghanistan in 2001 and they passed on very valuable intelligence to the American forces against Al Qaeda you know so you see the the the the the the the late motive for the the the the the impetus for the regime impetus was definitely in terms of a constructive engagement of the western world. You talked about Iran being besieged one of the reasons they intervened partially in Iraq also in Syria is also the fact that the forces which are rising there the basically the kind of Islam which was rising there ISIS Al Qaeda was inimical to the kind of Islam that is there in Iran and would also be a long-term threat to it do you see therefore that actually these forces supposedly the ones which also attacked the United States in 9-11 there was a common even a common basis for all the powers in the region to come together to prevent it but instead of that Iran is sought to be isolated these forces are sought to be turned against Syria and also lately against Iran would that be one of the also issues when when the west really played shall we say a more destructive card in West Asia well probably you know there is a lot of sophisticity here you know in the sense that you know that Al Qaeda's creation you have to point the finger at the United States there's no other way you know like I mean I worked for a long time in my career around Afghanistan and I have had access to a lot of privileged information and it's very clear that you know that there was American backing for Osama bin Laden and he was transferred from Africa to Afghanistan and they had at that time the CIA's favorite group was nothing other than this Hakanis group you know that group and they prevailed that they conducted him directly to keep him there so you know this is how it began and then one thing led to another you know and then you know it was bound to happen they spun out of American control and you know they got fired up you know and then they demanded the exit of Americans from Saudi Arabia and you know their problem with the Saudi regime all kinds of elements got into it and then they hit at the Americans you know now in the case of Islamic state virtually it is the same thing this all goes back to Brzezinski's brainwave to you know inject this poison of radical Islam in a through terrorist groups to serve geopolitical agenda starting from Afghanistan Caucasus also the other target it's Chechnya the same thing has done and I even fear that at some point you know they might even turn towards Xinjiang you know and in fact you know they are hundreds or thousands of them from Xinjiang are working with as Islamic state fighters and we're working in Syria and that is China's involvement in the Syrian conflict one major consideration for China and Chechnya being the other contingent Chechnya and the entire North Caucasus you know Dagestan Chechnya all this inkushetia all these places so essentially so you know try to use this against Iran as well as Russia even against China in China Iran's very important because the point is these groups are also subscribing to the Wahhabi ideology and they are anti Shiite and they are virulently anti Shiite you know that you know like the Hasara Shiites in Afghanistan or you know in their crosshairs you know this kind of thing is there so you can find a better proxy than this to hit at Iran Iran's involvement in Iraq is also very curious it is not in terms of these terrorist groups or anything it is that the Americans you know the New York cons there you know with their thing that they should you know make all countries democratic so they introduced democracy there in Iraq now these guys didn't know that you know that means you know empowerment of Shiites and also those Shiites which had been sheltered in Iran against Adam for a very long time and then this this Islamic state came now the the Iranians had a dilemma that if they hadn't intervened in Syria they would have had to fight this Islamic state on their territory in in so this why today we have the a major operation going on in southwestern Syria bordering Jordan and Israel Jalan Heights yeah now Dara province of Syria has been completely liberated and I read this morning that the operation is completed in about 70 percent of Conetra Conetra is the one which is straddling Golan Heights yes now that is it's acknowledged by everybody that they are Islamic state fighters it's a problematic area and it was supported by Israel yes now you see the the thing is you know we here in India particularly you know we have this notion that Israel is a very important partner for India our at least our ruling elite and our establishment you know claims that you know Israel is a very important partner for India in fighting terrorism now this is a country which is actually sponsoring Islamic state as a proxy absolutely in in Syria and you know lots and lots of weapons have been confiscated during these operations with Israeli markings and you know they provide hospital services yes that they're taken from Syria into Israel from to Jalan and this Iranian website this morning I was reading Fast News Agency they had a report that some of the prominent commanders the Syrian forces knew these commanders they have escaped actually into Israel Israel will send them away later to Jalan they have escaped now into Israel so this is in fact the numbers are about some thousands I'm told yes yes the numbers are pretty large and then the Russians have been saying this all along that this American special forces on eastern border of Syria Syrian Iraqi border one of their main tasks is to give shelter to the Islamic state fighters and keep them incubate the future yes yes yes so coming back to the issue that you raised earlier when President Trump says that Iran's foreign policy is not good they have to change it what they're leaving out is the fact what the US foreign policy in the space area has been and if they don't really intervene on the side of what I would call larger secular policies they're endangering their own country as well no you see the thing is what is taking place can be very very simply put this way that the this project starting from 2011 regime change project in Syria Israelis got into the act in a big way and they had this notion that it's a walkover you know he in no time Assad will flee from there he dug in he fought and now he won that I am not getting into the detailed Russian intervention and all took place but the