BBCPERSIAN — broadcast
20261105 233000 UTC
350 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:00] This was Mr. Trump's statement in response to this question, although he said that if he had the
[00:00:04] same choices again, he would attack Iran again.
[00:00:07] And this is very interesting because we know that Mr. Trump expects a lot of
[00:00:11] loyalty from all members of his cabinet, and he can
[00:00:15] rarely confirm such a statement that goes against his views. Could this mean that Mr.
[00:00:19] Trump, if J.D. Vance wants to run in the next
[00:00:23] election, is already giving signs that he will
[00:00:26] support him? I think it's too early
[00:00:32] to determine whether
[00:00:36] Mr. Trump will support J.D. Vance or
[00:00:40] not. I want to say something that
[00:00:43] in fact, if you allow me,
[00:00:46] I'll just go back to one of
[00:00:50] our esteemed guests' comments regarding two
[00:00:54] points: Israel and the issue of
[00:00:57] necessary war. That's my opinion, anyway. And
[00:01:00] I've written this several times and
[00:01:03] mentioned it elsewhere. In my
[00:01:06] opinion, this
[00:01:09] war, meaning what Mr. Trump did,
[00:01:13] was not
[00:01:17] to end the war that Iran had
[00:01:21] started. This was a
[00:01:24] necessary war, not an
[00:01:27] optional war. It was a necessary war.
[00:01:30] But do you mean that the war that Iran started
[00:01:34] was a proxy war? Because we know that
[00:01:36] America didn't directly attack Iran.
[00:01:39] Right? What exactly do you mean by the war
[00:01:42] that Iran started? Look, in 1957,
[00:01:46] please let her finish her speech, Mrs. Wahdati. Please go ahead. Look, in
[00:01:50] 1957, during the Islamic Revolution,
[00:01:53] the Islamic Republic declared war on four
[00:01:57] fronts. One, against America.
[00:02:00] Two, against Israel.
[00:02:04] Three, against modernity.
[00:02:07] You can take the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, and
[00:02:11] four, against the majority of their
[00:02:14] own people who don't accept
[00:02:17] the Islamic Republic. This is a permanent war.
[00:02:20] That is, in fact, the mistake that in America,
[00:02:24] well, the explanation, that is, a misunderstanding
[00:02:27] is that Americans in the name of
[00:03:04] America attacked Iran, and it was indeed a war that was very unpopular. According to every poll,
[00:03:08] more than 60-65 percent are against this war
[00:03:11] in America.
[00:03:13] That's
[00:03:16] right, of course. The polls that have
[00:03:19] come out now make this issue a bit more
[00:03:23] complicated. That is, in fact, dissatisfaction with economic
[00:03:26] issues always takes priority. This
[00:03:30] issue, and I said, I repeat the issue.
[00:03:34] Look, the leader of a country
[00:03:36] must present the cost that this country
[00:03:40] must bear to the people.
[00:03:44] They must explain it. They must show
[00:03:47] this framework so that you can imagine
[00:03:51] you say that you, in fact,
[00:03:54] this extra dollar at the gas pump is
[00:03:58] actually a kind of B. payment.
[00:04:02] It's insurance. It's insurance. Imagine that the Islamic Republic, which from
[00:04:05] America's perspective
[00:04:08] is the world's
[00:04:11] biggest state sponsor of terrorism.
[00:04:14] That is, in fact, this issue is not a slogan. It's in American
[00:04:17] law.
[00:04:20] The opinion of the Islamic Republic from
[00:04:22] Tehran, I just want to make this point. That is,
[00:04:26] in fact,
[00:04:29] look. In fact, the Islamic Republic,
[00:04:33] all American presidents, from
[00:04:36] Bush to Obama to Biden, all
[00:04:39] said that we will not allow the Islamic
[00:04:42] Republic to acquire nuclear weapons.
[00:04:44] And the Islamic Republic has consistently said that it has no
[00:04:48] intention of acquiring nuclear weapons. Yes,
[00:04:51] it doesn't. They officially
[00:04:53] said so.
