Jamal Khashoggi and Mohammad Marandi HARDtalk

Welcome to HARDtalk. I'm Stephen Sackur.

There's a faultline that lies beneath much of the current

turmoil in the Middle East, and it runs between Riyadh and Tehran.

Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran are locked

It's a dangerous and costly struggle for regional

supremacy that weaves from Lebanon to Yemen by way of Syria and Iraq.

My guests today are Mohammad Marandi in Tehran,

Both respected clinical analysts. -- political.

Is there any way to take the heat out of the Saudi-Iranian

Mohammad Marandi in Tehran and Jamal Khashoggi in Jeddah, welcome to

HARDtalk. Let me start with a simple question for both of you. Relations

between the two countries are currently toxic. Diplomatic

relations have been severed. Mohammad Marandi first, is this

something the Iranians government deliberately wanted, set out to

achieve, or is this crisis in relations something that has

happened by accident? I think definitely the Iranians did not want

to break relations. The Iranians believe the Saudis have been showing

erratic behaviour for quite a long time. A few months ago, hundreds of

uranium pilgrims died during the Hajj pilgrimage. Because of sad in

competence. The Saudis not only did not apologise but did not show

remorse or express condolences. This angered Iranians a great deal. The

Iranians did not break off relations, the Saudis on the other

hand after the beheading of Nimr al-Nimr, who never carried arms,

people in Iran became angry, and some people went to win NBC -- went

to an embassy. They did the wrong thing, and a senior official was

dismissed. They threw stones and a firebomb, and the Saudis cut off

relations. When we compare the two incidents, it is obvious that the

Iranians are the ones who have shown patience, as they showed a few

months ago, and the Saudis, the belief here, is that the Saudis want

confrontation. Jamal Khashoggi, you have heard the Iranians narrative

presented by Mohammad Marandi, does that match what you perceive to be

reality? It was the straw that broke the back of a sour political

relationship that lasted many years. It only started because of Iranians

expansion. This fighting and killing Syrians, the political process in

Yemen, those and others led to a falling apart of peace. It would be

better if the Iranians got their hatred out of Syria, sat with us,

and talked peace. If they cannot do that, just get out of the Middle

East, go back to Iran, and let us fix the middle east along with

Turkey, Pakistan, and the international community, because it

has become so dangerous for all of us. All we need is for the Iranians

to stop meddling in the middle east. If laugh life were that simple. You

raised many points about different theatres of conflict in the region.

We will have to take them one by one. Before we get to external

issues, but stick with Saudi Arabia for a moment. Your government

beheaded 47 people at the beginning of this year, including the senior

Shia cleric and dissident Nimr al-Nimr. The decision to do that was

obviously taken consciously knowing it would infuriate, enrage and

provoke Tehran. I come back to this point about countries

decision-making. Why did the Saudis see fit to do that at this

particular time? If I want to give a reason why we executed Nimr al-Nimr,

I have to give a reason why we executed the other 46 people

implicated of terrorism. Some of them are also linked to Al Qaeda,

important leaders to Al Qaeda. They were all tried and were caught. It

is hypocritical to talk about execution of violent preachers while

Iran is doing the same thing. They have executed 200 people. They have

a law to execute someone who endangered the state. If they can do

it, why can't we do it? This is the law. It is a point I will put to

Mohammad Marandi. It is a bit rich, is it not, of the Iranians, Angelo

Foreign Minister in the New York Times are specially, to say the

Saudi actions, the executions, were an act of barbarism, then say Saudi

Arabia has a choice, it can continue promoting sectarian hatred, or it

can choose to play a constructive role in promoting regional

stability, as if Iran does not execute people, as if Iran does not

play sectarian politics in the region just as Saudi Arabia does.

What hypocrisy from your government! Well, I think most

objective observers would know there is no comparison between Iran and

Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia first of all has a wishing that promotes an

extreme ideology that should not be exhibited to Sunni is them --

regime. Textbooks speak of discrimination and believe that

those who do not believe the ideology of Muhammad are not real

Muslims, and that in many incidences, we see the Saudis

justified the death of people and minorities because of that. It is

interesting that Islamic state, Al Qaeda and other extremist groups use

the same textbooks used in Saudi Arabia. They use them to teach. That

is why we see the UCD-- Yazidis destroyed. It was the Iranians who

saved people from IS attacks. There is no comparison. Iran is opposed to

sectarianism. It does not exist in our text books. We have Christian

MPs. That is dangerous territory you are on giving the record of Iranian

leaders of a recent vintage Austin in the Holocaust and coming out with

various anti-Semitic words and phrases. If you suggest that Iran is

an entirely nonsectarian regime with leaders who are committed to

tolerance and freedom, I will question that clearly. Of course. I

would be glad if you tried to question it, but none of the

Iranians leaders, past or present, have ever made anti-Semitic remarks.

