Transcript submitted by a reader

http://www.urmedium.net/c/presstv/134610

Bardia Honardar, PressTV: 0:04
Hello and welcome to “Spotlight”. The UN Security Council has rejected a bid to keep sanctions relief for Iran, paving the way for renewed UN sanctions within days. Iran has slammed the move, calling any attempt by the European trio to reimpose sanctions baseless and a direct assault on international law. Iran’s ambassador to the UN, Amir Saeedi Ravani, emphasized that in a striking display of hypocrisy, the European trio and the US claim that Tehran must be punished for the reciprocal measures it took years after enduring violations by the other side. The three European countries triggered the snapback process last month, accusing Iran of breaching its obligations under the 2015 nuclear deal. That mechanism will expire on October the 18th.

0:54
And if no deal is reached by September 28th, international sanctions suspended under the nuclear deal will automatically return. Allow me to introduce my guests for tonight’s show. Security and political analyst Avi Rizk, joining us from the Lebanese capital Beirut. And we also have independent international affairs analyst Gilbert Doctorow joining us from Brussels.

1:25
Gentlemen, welcome to the program. Let’s start off with Mr. Rizk in Beirut. Iran’s ambassador to the UN, Amir Said Ravani, said today’s action was hasty, unnecessary and unlawful. The Iranian foreign minister also highlighted that the push to revive sanctions lacked consensus and faced serious opposition from several council members. What were your expectations for today’s session, Mr. Risk?

Rizk: 1:51
I think that the expectations were that indeed that this measure wouldn’t pass and that the sanctions are going to be implemented or imposed. In fact, the French president Emmanuel Macron said as much during an interview with Israeli television when he was asked about this topic. He was asked, are you certain, I think, that the sanctions are going to impose? He responded in the affirmative.

So I don’t think it comes as a big surprise. And I think that a lot of it’s related to European animosity towards Iran, specifically over Russia. In other words, there’s a lot of hostility and animosity between the Europeans and the Russians over Ukraine. And we know that Iran has drawn closer to Russia in recent years.

2:41
And so that’s made Iran more of an enemy in Europe’s eyes. I think that is one or possibly the major factor, not the only one, but a major factor behind the European approach to Iran and the fact that they’ve decided to impose these sanctions.

PressTV:
Gilbert Doctorow, Iran’s ambassador to the UN said any attempt by the European trio to reimpose sanctions is baseless and a direct assault on international law and the Council’s credibility. Give us your perspective on this route that the E3 decided to pursue ultimately.

Doctorow: 3:20
I believe that the underlying reasons for this action have nothing to do with Iran. I agree with the remarks of my fellow panelist that they are to be understood in reference to Europe’s positions on Russia. And this action against Iran is in its own way similar to Donald Trump’s attacks on boats in the Caribbean, allegedly coming from Venezuela and carrying narcotics. This is the action of a bully, a cowardly bully, who looks for a weak spot to flex his muscles and show his strength. And that is what the European Troika is doing. They are picking on Iran because they don’t have the guts to go directly after Russia. That’s what it’s all about.

PressTV:
All right, Ali Rizk, China and Russia who backed today’s proposal, they condemned further sanctions on Tehran as counterproductive, illegal and invalid. They also released a joint statement regarding the anti-Iran sanctions. The two countries said that the reinstatement of the sanctions [was] illegal. They will not comply with or abide by these renewed sanctions. So break down the response from China and Russia. What message do you think this sends to the other side, to those who are pushing for the renewal of the sanctions and for cranking up pressure on Iran?

Rizk: 5:01
Well, I think it was very clear during the recent summits which were held in Beijing, if you remember, Chinese President Xi Jinping hosting a number of world leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, also Iranian President Masoud Pazhashkian, and the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. I think that this show– by the way, another very important development during that summit, perhaps the most important, was the participation of the Indian Prime Minister Modi. I think that was a major, major development.

So I think that that particular summit showed that there’s a emerging block which is taking shape. And the reason why I focused on India is that India’s traditionally seemed to be on the Western or in the Western camp. But what happened in Beijing, I think, proved that something different is taking shape, because I think of Trump’s own policies.