point is the balance sheet today that battle has been lost now the thing is in that theater that is Syria Iraq together anywhere around 200,000 strong militia who were aligned with Assad's government forces and also with the fighting in Iraq they were trained by the Iranians and the battle harden seven years they've been fighting I know this militia is there now this is a hybrid war no country is attacking Syria it's a hybrid war you're sending in proxies now in this hybrid war Israel's military superiority Israel has been the dominant power because of the sheer military superiority outstripping all other countries in the region that has become irrelevant so you see something like what took place after the 2006 war in Lebanon they went in and then the hospital are resisted and then they didn't know how to withdraw in fact you know and now since then the Israelis have never gone anywhere near Lebanon they don't attack you know because they know that now the same kind of situation is developing in Syria and now look at that country it is in terms of social formation one of the most advanced countries in the Arab world an elite with a cosmopolitan outlook staunchly secular and a plural society that is you say that you know that an al-await minority is disproportionately there but it's not that the regime is just al-await there is a substantial social base even among the Sunnis and so on Christians and so on now you see this kind of a country you know with all the warts and all it was worth preserving in my opinion and it could have been a situation now this young man who was trained as a doctor in UK and he was a westernist his first visit after becoming president of Syria was actually to Paris you know he had a very special feeling towards France and the western world like this so they could have nudged him towards you know opening up and all that and he was in fact he had already embarked on that kind of a thing now they have destroyed this country so his father Hafiz didn't go for any trouble with the Israelis just accepted the occupation and was marking time but I think Bashar will now demand vacation of the occupation so there is a resistance movement going to shape up there this is actually the problem and that is why they have to the force behind it is Iran and that is why Trump has got into the act this is basically a dishonest plea the old argument this I told you this is sophistry this is completely because they have argued about missile which is not included in the nuclear agreement their missile range is far lower than Saudi Arabia and the basic problem they have is missile distance reaches Israel and that's one of the problems they have but still is not a very long-range missile so this whole missile technology is bogus it was not there in the agreement the talk about foreign policy is bogus so it really rests on extra considerations now extraneous considerations none of these this is to bring back the balance of forces in that region in favor of Israel which is shifting otherwise against it is completely shifting and also the core issue of the Palestinian issue is lying there and when this balance shifts like this there is going to be trouble all around then the Israelis will come under compulsion to address the Palestinian issue and you know the whole ideology of Israel and the whole geopolitical agenda behind the creation of Israel everything is this you have to put a question mark there Mr. Wadukumar the other issue really historically looking a country which has a Jewish population of a six and a half million forget for the time being the internal dissension another six and a half million Palestinian population leaving that out can it even hope to control an area today which is a population of 300 million and with countries like Iran population of 80 million just the sheer economic size of these countries are so much at variance does it not change the geo-strategic it is it is it is absolutely that case you know the point is it is only the blank check from the Americans but now they are also there is a problem they are no longer going to be able to come and fight wars and there is a certain kind of retrenchment taking place there and with that you know it's Israel has to really address a very bleak future in my opinion this is all the last act of the bravado the swagger you know this is you're absolutely right this is not sustainable you know the other geo-strategic balance which has shifted post 90 all of soviet union soviet union or the following state Russia the state that takes over russia has withdrawn literally from west asia all of these places now with Russia facing the kind of pressure it has in Crimea and Ukraine it's sort of coming back into international at least into international play shall we say and Syria has been the first test case where they have forced Libya where they did not do much that Syria they have learned lesson and after Libya they didn't want it to fall you know it is it is not because of the not only because of this threat of radical islam and terrorist groups and all that along the russian underbelly it's not only because of that you know you must also probably see this that russians do not want to be caught on the wrong foot like in the cold war era that is ideologically communism versus islam you know this sort of a propaganda by the west it really got entrenched there and therefore they were the antithesis so now what they what they're doing is therefore without being prescriptive they are engaging even islamic countries there number one number two this is a system the russian system today they are avid globalizers you know they are globalizing in a big way so they are picking up for instance railway projects in saudi arabia and they are negotiating s 400 missiles yes and with the ue and now they have a deal with captain of OPEC with saudi arabia on oil oil production and so on you see the the russian involvement is is something that they have brilliantly worked out with a view to seeing that the mistakes of the cold war era are not repeated and today you take syria for example it's a it's a test case they are the only power big power which is on talking terms with all the protagonists that's true they have been talked to israel very closely israel saudi arabia given concessions saudi arabia turkey iran katar even the countries which are supporting the islamic state they have brilliantly managed the