Iran does not equate to those with Zionism -- Judaism. If someone in

Iran, Angelo referring to the president, that is one individual

and whether we accept the line which he uses, I personally do not like

that sort of language, but he never made any anti-Semitic remarks -- and

you are referring to the president. With respect to both of you, our

viewers can judge for themselves whether they are any comparisons

between your government when it comes to sectarianism. We'll have to

park that for the moment. Let's talk about the various proxy conflicts

that engage in the two governments and upbringing turmoil to the middle

east region. Let's start with Syria. Before relations between your two

countries were severed, there was some hope this month would say a

breakthrough coming together of all the different parties to the Syria

conflict, including the President Assad government, rebel

representatives, and all of the external powers who have a role to

play, including the Saudi and Iranians representatives. From both

of your perspectives, given where you are today in the bilateral

relationship, is it impossible to believe you to governments can work

together to find a solution to Syria? Yes, we should do that, but

we do not have militias that fight the Syrian people, the Iranians are

doing that. We demand that the Iranians get out of Syria soaking

bring peace back to Syria. We brought every single representative

from the Syrian people to Riyadh from the Sunnis, the Shias, they

were all represented and from the team that would negotiate peace in

Geneva. We are supporting the Syrian people. While the Iranians are

supporting a dictator. You are supporting Saudi Arabia's money

going to one of the key rebel forces. No, no, no. Of course not!

The United States, United Kingdom, the international would hold as

liable if we send a single gunshot to the al-Nussra front. It is a

terrorist organisation. Just as much as Islamic State and Hezbollah. I

know many independent observers don't believe that. I wonder how

that goes down in Tehran. Last night, I read an interview with the

Indian ambassador to Damascus during 2011 and 2012, and he was saying the

government in the Persian region were involved in this, and Al Qaeda

were involved from the start. He said he spoke about the role Al

Jazeera played, but more importantly, let's go to the head of

the US defence and intelligence agency at that time, which is this

most important organisation, intelligence and military

organisation in the United States. He had 20,000 people working for

him. A document from that agency basically said they knew from early

on in Syria that the dominant groups that were fighting the Syrian

government were the extremists. They knew their allies were supporting

these governments activity and Saudi Arabia. -- Turkey. They knew there

was a strong possibility and extreme estate, including Al Qaeda,

remembering that Isil back then was Al Qaeda in Iraq, would be able to

form a government of swords between Iraq and Syria. -- sorts. The

general feeling did an article on Al Jazeera and admitted the United

States took a wilful decision to support its allies in Syria in their

pursuit of these policies. United States, the Saudis, the Turks, they

were all supporting the extremists. Neither of your government is

prepared to tell the truth which is that you are fuelled by paranoia of

each other. Despite you telling me you don't believe in sectarian

politics, both in Tehran and Riyadh there is a mentality that suggest

that if we don't project our power and place, our bitter rivals - of

the Saudis -Iranians - depending where you sit, will benefit. Because

of that mentality, Yemen, Syria, you could argue Lebanon and Iraq and a

host of other theatres of operation too have become this arena for a

struggle between your government that red ash that is the truth. If

we look at the Iran is supporting, it is supporting exclusively

sectarian groups, whether in Syria, in the form of the government of

Syria, in Lebanon, in the form of Hezbollah, in Yemen, in the form of

the Houthi, who have hijacked the process, why is Saudi Arabia dealing

with the people of Syria and Yemen, those who want a better future, who

want to build a new Yemen, a sectarian Yemen? (CROSSTALK). Hang

on. Let me talk Yemen for a moment. You are propping up President Hadi,

who we know, if your bombers, agreement and money were not

propping him up, we would be out of the country in no time at all. He

isn't the product of a popular movement but he is your puppet. No,

President Hadi is the head of a transitional government that was

part of a political process which was hijacked by the Houthis and the

former dictator of Yemen whom the Iranians are supporting today.