6:02
And I also believe that this also brings me to another important issue. For example, India didn’t commit to the sanctions which were imposed on Russia. That’s why Trump chose to increase the tariffs. But that just goes to tell you that even if the Western camp doesn’t tend to increase the maximum pressure on Iran, a lot of the countries aren’t going to commit to that, regardless of this resolution or regardless of the European intentions to reactivate the snapback mechanism. So China and Russia, yes they won’t commit to it, but I think also countries like India, it’s quite possible that they might not also commit to it.

6:47
So this era of Western hegemony and the West being able to impose its own will, I think that slowly is breaking down. And I think Trump’s policies, by the way, are speeding up the process of it breaking down. So yes, it is considered to be, I think, an escalatory step, but I think that other countries do have their own incentives to try and stop or limit how effective these measures will be, not just for the sake of Iran, I think, but also because they want to prove their own points that there’s a new world order which is emerging, and that the US can no longer use these sanctions in such a way.

PressTV: 7:31
And Mr. Doctorow, about the reactions and responses coming in following the UN Security Council session, if you’d like to add anything to China and Russia’s response. Also, Pakistan said invoking snapback complicates the situation. Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA could be an area which gets complicated.

Doctorow:
I subscribe completely to the remarks of my fellow panelist. We respect the positions of China and Russia on the snapback. I just remember that going back 10 years, the Russians and other countries that had been subjected to sanctions went along with the dictat coming from the United States and its allies to impose sanctions on a country X, Y, and Z. That game is over, and it has been declared invalid from the highest possible point, that is Russia and China.

8:39
And for that reason, the notion that a Gemini is unraveled, or has unraveled already, and cannot be put back in place is a very important development to which we are witnesses. Having said that, of course I appreciate that imposing or reimposing sanctions on Iran will be very painful for your country. And I am hopeful that understanding in places like Russia and China will enable mitigation of the pain that the troika in Europe intend to impose.

Let us also consider that they’re acting in the hope, one more action in the hope of currying favor with Donald Trump. Trump, of course, is much tougher on Iran than he dares to be on Russia. So this is a situation in which Iran is an unwilling victim and a innocent victim, one can say. It is being punched for the simple reason that those who are imposing these sanctions believe that they can do to Iran what they cannot do to a country like Russia. And then that is sad.

PressTV:
So Mr. Rizk, Gilbert Doctorow believes that the trail leads back to Russia. Iran’s foreign minister, however, he has accused the European Troika, France, Germany and the UK of colluding with Israel and the United States to maliciously pressure the Iranian people. Your reaction to that accusation, and do you agree with the Iranian foreign minister?

Rizk: 10:34
I think that part of it is about the United States, but again, I think the Europeans have their own hostility towards Iran, which is separate than the issue of the United States. And it wouldn’t be the first time, by the way. If you go back to when Obama wanted to reach the agreement or when he did reach the agreement with Iran, France objected strongly initially. It was the most hawkish player out of all of the G5-plus-1.

And at the initial phase, it obstructed the American efforts, Obama’s efforts to reach an agreement. This time around, I think that the European stance is even more hawkish, as I said, due to the developments that have taken place between Iran and Russia. By that, I mean the closer ties between the two countries. But regarding Israel, I think that’s an interesting point. And this brings me to the issue of the European intentions to recognize a Palestinian state. And we hear now about potential European sanctions against Israel.

11:36
Now I think possibly, possibly, the Europeans, in order to satisfy the Israelis, they might be following the strategy in such a way, in the following way, that we recognize a Palestinian state, we might sanction some Israeli right-wing figures, but at the same time, we impose sanctions against Iran. That way, they might make up for Israel.

So they take some anti-Israeli measures on the one hand, but they make up for that by escalating against Iran. And I think many Western countries do pursue these kinds of policies in order to gain the satisfaction of Israel, because Israel still, I think, wields enormous influence over political decision making in the West.

PressTV: 12:25
Gilbert Doctorow, along the lines of the same issue, a guest that we spoke to earlier here following today’s UN Security Council session said that there is a constant effort to undermine Iran at every turn. Please tell us whether you agree with that or not; and who benefits from this?

Doctorow:
Well the beneficiary of course is Israel. Any restrictions on Iran that cause economic harm, any restrictions that cause a weakening of some sort in the military capabilities of Iran all serve the purposes of Israel.

As regards Israeli influence on this decision, I’m rather skeptical. The decision to reimpose or use this snapback, I’m rather skeptical that they played any significant role. I still say the issues are more on the United States, currying favor with the United States, and doing to Iran what they would like to do to Russia, but don’t have the ability or the force of will to do.

