Video and Transcript: President Obama's Statements on Iran (16 June)

OBAMA INTERVIEW WITH CNBC (Transcript after the videos)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

OBAMA STATEMENT AT PRESS CONFERENCE WITH SOUTH KOREAN PRESIDENT

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

CNBC INTERVIEW

HARWOOD: Couple things, quickly, before we run out of time. You took your time reacting to the protests in Iran after the election. What are you watching for in the handling of those protests and in the investigation of the results to--and how will that influence the dialogue that you seek to have with Iran?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I think first of all, it's important to understand that although there is amazing ferment taking place in Iran, that the difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised. Either way, we were going to be dealing with an Iranian regime that has historically been hostile to the United States, that has caused some problems in the neighborhood and is pursuing nuclear weapons. And so we've got long-term interests in having them not weaponize nuclear power and stop funding organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas. And that would be true whoever came out on top in this election. The second thing that I think's important to recognize is that the easiest way for reactionary forces inside Iran to crush reformers is to say it's the US that is encouraging those reformers. So what I've said is, `Look, it's up to the Iranian people to make a decision. We are not meddling.' And, you know, ultimately the question that the leadership in Iran has to answer is their own credibility in the eyes of the Iranian people. And when you've got 100,000 people who are out on the streets peacefully protesting, and they're having to be scattered through violence and gunshots, what that tells me is the Iranian people are not convinced of the legitimacy of the election. And my hope is that the regime responds not with violence, but with a recognition that the universal principles of peaceful expression and democracy are ones that should be affirmed. Am I optimistic that that will happen? You know, I take a wait-and-see approach. Either way, it's important for the United States to engage in the tough diplomacy around those permanent security concerns that we have--nuclear weapons, funding of terrorism. That's not going to go away, and I think it's important for us to make sure that we've reached out.

The Latest from Iran: Marches, Deaths, and Politics (16 June)

NEW The Latest from Iran (17 June): Uncovering the News on Attacks, Protests, and the Supreme Leader

Iran: Four Scenarios for the Vote Recount
Iran: Video and Transcript of President Obama’s Remarks (15 June)
Related Post: The Latest from Iran: Demonstrations and An Appeal to the Guardian Council (15 June)

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS- SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED




2220 GMT: Politically, the evening highlight appears to be the Supreme Leader's meeting with representatives of the four Presidential campaigns, calling for them to join together for "national unity". The move seems to be more of an attempt to buy some more political time while the Guardian Council tries to sort out its options --- all candidates will have been told of the necessity to keep demonstrations non-violent and non-threatening to the regime.

Elsewhere, chatter about gatherings has died down (it is, after all, 3 a.m. in Iran), so the hope is that there will be none of the violence that was feared earlier today.

Thanks to all for working with us today. We'll see you about 0530 GMT --- until then, our thoughts are with friends and colleagues in Iran.

2115 GMT: Breaking News On, citing the Wall Street Journal, says gunmen have seriously injured at least one person after opening fire on Mousavi supporters in Tehran. We're unable to find the specific information on the WSJ's site at this time. [Posted by Mike]

2100 GMT: Barack Obama has told CNBC that the outcome of events in Iran will make little difference to US policy towards Iran, and that Iranian hostility towards the US would remain:

"I think it's important to understand that although there is amazing ferment taking place in Iran, the difference in actual policies between Ahmadinejad and Moussavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as advertised," he said. "I think it's important to understand that either way we are going to be dealing with a regime in Iran that is hostile to the US. We have long term interests in not having them with nuclear power and funding terrorism."

[Posted by Mike]

1845 GMT: I am on a break for a couple of hours. Please keep items coming in for our late evening update --- we are following stories of a possible large march tomorrow and a statement by Ayatollah Montazeri.

1825 GMT: Reuters, citing British newspaper correspondent, says loud cries of "Allah-o-Akbar" from Tehran rooftops.

Reports that former President Rafsanjani and his daughter were amongst demonstrators marching from Vanak Square today.