[00:04:55] The Islamic Republic's claim, which we know
[00:04:59] from the documents that Mossad
[00:05:03] brought from Iran, with all the equipment
[00:05:06] and with all the documents that were in
[00:05:10] the Tehran warehouse, showed that this was a complete lie.
[00:05:13] And the Islamic Republic, even
[00:05:16] today, if the Islamic
[00:05:19] Republic truly has no
[00:05:23] intention of pursuing a nuclear
[00:05:26] weapons program, why doesn't it allow all
[00:05:29] IAEA inspectors to go everywhere? Why
[00:05:33] Please let's get back to the program's topic, which is really
[00:05:36] directly related to the US midterm elections, and my point
[00:05:40] is that yes, my point is that I am
[00:05:58] talking about the necessity of this war. Now, I would say
[00:06:02] this was a necessary war, but then it was
[00:06:06] planned, then it was executed,
[00:06:09] and that's why now the Islamic
[00:06:12] Republic (meaning America) is in trouble. It couldn't. Yes, it was executed to such an extent that even
[00:06:16] some American publications say that America wanted to carry out regime
[00:06:20] change in Iran, but in practice, the Islamic Republic has
[00:06:23] carried out regime change in America. Mr.
[00:06:26] Mahdizadeh, now if we return to the topic of
[00:06:30] the elections and their results and their effects on events
[00:06:33] and developments in Iran, we know that the defeat of the Republicans in the
[00:06:36] elections has emboldened many officials of the Islamic Republic. Their statements
[00:06:40] are much more defiant. For example, Mojtaba
[00:06:44] Khamenei threatened America that if aggressions are repeated,
[00:06:48] a much wider war that will be trans-regional
[00:06:51] will occur. Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, the head of the judiciary,
[00:06:55] wrote that we will certainly inflict more defeats on him,
[00:06:59] meaning Mr. Trump. He said that this is still the result
[00:07:02] of the early morning, and referring to the hostage-taking of
[00:07:05] 1979, he said that November 4th has always been a day of defeat
[00:07:09] for Americans. Does this mean that,
[00:07:13] in fact, as I said, they have become much more defiant and determined
[00:07:16] regarding their demands from America, the officials of the Islamic
[00:07:20] Republic?
[00:07:22] Mindy, one point, since I am in Iran. Mr. Tajbakhsh
[00:07:26] brought up that he said the war was necessary. No,
[00:07:30] it was by no means necessary. International laws did not allow such
[00:07:34] a thing. I think he has little knowledge of international
[00:07:37] laws. The International Atomic Energy Agency, in
[00:07:41] its latest report, and that report actually
[00:07:44] caused the war, Mr. Grossi, who they said was biased,
[00:07:48] even in that report, emphasized that Iran had not
[00:07:52] moved towards nuclear weapons. On the first day
[00:07:55] of the 40-day war, Mr. Chuck Schumer, as
[00:07:59] the leader of the minority Democrats in the
[00:08:03] Senate, declared that this was a war of choice.
[00:08:06] Mr. Trump's partner was also someone whom the International
[00:08:09] Criminal Court had prosecuted for
[00:08:13] war crimes in Gaza. And the American people
[00:08:16] naturally revolted. It wasn't just an economic issue. All these
[00:08:20] factors, plus the war crimes in Minab,
[00:08:23] Lamerd, and the wedding ceremony in
[00:08:25] Sirik that took place, all
[00:08:29] of these had a global impact.