PressTV: 13:40
Sure. And Ali Rizk, just chronologically looking at everything that led up to the situation we are right now, the E3, they also severely failed in carrying out their obligations under the JCPOA. So what about all of Europe’s shortcomings in the implementation of the nuclear deal? And why did Iran have to do all the heavy lifting all these years? Why has Iran always been the one to shoulder the responsibility of keeping the JCPOA afloat?

Rizk:
Well, I think that’s been the issue all along. I have to emphasize here, I must slightly disagree with my colleague. I still think Israel wields enormous influence over the West, and I think this goes a long way in giving an answer to what you just asked.

PressTV:
Absolutely.

Rizk:
Israel is viewed as a natural ally of the West, of Europe and of the United States, and as a result of Israel being viewed as this natural ally, that leads to these double standards which you just referred to. The Europeans weren’t able to live up to their own pledges of the deal simply because Trump introduced this mechanism of secondary sanctions, meaning that if the EU were to continue with business deals with Iran after the US withdrew under Trump, they would be subject to sanctions. And I think the EU economies are just too weak to withstand that.

But again, I think the major, the basic point is that Israel continues to be viewed despite everything which is happening and the horrors of Gaza, it’s still viewed as a natural Western ally, and that’s translated into these policies which appear to be illogical and place all of the onus on Iran without looking at how other parties have not lived up to their commitments or pledges.

PressTV: 15:42
Mr. Doctorow, would you like to respond to that?

Doctorow:
Well, if we look at this old question of the smaller devil and the bigger devil, the smaller devil being Israel and the bigger devil being the United States, I put my money on the bigger devil. This is– what we are now engaged in, my fellow panelists and myself, is a debate over whether Israel is the tail wagging the dog or whether the head is wagging the tail. I opt for the head wagging the tail.

Israel does what the United States wants. And it’s not because Israel dominates the United States, but because the United States dominates, or can dominate Israel, if and when, at any moment, it wants to. Everyone knows full well that the moment the United States pulls the plug on its economic support to Israel, Israel will fold. So the situation is a bit different from my perspective from the presentation that Israel is calling the shots and the United States falls into line.

PressTV:
All right, and staying with you, Mr. Doctorow, Iran has been calling out a serious double standard here, where Tehran has demonstrated its peaceful intentions, pointing to years of cooperation with the IAEA and the transparency it has shown under the NPT. But Israel, which is carrying out a genocide as we speak, it possesses nuclear weapons without scrutiny, and Iran here is being punished for its civilian nuclear technology.

Doctorow: 17:24
Well, unfortunately, the world we’re living in has more than double standards to worry about. It is very sad that the Gulf states have done nothing to save the Palestinians and to put pressure, military pressure, as well as political pressure, on Israel to desist.

That is the world we live in. It’s a much more complicated world than we have been discussing till now. And it is regrettable that none of the great powers can move in. It’s logical they can’t move in if the neighbors of Israel and Palestine are doing nothing other than Iran. Iran is very active. The Houthis are very active. But the rest of the region is quiet.

PressTV:
And same question to you Mr. Rizk about this double standard and hypocrisy that we’re seeing with regards to the Israeli regime.

Rizk: 18:25
If you just give me a minute to respond to that point, I know we’re going off script here, but I have to emphasize that the recent strike on Doha, Qatar, the Israeli attack, I think that proves in my humble opinion beyond any doubt that it’s Israel which directs US policy in the way it wishes more than the other way around. I’m not saying it dominates or it always decides, but it does have significant influence.

Look at the pro-Israeli lobby, look at the evangelicals, and the US, it can, if it pulls the plug on economic aid to Israel, yes, Israel wouldn’t survive. But I don’t think that there’s any US president who has the political will to do so, because of the dangers that would expose. The strike on Qatar, you’re talking about Centcom, the base of Centcom. Now how that strike serves American interests, I fail to see.

19:22
Regarding the double standards, look, again, this is standard Western policy. There are certain players which are signified as national allies. [4 sec. no sound] And that’s the way the policies are pursued, despite the fact that this sometimes is contradictory to Western interests, but they continue to pursue that. And it seems to want to be rather illogical, not based on any strategic or rational calculations.