1755 GMT: Twitter sources say Presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi was at the rally in front of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting complex and spoke to the demonstrators.

1750 GMT: Has the BBC, normally cautious about showing any political opinion in a conflict, tilted toward the Iranian oppositions? The Beeb's homepage has turned from its usual Red to Green.

1630 GMT: Press TV still focuses on pro-Ahmadinejad rally but adds, "Pro-Mousavi rallies surround the venue" (possibly a coded reference to demonstrating outside the main Iranian broadcasting complex), and says Mousavi is among the crowd.

1535 GMT: Twitter references to "tens of thousands" of opposition demonstrators in front of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting complex are complemented by witness reports to BBC of "a mass rally in northern Tehran".

1530 GMT: Press TV English's "News in Brief" highlights pro-Ahmadinejad rally noting, "This square was supposed to be the venue of a rally for Mousavi supporters but Ahmadinejad supporters decided to show up in the same location earlier."

1520 GMT: The pro-Ahmadinejad rally has proceeded peacefully while, after the cancellation of the main opposition rally earlier today, smaller demonstrations have been occurring across Tehran. There are stories of more attacks by security forces and paramilitary Basiji at universities, including Shiraz and Mashaad. The BBC has reported the story, which circulated yesterday, that 120 faculty resigned at Tehran University.

A note on the media coverage: it became painfully apparent this afternoon that Al Jazeera's correspondent was reported from the confines of his (badly set up for sound) office. When the programme's host mentioned this, the correspondent replied that he was free to move around Tehran but, in a convoluted explanation, added that he was restricting himself "for his own safety". I suspect Government monitors were either nearby or watching intently from a Ministry. Other international media have also been effectively blinded by teh restrictions on movement.

1255 GMT: I am off to appear on Al Jazeera English's "Inside Story" considering the politics and protests in Iran. The programme will air at 1730 GMT. Full updates will resume in about two hours.

1240 GMT: Almost three hours after it began, the pro-Ahmadinejad rally is finally receiving coverage, albeit from Press TV English. Camera shots show that Vali-e Asr Square is filled with demonstrators waving Iranian flags, while correspondent Homa Lezgee is estimating there are "thousands" in the square and giving a basic summary of their arguments that Ahmadinejad won a clear majority in an election in which almost 40 million votes were cast. Lezgee is vague on who might speak to the rally, although she says it is likely to last "several hours".

Lezgee says Mousavi supporters were in Vali-e Asr Square but have moved to Vanak Square and she has had no reports of clashes.

1205 GMT: BBC correspondent John Lyon in Tehran says that, after a loosening of restrictions on international media yesterday, reporters are now confined to their offices unless they have official permission for movement. He speculates that this indicates a power struggle within the Iranian system and, from his office, says that this situation "must remind Iranians of 1979".

1115 GMT: News services are reporting that the Mousavi campaign has called off this afternoon's rally because of fear of violence.

An extraordinary interview on Al Jazeera: Professor Sadegh Zibakalam, head of Iranian Studies at Tehran University, is saying the Guardian Council's decision to review the vote is "too little, too late" to satisfy public opinion: "Nothing short of declaring the election null and void will stop the protest of the people." Even more surprisingly, Zibakalam criticised the Supreme Leader's failure to heed the pre-election warnings, in a letter from former President Rafsanjani, of Government manipulation of the vote.

1105 GMT: We've just posted an outstanding analysis by Chris Emery of the possible outcomes of the Guardian Council's recount of Friday's vote.

1035 GMT: Echoing yesterday's developments, there is confusion as to whether the Mousavi campaign is withdrawing its support for a rally. Today's tension is heightened by the overlap of the 5 p.m. rally with the earlier pro-Ahmadinejad demonstration.