[00:08:32] They provoked very strong reactions in America and throughout the world,
[00:08:35] and caused this atrocity. Therefore, that you
[00:08:39] repeat, no, this is a necessary war and
[00:08:43] Iran must be attacked, while 90 million Iranians live in Iran,
[00:08:46] is a very, very vulgar
[00:08:48] statement. Mr. Mirizadeh, if you could answer my
[00:08:52] question, I would be grateful. The question I asked is, but regarding,
[00:08:56] regarding, no, I think I've been waiting for 20 minutes. I need
[00:09:00] to go back. Regarding the officials
[00:09:03] of the Islamic Republic, Mr. Khamenei, before
[00:09:07] these elections, in a meeting with military commanders,
[00:09:10] he had also said that. That is, Mr. Khamenei's father and
[00:09:14] Mr. Khamenei's son's positions have always been harsh towards America,
[00:09:18] and he also said there that if there is to be a war,
[00:09:21] it must be without geographical limitations. Well, at the
[00:09:25] time he said this, the congressional elections
[00:09:28] had not yet been held. But as I said, this
[00:09:32] has given extra confidence to the officials of the Islamic Republic
[00:09:36] to want to challenge Trump.
[00:09:39] You also said that at the beginning of the program.
[00:10:00] This is historic for us, the Iranian nation, and I, as a journalist,
[00:10:03] have always said that I'm with you, and
[00:10:07] I think the vast majority of Iranian people say the same. But the more
[00:10:10] aggressive
[00:10:13] it gets, the more dangerous it becomes. Mr.
[00:10:16] Rajaeian, because Trump, when he lost and started
[00:10:20] with bombs, started with negotiations,
[00:10:24] he
[00:10:27] must end it with bombs, and he's like
[00:10:30] a person who's chest-deep in a swamp and sees a branch in the
[00:10:34] middle. Well, he won't turn back. He'll take the risk and
[00:10:38] go forward. Although I think and I'm sure that he
[00:10:42] can't end it with bombs either, and he'll make
[00:10:44] it worse. Mr. Hesami, what is your opinion on the
[00:10:48] question I asked? Do you think that after these results
[00:10:52] of the US midterm elections, will Iranian
[00:10:55] negotiators, if there is a negotiation underway and
[00:10:59] it continues, will they have a longer tongue, so to speak?
[00:11:02] Will they have more demands? It's interesting,
[00:11:06] look, now this discussion about the necessity of war or
[00:11:10] explaining war to the people is a discussion that I disagree with.
[00:11:13] The issue is that. But look, what was the goal of the attack
[00:11:17] and what is it? Let's not mind-read. Let's see what the goal was.
[00:11:21] That is, the achievement of the 12-day war and the 38-day
[00:11:28] war, whatever its goal was. If this goal was going to be, they had
[00:11:32] repeatedly said the goal was regime change, which they also changed later.
[00:11:35] Then they said the goal was to eliminate
[00:11:39] Iran's so-called nuclear capabilities.
[00:11:42] Then they talked about missiles and ICBMs.
[00:11:45] Then they talked about what we should do about the Strait of Hormuz.
[00:11:49] The discussion of whether there will be a war or not
[00:11:53] and whether these negotiations are always ongoing. This issue
[00:11:57] has never stopped. But
[00:12:00] the two countries presented a narrative
[00:12:04] to their people, and they distanced themselves from these two narratives
[00:12:07] and reached an agreement when trust
[00:12:11] was zero. For 48 years, trust has really been zero.
[00:12:14] An effort was made during Rouhani and Zarif's time. An effort was made
[00:12:17] for the JCPOA to do this. During Rafsanjani's
[00:12:21] time, if you remember, it was one of Hashemi's plans to
[00:12:25] normalize relations. Well, this confrontation and interaction with the
[00:12:29] Islamic Republic with America has been an issue from day
[00:12:32] one. But as for the possibility of war in these two months,
[00:12:36] yes, it is possible because, as you know,
[00:12:40] Trump wants to do great things. He wants to make
[00:12:44] Gaza, the West Bank, the French Riviera.
[00:12:47] He wants to end the Ukrainian war in one day.