Iranians have their favourite dictator in the Middle East, in

Assad. In favour of the political process in Yemen we are not against

the Houthi because they are Shia but because they hijack the political

process. You say we are against the Houthis when the truth is, what you

are doing is killing civilians by the thousands. The death toll in

Yemen has gone beyond 5000. Many of them are civilians. Even today there

is a report of more civilian casualties. In one particular

terrible bombing last September more than 130 people were killed in a

wedding party. Your bombs are doing the sort of damage that many people

around the world would regard as criminal Tom warcrimes. No, no, --

criminal, warcrimes. When they were investigated, it turned out they

were targeted by the Houthi bombing. They are starving people in Taez. We

are targeting military locations. Hezbollah, the party the Iranians

support, they are starving people in Syria, in Madaya. You saw it on the

BBC. Let's take a bigger view of this away from the individual

theatres of conflict in the region, and lets think about both of your

government and your relationship with the US of America. Now, this

month is supposed to see the next level of implementation of the

nuclear deal between the international powers and Iran. We've

just seen in the last 24 hours a serious incident which has been

diffused, where an American military personnel appear to have encroached

on Iranian territorial waters and have since been released. The

relationship between Washington and Tehran is fragile. Mahomet Morandi,

do you believe this deal will stick Les --? Obviously they don't, nor do

the Israelis, but we have to see. India's recent incident, we saw that

the Americans were behaving irresponsibly. -- in this recent

incident. They were in Iranian territory when they were immediately

arrested by naval forces of the Revolutionary Guard. We saw American

ships and an American aircraft carrier behaving aggressively in the

region and the Iranians told them to abide by international law and

behave more responsibly. Ultimately the Iranians carried out an

investigation and saw that there was a problem with a navigation system

and they release these people. So I think it is fragile but I think...

(CROSSTALK). It is fragile because there are serious players inside

Tehran - hardliners, so called - who are suspicious of President Rohani

and his agenda of warming relationship with Washington? I

don't agree. The political establishment, major players, have

agreed to go by this agreement, which parliament has approved, as

has the national Security Council with major discussion in Iran about

the pros and cons. Ultimately it was approved. I want to take back their

thought about America to Khashoggi, here is the work of a former US

ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Robert Jordan, who says, the Saudis are

feeling a real sense of encirclement right now - they feel abandoned by

the Obama Administration. You know that the Iranians Wilbert unfrozen

pretty much $100 billion of assets. -- will get. Use either warming of

relations and you in Saudi Arabia are deeply worried about it, are you

not? yes. It is good to be incorporated into a peaceful Middle

East. A different Iran, like Turkey Pakistan, which wants to be part of

a peaceful Middle East. But we think it is wrong of the Americans,

particularly Mr Obama, to separate between the nuclear issue and

Iranians' behaviour in the region. What is a danger to all of peace is

the Iranians' behaviour in the region, and the American and

international community should put a check on Iran when they do. Look

what they are doing in Syria and Yemen, what they are doing hijacking

the political system in Lebanon - this is all wrong internationally,

for international peace. So, I wish the international community would

have consideration and link the nuclear issue to Iranians' behaviour

in the Middle East, because it is not great in the Middle East. For

both of you it strikes me you are at a fundamentally difficult moment

right now. Leave aside all of the conflict we just discussed. You are

both under immense economic pressure. That is because of the

plummeting price of oil. As we speak today it is around 30 US dollars per

barrel. I think in Saudi Arabia you need $100 a barrel to make your

budgets work. In Iran, similarly, you need a higher price of oil to

dig yourself out of huge annual deficits. Saudi first, when we look

at what you are doing today we see a government talking about austerity,

we see a deputy crown prince who cites Mrs Thatcher when he talks

about imposing cuts on the subsidies it your people are used to, there is

also talks of a sales tax, and you have a deficit that is 15% of your

national income - you are in crisis right now. No. I don't feel at a

crisis. And the Saudi market doesn't feel that crisis. We are going

through difficulties. We want to have a bit of Saudi Arabia -- a

better Saudi Arabia, a prosperous Saudi Arabia - we all want that. At

the same time we have another priority, it is to have a secure

Middle East. We cannot allow Iranians to win in Syria and impose

a sectarian dictatorship in Syria, not Yemen. I wish we can think of

the broader picture. Let's give the final word to Tehran, to Mr Marandi.

A return to economics, which in a sense tries everything - Saudi

Arabia has pretty much the world's biggest and cheapest to exploit oil

reserves, a much more effective oil industry than you do. Your economy

already has severe unemployment, high inflation. In the end,

economics dictates that Iran is not going to be able to project its

power in the way it wants... I think the Iranians have been under

sanctions for a number of years and they are not projecting power

negatively - they are supporting indigenous groups in different

countries. And that is why the Saudis are you losing in Yemen,

because they are supporting an unpopular former president whose

term in office had expired. The Saudis are supporting extremist E in

Syria. I would like to lecture the US and European. The head of, the

deputy head of Germany warned Saudi Arabia that they are spreading

extremism in Europe -- extremists. And Wahabism. German intelligence

said Saudi Arabia is becoming a threat to Europe. This is their

allies they invest, not Iran. The real fault is with the US and

European to allow Saudi Arabia to export extremism to Afghanistan. And

then we had 9/11. We had the explosions in London. They allowed

this to happen again over the last couple of years. We saw what

happened in Syria and Iraq and now we have the refugees in Europe and

the explosions in the US, in Istanbul, people who came from Saudi

Arabia and the US. It is the fault of the US for allowing this

extremism to be exported from Saudi Arabia - and now the chickens are

coming home to roost. We have not had a meeting of minds but we have

had an interesting debate. We will have to edit there. Mohammad Marandi

and Jamal Khashoggi, thank you both for being on HARDtalk. -- we will

have to end it there. We have already seen a fair bit

of snow overnight,