1030 GMT: The Guardian Council has rejected the appeal of the Mousavi campaign for a new election: ""Based on the law, the demand of those candidates for the cancellation of the vote, this cannot be considered."

0945 GMT: The Guardian of London has posted a handy spreadsheet of the "official" vote on Friday, broken down province-by-province.

0900 GMT: According to Saeed Ahmed, the Mousavi campaign has rejected the recount proposal and insisted on a new election. It believe a "recount will provide more opportunity for fraud".

0825 GMT: CNN's Saeed Ahmed reports that the Guardian Council told the Islamic Republic News Agency that it met with the three opposition candidates, "asked them to specify what areas they want recount, and agreed to do so". That would indicate a wide-range rather than narrow reconsideration of the vote.

In turn, this opens up the possibility that the Guardian Council may overturn Friday's result. That, however, raises the further question: would it go as far as to order a re-run election or even declare Mousavi the victor?

A possible way out would be for the Guardian Council to declare Ahmadinejad's "revised" figures at below 50 percent (vs. the 63-64 percent he supposedly received). That would lead to a second-round contest between the President and Mousavi. Such a "solution" would still be politically tricky: a scapegoat (for example, the pro-Ahmadinejad Minister of Interior) would have to be found for last Friday's unfortunate events. It would mean, however, that the Council would not have to make the choice between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi.

It is notable that all of this is occurring while Ahmadinejad is in Moscow. Yesterday, the rumour was that he had cancelled the trip. Now the rumour is that he was encouraged to leave Iran as these political manoeuvres took place.

0813 GMT: Press TV English confirms news that Guardian Council "ready to recount disputed ballot boxes".

0810 GMT: According to CNN's International Desk, Press TV in Iran is reporting that the Guardian Council will recount votes from some of the provinces in Friday's election.

0740 GMT: Concerns about possible confrontations have been raised by the announcement that there will be a pro-Ahmadinejad rally in Vali-e Asr Square at 3 p.m. local time today. Demonstrators protesting the election gather in the same location two hours later.

Press TV, reporting on both planned rallies, is emphasising Mir Hossein Mousavi's call on his supporters "to keep calm...to act peacefully and to avoid falling into the trap of street violence". Mousavi's headquarters says he is not attending the 5 p.m. rally.

0645 GMT: The office of leading politician Mohammad Ali Abtahi, an ally of Presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi, says that he has been arrested.

Morning Update 0530 GMT: State-run Press TV is reporting that seven people were killed in the "illegal rally" at Azadi Square in Tehran yesterday. There was no direct reference to the probable source of the gunfire, members of the paramilitary Basiji militia.

Instead, Press TV's initial reference, "As protesters were beginning to disperse at sundown unidentified gunmen fired shots into the crowd," has been replaced by this morning's assertion of an "attack on a military post" by demonstrators "reportedly trying to loot weapons and vandalise public and Government property". At the same time, Press TV continues to emphasize that this "was a peaceful rally up until [that] moment."

The media line, while less enthusiastic than the coverage of yesterday afternoon's rally (see 15 June updates), indicates that the Iranian Government, including the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is trying to maintain some room for compromise with opposition.

That impression is supported by events on the political front. the optimism of yesterday afternoon has been replaced by a downbeat caution amongst opposition leaders. Mir Hossein Mousavi, writing his followers last night about his appeal to the Guardian Council over vote fraud, said, ""I don't have any hope in them."

However, in a sign that compromise might be sought, the Guardian Council are now calling the electoral outcome “provisional” and are meeting with all three opposition candidates today. The meetings occur as President Ahmadinejad is out of the country, having left for a Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Russia last night. Ahmadinejad, in a statement to the press as he departed, made no reference to yesterday's marches.

Other international media such as CNN, restricted in their movements, are following Press TV on the report of casualties.

In Washington, President Obama was asked about Iran during his press conference with Italian President Silvio Berlusconi. He replied,"[I am] deeply troubled by the violence I've been seeing on television....I think that the democratic process, free speech, the ability of people to peacefully dissent -- all those are universal values and need to be respected."