PressTV: 19:56
Gilbert Doctorow, let’s talk about the credibility of the United Nations Security Council in its entirety as well. Do you think that the Security Council is a body for peace, or is it the exact opposite? Because we have to also allude to the constant resolutions for a ceasefire in Gaza that have been vetoed at the Security Council.

Doctorow:
There’s no question that the UN Security Council is not functioning as designed. But it was always from the very beginning intended to be a place of dispute and failure to resolve issues. That was foreseen when the veto was given to the permanent members.

So I don’t see a very great deterioration in the efficacy of UN resolutions or in the actions of the Security Council itself. The Security Council is a talking body. And it is a place where some debates of importance take place, which can be useful for informing the broad public across the world. However, when matters are critical, as they are in the Palestinian issue, on the issue of Iran today, we can expect that the various interests work against any effective resolution. That’s where we are today. And I’ll say the issue is in the region, and the region is doing nothing.

PressTV: 21:45
Okay, final question to Mr. Rizk. Same issue about the United Nations Security Council. Do you think there’s a big question mark over the credibility of the likes of the UNSC? Is it a force for good or is it a force to stifle good?

Rizk:
I’m not sure if we can say it’s a force for good or a force for evil. The UN Security Council, it’s a result of World War Two, basically, whereby you have the most powerful countries that emerge after World War II, which have veto power. Each country, yesterday for example, it turned out to be a force of sheer evil when the US used that veto against the resolution regarding genocide, which is taking place in [Gaza]. So there are certain powers who exercise their own domination if you would like, in order to push through their own policies. And I think that more and more we’re approaching the law of the jungle, if you would like, outside the framework of the UN.

One very good example of that is not only the genocide in Gaza, but also what the guests referred to, the current US campaign against Venezuela, the attack on boats and fishermen, which is happening. Also how the George Bush administration launched the war on terror without going back to the Security Council. So I think that quite some time, the UN Security Council has been only able to do so much.

PressTV: 23:16
All right, thank you, gentlemen. We’re going to leave it there. Security and political analyst Avi Rizk, joining us from Beirut. And independent international affairs analyst Gilbert Doctorow, joining us from Brussels. Than you, gentlemen, and a special thanks to you our viewers for staying with us on tonight’s edition of “Spotlight”. It’s good night for now. We’ll see you next time.

Transcript submitted by a reader

https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/08/29/753998/SLAMMING-ILLEGAL-SNAPBACK

PressTV: 0:19
Hello and welcome to “Spotlight”. Iran’s ambassador to the UN has strongly rejected and condemned the E3 push to activate the snapback mechanism against Iran, which would reimpose UN sanctions on Tehran over its nuclear program. Amir Saeedi Avani said the decision undermines Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA and constitutes an unnecessary and provocative escalation. Iranian foreign minister has also issued a stern warning to the European Troika, namely France, Germany and the UK, accusing them of colluding with Israel and the United States to maliciously pressure the Iranian people. We’ll be discussing the different aspects of this snapback mechanism and more on this edition of Spotlight. Here are our guests for tonight’s show.

1:08
Independent International Affairs Analyst Gilbert Doctorow joining us from Brussels. And we also have political commentator Massoud Shadjareh joining us from the British capital, London.

1:27
Welcome to the program. Let’s start off with Mr. Massoud Shadjareh. In London, Iran has rejected the invoking of the snapback mechanism as illegal and illegitimate. Tehran says that any attempt to revive these past sanctions would be a serious blow to diplomacy and a violation of the JCPOA itself. Give us your perspective on this route taken by the E3.

Shadjareh:
It really is outrageous that after all these years, the incompetent of Europeans after Trump pulled out, out of the deal and put sanctions against Iran. European nations said Iran should stay in and they will find ways of addressing the grievance of Iran and addressing the sort of the needs and aspiration of Iran, which was supposed to be ensured under JCPOA.

2:28
But they did nothing as such. As a matter of fact, they were the cause, not just Trump, but they were the cause of undermining and making JCPOA abandoned completely, despite the fact that Iran stood by its commitment right the way through. So here at the 11th hour, to jump in and try to actually claim that there is suddenly Iran has not adhered to his commitment. It is an abuse of the process, it’s undermining the spirit of the agreement and indeed it really is what I could only describe, that is, sort of trying to change the rules halfway through, just to put further pressure and support the Zionist state, which we have seen over the almost two years, they have done so.