[00:12:50] My point is that
[00:12:54] his so-called claim that the big beauti
[00:12:58] will bring the greatest peace to the Middle East
[00:13:01] in Gaza. Well, when
[00:13:04] the inability of this attack and the current problems that have arisen
[00:13:08] both electorally and in reality in the
[00:13:11] region and the damages that even
[00:13:15] the regional countries have suffered, this shows
[00:13:18] America's inadequacy, that it cannot in fact protect
[00:13:21] the region's security and that superpower and hyperpower that
[00:13:26] it should be is unable to do this. Now, this strengthens the hand of the Islamic Republic
[00:13:29] in the region. But this also does not mean that
[00:13:33] in fact, the main issue of Iran's nuclear
[00:13:36] issue, the issue of the Strait of Hormuz, and
[00:13:39] the issue of that enriched uranium.
[00:13:43] That's still on the table. Now, let's think about an attack.
[00:13:47] What is the goal of the attack? Friends say a limited attack. Well, what do they want to
[00:13:50] hit? And the goal of that attack is that will some other people come?
[00:13:57] Will they find reasonable people at the negotiating table so that they can deal with them? They are specifically saying that it is highly probable that a mountainous area,
[00:14:00] Gzalar, where it is thought that there are new nuclear facilities
[00:14:04] or they are in the process of building them, they will hit that. Well, what will happen then?
[00:14:08] What will happen? That is, Trump will come and say we succeeded.
[00:14:12] Iran's nuclear program is gone. Now it's 20 years, 30 years,
[00:14:15] 50 years behind. Again, you have to sit at the negotiating
[00:14:19] table about whether the agency, about the NPT, about
[00:14:22] nuclear proliferation. About the missile program and the Strait
[00:14:26] of Hormuz, you need to reach an agreement. Therefore,
[00:14:29] diplomacy under Netanyahu and under Trump
[00:14:33] had in fact been lost and is lost. That war
[00:14:36] was necessary. I don't see it as necessary even from Israel's perspective.
[00:14:40] I know that for Israel,
[00:14:44] because the Islamic Republic not only says that it is increasing uranium
[00:14:47] enrichment, but it also says that it wants the destruction of the Zionist
[00:14:51] state. These are two issues for Israel.
[00:15:25] Iraq had said, and in fact, some say that the Islamic
[00:15:28] Republic thrives on crisis and
[00:15:32] continues its life through crisis. Some also think
[00:15:36] that perhaps this time the officials of the Islamic Republic
[00:15:39] look at this issue differently because in the recent wars that
[00:15:42] America and Israel fought, the leadership officials lost
[00:15:46] several layers of leadership, and those who are in power now
[00:15:50] know that if another war happens, their lives will most likely
[00:15:54] be in danger. As a result, they will probably avoid war.
[00:15:57] Please allow me to elaborate on a few points in relation
[00:16:00] to your question. First of all,
[00:16:03] war is a crisis
[00:16:08] that strengthens national sentiment among the people
[00:16:12] and makes the government much stronger. This is what Netanyahu also
[00:16:15] wanted to do in Israel and increase public support
[00:16:18] for his own government. Therefore, it's not just the Iranian government.
[00:16:22] Some people thought that Trump also wanted to
[00:16:26] do the same and buy political support for himself
[00:16:29] during wartime by using the national sentiments of the people.
[00:16:32] But as I said, I want to
[00:16:35] elaborate on this point that this is Israel's war
[00:16:39] against Iran. Even if America withdraws,
[00:16:43] we must see how much American support for Israel
[00:16:46] there is. Mr. Trump came and said that he wanted to cut
[00:16:50] the 4 billion dollar budget for aid to Israel. But this is the
[00:16:54] superficial aspect of the issue. In essence, this budget
[00:16:57] is being given to Israel through another channel,
[00:17:01] which is through the US military budget. When they approved the budget, there was a clause
[00:17:05] in it that said that the Israeli army
[00:17:08] can practically merge with the US army, have all
[00:17:12] military secrets, have access to the most advanced technology,
[00:17:15] have joint training, and receive all
[00:17:19] military equipment. This is very dangerous for Iran,
[00:17:23] because Israel, with its direct
[00:17:26] and indirect aid and, so to speak, technical assistance from America,
[00:17:30] is again in danger. What the new Congress wants to do, and
[00:17:34] what the people expect to be done,
[00:17:37] is to change or remove this
[00:17:41] clause. That is, effectively, to stop
[00:17:45] aid to the Israeli government for an attack on Iran.