At the same time, Obama emphasized that his Administration would not intervene to influence the internal developments: ""We respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran."

Iran: Video and Transcript of President Obama's Remarks (15 June)

The Latest from Iran: Marches, Deaths, and Politics (16 June)

The response of President Obama to the first question in the press conference after his meeting with Italian leader Silvio Berlusconi. Note the balance between his concern over the aftermath of the election and his continued pursuit of engagement with Iran: "We will continue to pursue a tough, direct dialogue between our two countries, and we'll see where it takes us."

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSpXxdO74vs[/youtube]

QUESTION: Mr. President, on Iran, does the disputed election results affect -- there's been violence in the street -- in any way change your willingness to meet with Mr. Ahmadinejad without preconditions?  And also, do you have anything to say, any message to send to people who are on the streets protesting, who believe their votes were stolen and who are being attacked violently?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Obviously all of us have been watching the news from Iran.  And I want to start off by being very clear that it is up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran's leaders will be; that we respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran, which sometimes the United States can be a handy political football -- or discussions with the United States.

Having said all that, I am deeply troubled by the violence that I've been seeing on television.  I think that the democratic process -- free speech, the ability of people to peacefully dissent -- all those are universal values and need to be respected.  And whenever I see violence perpetrated on people who are peacefully dissenting, and whenever the American people see that, I think they're, rightfully, troubled.

My understanding is, is that the Iranian government says that they are going to look into irregularities that have taken place.  We weren’t on the ground, we did not have observers there, we did not have international observers on hand, so I can't state definitively one way or another what happened with respect to the election.  But what I can say is that there appears to be a sense on the part of people who were so hopeful and so engaged and so committed to democracy who now feel betrayed.  And I think it's important that, moving forward, whatever investigations take place are done in a way that is not resulting in bloodshed and is not resulting in people being stifled in expressing their views.

Now, with respect to the United States and our interactions with Iran, I've always believed that as odious as I consider some of President Ahmadinejad's statements, as deep as the differences that exist between the United States and Iran on a range of core issues, that the use of tough, hard-headed diplomacy -- diplomacy with no illusions about Iran and the nature of the differences between our two countries -- is critical when it comes to pursuing a core set of our national security interests, specifically, making sure that we are not seeing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East triggered by Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon; making sure that Iran is not exporting terrorist activity.  Those are core interests not just to the United States but I think to a peaceful world in general.

We will continue to pursue a tough, direct dialogue between our two countries, and we'll see where it takes us.  But even as we do so, I think it would be wrong for me to be silent about what we've seen on the television over the last few days.  And what I would say to those people who put so much hope and energy and optimism into the political process, I would say to them that the world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was.  And they should know that the world is watching.

And particularly to the youth of Iran, I want them to know that we in the United States do not want to make any decisions for the Iranians, but we do believe that the Iranian people and their voices should be heard and respected.

Iran: Four Scenarios for the Vote Recount

The Latest from Iran (17 June): Uncovering the News on Attacks, Protests, and the Supreme Leader
NEW Iran: The First Audio from “Alive in Tehran”
NEW Video: President Obama’s Statements on Iran (16 June)
LATEST Video: The Protests in and Beyond Tehran

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS- SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED

At our request, Chris Emery has written this special snap analysis of today's unprecedented developments in Iran:

This morning’s news that the Guardian Council has agreed to recount disputed votes only confirms that the Islamic Republic, at both a public and official level, has entered totally uncharted waters. It is impossible to know at this stage the degree of coordination between the office of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the Guardian Council. However, it appears that, given the immediacy of the situation, the Guardian Council have decided that there is not enough political space to present a full report over the next 10 days (which they announced yesterday). Instead, the highly volatile atmosphere on the street demands immediate concessions.