3:31
Even they have not just supported Zionist state, but they have supported this genocide and equipped it to be able to commit this genocide. So I think in one way we can’t sort of expect anything else, but from the other side, it really this action undermines every aspect of sort of fair play and adhering to the spirit of the JCPOA.

PressTV: 3:57
Let’s bring in Gilbert Doctorow from Brussels. Mr. Doctorow, Iran’s foreign minister has called the activation of the snapback mechanism immoral, unjustified and unlawful.

Please walk us through these main talking points about the snapback activation. In addition to that, Iran’s UN envoy Amir Saeedi Ravani earlier said the decision undermines Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA and constitutes an unnecessary and provocative escalation.

Doctorow: 4:29
Well, this news item that you are now raising is getting attention even of mainstream in the West. “Financial Times” reported precisely on this issue of Iran being prepared to stop its cooperation with the International Atomic Agency if the snapback proceeds. At the same time, I would say that this is occurring at a propitious moment for Iran, because you will have every opportunity to consult with close friends and allies in the coming several days in China.

5:05
Your delegation is taking part in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization annual meeting. I believe your presence will be there. And surely they will find the time with Mr. Putin and perhaps with other important decision makers who will be there of the 26 countries taking part. You’ll have an opportunity to go over what remedies that Iran may have to strike back against this discriminatory and unjustified decision, which appears to be made in Europe.

PressTV 5:49
Masoud Shadjareh, earlier today, Iran’s UN envoy, Mr. Amir Saeedi Avani, called on other UNSC members to defend the rule of law and act responsibly. What should other members of the UNSC be doing in this regard?

Shadjareh:
Well, I think this implementation of switching this procedure, it has much more fundamental impact than what it will, impact that it will have on Iran. The reality is that it sort of makes mockery of any sort of negotiation or diplomacy or international law.

The reality is that, you know, if they could change the law, if they could abuse any agreement, clear agreement in this way, then they could do it to anybody else. And basically it’s a signal, as I was saying earlier on, that they will change the law of the game, in the middle of the game, just to implement their wishes and abuse the principles. Here, by doing so, they’re abusing principles of diplomacy, principles of fair play.

7:11
You know, every aspect of international relations is undermined because everyone, everyone could see how unfair it is, how abusive it is and how it’s been designed just to provoke. And I think no international body, no matter what part of the world they are, they can no longer trust agreements, like JCPOA and other agreements, internationally, if indeed this one be abused so clearly, so openly and so publicly. I agree with my colleague, the other contributor, that we have to wait and see what China and Russia and other nations are going to do. But the fact is this: that I believe there is a lot more at stake than just what is happening in Europe.

PressTV: 8:06
Mr. Doctorow, would you like to add anything to that? In that regard, actually, China and Russia have also condemned the activation of the snapback mechanism by the European troika. Moscow warned that reimposing sanctions against Iran could bring grave consequences, and it called it a, quote, “erroneous decision”.

The Russian Foreign Ministry says the trio is undermining diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful solution to the issue. Walk us through those reactions, if you may, because Iran has put forth questions whether the European trio is acting independently or simply following US policy.

Doctorow: 8:45
You’ve just taken words from my mouth. I was about to say precisely that. You are approaching this from a standpoint of fairness, rationality, and diplomacy. I’m afraid to say that all of those parameters do not apply in what is taking place, because Europe is only interested in currying favor with the United States at this moment, because the Europeans are scared out of their wits about how to deal with Russia when they are not equal to the Russians’ military force and when they are provoking, constantly poking the Russian bear in the eye.

So unfortunately, Iran is an innocent victim of a different set of considerations, which are really the European dependency and, say, slavish dependency on the United States and their hope that following Mr. Trump’s lead on this issue, they will be rewarded, patted on the head, and get what they want from the United States with respect to Ukraine. So, you are regrettably paying a price in the irrational and unreasonable behavior of the Europeans.

10:12
However, from the wild side world, looking from a standpoint of the global south, I think Europe has lost all credibility. And it appears to be weak, indecisive, and dependent, and lacking in sovereignty. So in that context, I think Iran does not have to feel abused. And I think you will receive very good counsel and support from the countries with which your president will be meeting in China in the next few days.

PressTV: 10:52
Massoud Shadjareh, in a joint statement, the E3 envoys to the UN accused Iran of abandoning almost all of its JCPOA commitments since 2019. What about all of Europe’s shortcomings in the implementation of the JCPOA? Why does Iran have to do all the heavy lifting here? Why has Iran always been the one to shoulder the responsibility of keeping the JCPOA afloat?