relationship so you know the the americans have a problem there also now you know the the thing is and then there is the other player who has appeared on the horizon but with immense potential that is china so you know the when you look at it on the chess board you find a hopeless situation from the american point of view there is a you know basically once you know this kishore mohani said in a in a piece about three four years ago that the basically the problem is the american intellectuals are still unable to reconcile with this thought you know it's surprising because you know in the financial times with the thought that you know that sort of capacity to influence and dictate is no longer there for the americans financial times edward lucas had a lunch with ft it was kissinger on thursday and kissinger mentioned this kissinger mentioned that you know that he would induce you know what trump is doing in certain ways because the point is it is not possible now for the united states to do it all this previous way this is the reference to hilsinki summit but that's the point you know that there you find today also that you know that there is really there is great reluctance to accept that the world is changed that the locus of power is shifted and they don't have the kind of western alliance system any longer operating like this it was actually evident as far back as 2003 when germany and france said that they are not going to come into iraq you know and they had to settle with just uk you know the coalition of the willing so these are all playing out you know they say it's actually markers for the yes that's why i said in the beginning that you know that there are many layers the core is this that they have to dismantle uh they have to firstly they have to stop roll back and destroy iran that is at the core if they want the geo strategic dominance of israel to continue last question do you think it lead to a shooting war with iran do you think that's possible or this is a prelude to coming to a negotiating table and this is an opening gambit by trump let's restart the negotiations but on a different footing you know when you look at that part of it i have extensively dealt with iran you know when they are so many times and i know they are elite you know their mindset and what drives them they are very pragmatic mind you something like half of rohan is cabinet they are people who are trained in american universities and zarif you know he is on twitter with nancy pelosi and others you know and so you know they are all over the place you know as i briefly mentioned earlier their driving force there is this that they want to have their economy revamped and put it on a stable footing because the regime faces a challenge there and they don't want to be caught in a situation of rising expectations that they are unable to fulfill and thereby the legitimacy of the regime getting undermined this is the this is the central issue for them they are not projecting power into other countries and they have not created these situations you take emin for example emin's conflict didn't even like trump and all say that iran is behind it it didn't start yesterday or day before yesterday this is going on for a long time you know this is the second or third time that the saudis are militarily intervened in emin you can remember saudis and the hooties of the same side absolutely so this is yeah they're shifting sands you know so the point is this that the when you come to iran therefore uh to answer your question yes they will deal but the point is they should there should be an enlightened leadership in america not this one dimensional hollow men like at the leadership level like that country has caught today but the saving graces here is that this man is also a businessman president trump is finally realistic tycoon and businessman and uh i doubt if uh you know he will overrule the pentagons advice and order the troops as the commander in chief to go into iran and it's a big country it's you know it's two-third the size of india it's land mass and it's very difficult terrain and going there and occupying that country unthinkable and then not only that before they enter uh iran can be trusted in fact you know to hit back in a way that there are going to be huge casualties there's going to be disruption in the world economy this all these gulf countries they've already said that if they are intimidated they will stop the flow of oil into the world market can you imagine a situation that you know there's oil shortage like that western economies and everything there'll be you know entire global economy absolute global economy will be in turmoil so that the fact that uh trump is there's maybe a possibility in a second term unless this is settled that he may do something like that and i don't think also that the pentagon will really go along with an agenda to wage a war on iran so i think a constructive engagement can take place now if you look back six months back this is not the rhetoric towards north korea yes that you hear today so uh it is quite possible but the main problem is uh then israel will have to understand i that is the main problem because understand means what that it has to address the palestinian issue you see it has to you know behave like a normal state like every month it is going and attacking some with us gaza or debi for yesterday they went and shot they sent missiles into gaza again then to syria so you know this kind of thing cannot happen cannot work that is the main problem is it possible to deal ink israel and iran issue is the challenge and as of now they seem to be linked at least in the us view of the west asian scenario that's a key problem that is that is that is that is where the uh the whole thing has become such a knot you know and of course you have the other issues that despite of the best intentions of people not to go to war war can still take place after all that first world war i think still we should we should not look at it like that because we should there is always a possibility a margin of error is always there but in this particular case i refuse to contemplate a war because simply because it will be such a catastrophe consequences the world will be horrendous thank you ambassador badrik bar to be being with us today and we hope to see you more though your visits to delhi are now infrequent thank you thank you very much it's been my pleasure