At this very early stage there appears to be four scenarios:

1. Mousavi Declared Winner

This appears to be the second least likely scenario but the one most problematic for the Supreme Leader, who has already endorsed Ahmadinejad’s victory. For this to happen, Ahmadinejad would have to lose about 10 million votes. The scale of voting irregularity would then appear so brazen that it is difficult to see how it could be sold to the Iranian public without permanently damaging key institutions. It would require several high-level scapegoats, probably all high-ranking officials in the Interior Ministry and maybe some Revolutionary Guards tasked with guarding ballot boxes. Some administrators on the ground would doubtless also be fed to the wolves.

This decision would almost certainly bring Ahmadinejad’s supporters on the streets in huge numbers and potentially see as much, or even more, disruption and violence on the streets. The humiliation of Ahmadinejad, who has been packed off to Moscow, would be a huge boost to political heavyweights like former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, but it could spark a backlash from others in the political establishment, with hardliners playing the nationalist card by highlighting international pressure for a Mousavi victory. (To its credit, the Obama administration has so far done well to avoid providing this ammunition and would probably continue to do so.)

2. Ahmadinejad confirmed as victor

This appears to be the most-likely scenario. The Guardian Council may remain confident in the result and  that any manipulation remains undetectable. They may have, before making this morning’s announcement, quietly taken soundings amongst Iranian elites and institutions to confirm these assumptions.

Ahmadinejad’s lead would almost certainly be cut, and the election would appear much more competitive, but he would still win outright. This would still ask some tough questions as to why the President’s majority was initially so huge and would probably still require some scapegoats.

This result would obviously not convince many core opposition supporters. Their reaction, however, could swing in one of two different directions.  They could feel that, even with a re-confirmed Ahmadinejad victory, this unprecedented enquiry means the establishment can be pushed further. On the other hand, they could feel that they have reached the limits of what they can achieve. Meanwhile, the political establishment could see this gesture as their final offer and then crack down hard on any further opposition.

3. The election goes to a second-round runoff

This appears perhaps the second most likely scenario but would pose a huge political and logistical question for all parties.

Ahmadinejad’s vote would be cut to below 50% so he would enter a head-to-head contest with Mousavi. The numbers would be altered to increase the first-round vote for Karroubi and Rezaei, whose poor showing, even in their home provinces been greeted with extreme suspicion. Again, scapegoats would be needed.

A second-round ballot would re-establish some legitimacy without provoking the violence that would likely follow scenarios 1 and 2. It is likely that this re-run would be supervised by figures with substantial credibility in Iran (maybe Speaker of the Parliament Ali Larijani). Such a body was proposed for the first election but rejected by the Supreme Leader.

This would be expensive and logistically difficult, with much of the infrastructure on the streets and in the various campaigns is paralysed. There is certainly no guarantee that Mousavi would win, either. His campaign may want to go back to the polls quickly, whilst their supporters are mobilised. On the other hand, they may want a cooling-off period in which they can recompose their strategy, redefine their message, and normalise their communications.

4. Election is declared null and void and new election called

Although this is the option apparently favoured by the Mousavi campaign, it has apparently been rejected by the Guardian Council and is thus the most unlikely scenario. Writing off the first election as irredeemably corrupt and mismanaged would be enormously embarrassing for the political establishment and, again, even more logistically problematic. Would candidates de-selected by the Guardian Council be able to re-apply, would there be more television debates or campaign messages? When would the election occur and how would it be supervised to guarantee legitimacy? This scenario would, like all of the others, require heads to roll at a local and central level.

Again, there is no guarantee that Mousavi would win and there is a real question whether Mehdi Karroubi would even stand. This could essentially be a second-round contest between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad.

The International Reaction

The West, and particular the Obama administration, will cautiously welcome today’s Guardian Council concession but will remain prudently cautious until one of the above scenarios — or another I have missed — emerges. Most governments will hope for a scenario that will ideally remove Ahmadinejad and chasten the political establishment enough to offer future concessions to political openness without provoking a major backlash or instability.