Shadjareh:
I mean, you couldn’t make comedy like that. In reality, it is that, you know, everyone around the world, any fair-minded person, will know that Iran went more than an extra mile to adhere to its responsibility, its commitment, but those commitments were undermined first by United States and Trump’s administration. And then it was sort of the same thing happened with the Europeans, so weak that they couldn’t really be a player.

And they just made [xxxxx] to the United States, and they weren’t able to save anything whatsoever of the agreement and they undermined it. But you know, the point I think at this hour and this time is that we need to understand that what Iranians and Iran and indeed fair-minded people in the global South will think right now is that you can’t trust, you can’t do a political deal, You can’t do a deal with the Europeans or Americans. And the fact of the matter is that really what is at here now is that we have to make a stand. Iran has to make a stand. Iran and its allies need to come together recognizing the negotiation.

12:52
If indeed this is implemented by the UN, then really it leaves no room whatsoever for any further negotiation. And I think this is the key. We are saying, we are seeing the beginning of end of international relations and international fair play, international law. And we have seen that being battered so badly over the last two years with Gaza being treated the way it has and the genocide has been supported by these nations. Now we are seeing that’s going further.

13:33
The weakness of Europeans is actually showing itself that they cannot possibly be involved in any international negotiation and be their own voice and their own action.

PressTV:
Gilbert Doctorow, Iran has been calling out the double standard here. Tehran believes it has already demonstrated its peaceful intentions, pointing to years of cooperation with the IAEA and full transparency under the NPT. But the Israeli regime that is carrying out a genocide as we speak possesses nuclear weapons without scrutiny while Iran has constantly been punished for its civilian nuclear energy program and civilian nuclear technology.

Doctorow: 14:23
Well, this double standard has been maintained under a situation of American global domination when it was not subject to a voice of reason or to measures of decency because “might made right”.

We are witnessing now the deterioration, collapse of that system. Frankly speaking, although Mr. Trump may not be a favorite politician in Iran, he is doing what he can to dismantle and destroy the underpinnings of American global domination. So in the longer run, this man who has not been very kind to Iran and who has certainly given the signal to the Europeans to make the decision which you have been decrying today, in the long run I believe that Mr. Trump is doing what he can to move to a multi-polar world, peculiar as that may sound to your audience today.

PressTV: 15:36
Massoud Shadjarah, with regards to the issue of international law, we spoke to a commentator a few days ago here on PressTV. He said, why are we even talking about international law at all? Because the issue of international law at this point is moot. Do you see it in that light as well?

Shadjareh:
Yeah, I think we really need to revalue and re-adjust our sort of even terminology when we say “double standard” or “international law”. It’s not a double standard. I think now with the blanket removed from our eyes, we could see quite clearly that it’s always, always supposed to be the same standard. This, it wasn’t a double standard, it’s an illusion that there will be a treatment, same treatment for the state of Israel as there is for Iran or anybody else around the world.

16:38
Lebanon, Syria, the reality is that it is always supposed to be this double standard. This was the standard, not double standard. And I think now we also see after almost two years of genocide in Gaza, that international law was always supposed to be misused and abused by the colonial power to implement their policies. I would even go further and say democracy has been exposed as well. You know, right across the Europe and Western world, overwhelming majority of people want end to this genocide, but the leadership, despite the strong feeling within all these nations, is not only [not] stopping it, but actually fueling it, giving free military equipment, finances and political support, and it goes on and on.

17:39
I think we need to sort of revalue that. Was there ever going to be a UN coming at 11th hour and saving the day? I would say no. Was there ever going to be equality in [inter]national law? No. Was there ever going to be equality in treaties and treatment of different nations? No.

I mean, now it’s very clear. We need to sort of sit back and say that we are in a juncture. Either we go along with the way that the Western powers are pushing us towards a future with genocide as the norm, or we oppose it and we change all the systems and have systems that are fit for purpose rather than fit for [revolution].

PressTV 18:28
Mr. Doctorow, Iran expects respect from the E3 and not pressure, especially regarding its right to enrich uranium under the NPT. Hasn’t that route of pressure proven to be ineffective? We can look at all the unilateral sanctions and the maximum pressure campaign that was spearheaded by Washington for all these years?

Doctorow:
Yes, well, of course the sanctions have been painful for Iran. It would be a mistake to underestimate the damage that has been done. Russia is the example of a country that has successfully resisted the greatest number of imposed sanctions in history. But Russia is a different country, a different economy, different scale of population, and it has been uniquely prepared to manage these sanctions. Iran has done very well, but it has suffered to a greater extent. And what is about to be reimposed if this happens? I believe you have four to six weeks to negotiate this and find some amicable solution.

19:46
But if it is imposed, of course, that will be a hardship. The question is, what will Iran’s friends and allies propose to do to alleviate this pain and in turn to inflict pain on the Europeans for the injustice they are considering. And if you look at the changing balance between Europe and the rest of the world, you will find that it is at a disadvantage today; its ability to impose willy-nilly its demands on a country like Iran is deteriorating.

20:38
This– for that to continue, it is imperative that you reach agreements with fellow members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and with BRICS because essentially the three founding members and most important driving forces of BRICS of which you are now a member will be in attendance in Beijing for the 80th anniversary of the end of the war in the Pacific Theater. So you have an opportunity. I hope that it is used effectively. And there must be a united action, not only to assist Iran, but to impose pain on those who want to use the snapback.

PressTV: 21:29
Mr. Shadjareh, let’s wrap up this segment of the program with this final question. Of course, we’re running short of time, so I’m going to ask you to be brief.

Iran says that it’s still open to dialogue, but has always insisted the trust must go both ways. If the West wants progress, It has to stop making threats and start recognizing Iran’s legal rights. But we haven’t seen much trust building from the Western governments, have we?

Shadjareh:
No, we haven’t. I mean, I think Iran, ideologically, doesn’t want to close the door and wants to show both internally and externally that is indeed looking for a solution.

But I think it’s very difficult to see that any solution externally will be available without some sort of pressure from China and from Russia and indeed, global South. And I myself, I will add my voice to all those who are saying that this needs to happen, not just for saving Iran, but indeed to save internationally the ability of everyone else to have some sort of hope for the future because this sort of bullying will not bring us anything except war, genocide and disarray.

PressTV: 22:53
All right, thanks a lot, gentlemen. Political commentator Massoud Shadjareh joining us from London, and independent international affairs analyst Gilbert Doctorow joining us from Brussels.

Thank you for contributing to tonight’s program, and a special thanks to our viewers for staying with us on tonight’s edition of “Spotlight”.

23:09
It’s good night for now. See you next time.

It was a pleasure, after a break of several months, to rejoin Natali Morris and her husband on their interview program Redacted for a discussion of the Israeli-Iran war: its likely duration, global significance and the position on this conflict taken by other world powers including the USA, Russia, China and Pakistan.

Redacted is an enormously popular program in the United States, in Europe and, I imagine, in other parts of the world. The viewer numbers on this show are indicative of the interest that the moderators have developed in a loyal audience.

As one Comment mentions, the Israeli air defense is a lot more than the Iron Dome, which is intended to intercept short range projectiles. Other, higher altitude interceptors protect Israeli from ballistic missiles. The problem that few commentators discuss is that the supply of missiles for these air defenses is not unlimited. The Iranian wave attacks are depleting these interceptors so that the effective protection of Israel from incoming missiles may not last more than 10 days.  If that is true, then Israel will not pursue the war beyond that point and Iran has already publicly stated that it will halt its attacks in turn.

Accordingly, there seems to be a lot of hyperventilating on the part of my fellow commentators. Moreover, the environmental threats from Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear installations are being blown out of proportion for purposes of sensationalism. The world is not facing a new Chernobyl disaster from Israeli bombing raids.

That being said, the direct entry of Washington into the conflict by supplying its heaviest bombs to Israel or, still worse, by flying B2s into Iran and destroying the underground facilities that are best protected, could create a broad regional, even global conflict. Nonetheless, this is all still a hypothetical risk. 

In the meantime, the Russians, like the Chinese, are probably quietly supplying Teheran with air defense installations and other military materiel.  One has to wonder how long it will be before the North Koreans offer to sell a bomb or two to Teheran.  Why build when you can buy?

In any case, barring some dramatic development in the Iranian political structure, the balance of power in the Middle East between Israel and Iran is likely to continue be a major issue in the region for years to come whatever the outcome of the present exchange of missile strikes and bombing raids.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025