[Enduring America is continuing to follow the situation in Iran very closely- for the latest, please subscribe to our updates.]

Israel-Palestine: Netanyahu's Two-State Magical Sidestep

NEW Video: Netanyahu on US Television (NBC “Today” Programme – 15 June)
Transcript: Netanyahu Speech on Israel-Palestine (14 June)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a master politician, but as he walked to the podium at Bar Ilan University yesterday, he faced a magician's challenge: how could he ever wish away the headline US pressure on his Cabinet to start a meaningful Israel-Palestine peace process by halting the expansion of Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank?

No problem for Bibi: he did it with a wave of the hand: "The territory under Palestinian control must be demilitarized with ironclad security provisions for Israel." With that single sentence, the Prime Minister not only escaped from Washington's chains; he draped them around the shoulders of the Palestinian Authority.

The international media, primed in advance by the Prime Minister's office, rushed to declare that Benjamin Netanyahu, for the first time, had recognised a Palestinian state. Netanyahu's three references to that "state", however, were either far from positive or laden with conditions: "There is a real danger that an armed Palestinian state would emerge that would become another terrorist base against the Jewish state"; "It is impossible to expect us to agree in advance to the principle of a Palestinian state without assurances that this state will be demilitarized"; and, most importantly:

If we receive this guarantee regarding demilitarization and Israel’s security needs, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the State of the Jewish people, then we will be ready in a future peace agreement to reach a solution where a demilitarized Palestinian state exists alongside the Jewish state.

This was a political manoeuvre (I'll shy away from a reference to a magician's trick) of the highest order. Netanyahu ensured that he got the immediate endorsement of the White House without giving any ground.

For the immediate effect is to turn pressure onto the Palestinian Authority. Under Netanyahu's formula, Mahmoud Abbas and his advisors will have to not only repeat their recognition of Israel, given to the US-UN-European Union-Russia Quartet, but also declare in advance that they will not have any armed forces beyond local police. They will have to renounce the Palestinian "right to return" to lands owned in Israel before 1948.

While putting conditions on his Palestinian counterparts, Netanyahu is trying to make the condition set on Israel by US disappear. He began with the apparent concession, "We have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements," while at the same time trying to lock in construction which has already occurred or been authorised by the Israeli Government:

There is a need to enable the residents to live normal lives, to allow mothers and fathers to raise their children like families elsewhere. The settlers are neither the enemies of the people nor the enemies of peace. Rather, they are an integral part of our people, a principled, pioneering and Zionist public.

Far from incidentally, the Israeli Prime Minister also drew the line against any political recognition of Hamas, a possibility opened up in President Obama's Cairo speech. He did so far from subtly: "Above all else, the Palestinians must decide between the path of peace and the path of Hamas." Even more importantly for his strategy, Netanyahu used the Hamas menace to reinforce his demands on the Palestinian Authority: "Without [demilitarization], sooner or later, these territories will become another Hamastan."

Of course, Netanyahu's success may only be short-term. This morning, the initial headlines have of his "two-state" declaration have been offset by stories of the Palestinian rejection of his speech. And there are signs that Obama officials may have recognised their endorsement was given too quickly, in light of Netanyahu's conditions and his rejection of their condition to resolve the settlements issue.

For the moment, however, the Israeli Prime Minister has given himself a bit of breathing space. The US had hoped to follow the Cairo speech with diplomatic advances through envoy George Mitchell's talks in Tel Aviv, Ramallah, and Damascus. Netanyahu's manoeuvres, with his staff publicly denouncing Washington's approach before the promise of a speech after Mitchell's departure, and (height of ironies) the sudden attention given to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's "victory" in Iran has blocked those American hopes.

Netanyahu's magic? At the same time that he supposedly accepted the "two-state" peace process, his carefully-framed speech --- for the moment --- made it disappear.