[00:17:48] Note that Israel is a country where, Mrs. Wahdat Bina, we
[00:17:52] know that the Democratic Party was very strongly
[00:17:56] interested in Israel and cooperation with Israel, closeness with
[00:17:59] Israel. Now, do you think that they, who took over Congress,
[00:18:02] will act against their own inclination?
[00:18:05] Many of those who were recently elected are
[00:18:09] in the left wing of the Democratic Party.
[00:18:13] That is, a wave of leftism has emerged in America, which I call a kind
[00:18:16] of intellectual revolution and a political earthquake.
[00:18:20] And they are trying to purge or cleanse
[00:18:23] the right wing of the Democratic Party, remove them.
[00:18:26] And we hope that in two years, when
[00:18:30] the elections are held, this shift to the left will continue
[00:18:33] a bit more. Therefore, a strong movement of the Democratic Party is correct. As you
[00:18:37] said, until the previous elections,
[00:18:40] they enjoyed the full support of
[00:18:43] the Israeli lobby. All their candidates were the ones who came to
[00:18:47] power. But now we see that in Texas, which is strongly
[00:18:49] Republican, a teacher comes to power who says that
[00:18:53] she is ashamed that our hands are stained with the blood of Palestinian children
[00:18:56] and our tax money should not be spent on that. Therefore, this movement has started
[00:19:00] in the Democratic Party, and we hope that it will continue,
[00:19:04] and that if, because I am approaching the end of the program,
[00:19:08] I want to hear others' opinions on this very issue of Israel. Mr. Tajbakhsh, what is your opinion?
[00:19:11] I just want to make one point because I participated
[00:19:15] in the program and Mr. Tajbakhsh spoke
[00:19:18] as if he was Mr. Trump's defense lawyer. In a situation
[00:19:22] where Trump's own deputy is saying that this war was a mistake, it led to this.
[00:19:25] Millions of votes. This statement, because I say time is very
[00:19:29] personal attacks and so on be put
[00:19:32] aside. The main point is about
[00:19:35] your program. Exactly, this BBC
[00:19:38] Farsi program is for the people of Iran. It should be in the direction
[00:19:42] of supporting the interests of the Iranian people, who,
[00:19:45] in the way he thinks can support the interests of the Iranian people,
[00:19:49] he differs. Please allow me to continue my question about
[00:19:52] Israel. Please allow Mrs. Wahdat Bina, Mr.
[00:19:55] Tajbakhsh, what is your opinion on how much
[00:19:59] this Senate and House of Representatives that
[00:20:02] will come to power will change America's approach towards
[00:20:06] Israel?
[00:20:37] This anti-Israel sentiment
[00:20:40] has gained momentum
[00:20:44] in a segment of
[00:20:48] progressive groups or, in fact, Democrats
[00:20:53] and even young Jewish youth. This is, in my opinion,
[00:20:56] a very dangerous phenomenon. The idea
[00:20:59] that the issue of Israel is this war of Israel,
[00:21:02] in my opinion, we should reconsider
[00:21:05] this claim. The reason is that
[00:21:09] a very small country
[00:21:12] can turn a superpower around and force
[00:21:15] it to go to war. It's not at all
[00:21:25] Say about this issue, look, someone can
[00:21:28] be a supporter of the Israeli people and Israel, but
[00:21:32] oppose Mr. Netanyahu's policies. Here I
[00:21:36] see that the same thing that happened to America after 9/11
[00:21:40] also happened to Netanyahu and Israel.
[00:21:42] After 9/11, people in countries
[00:21:46] around the world were sympathetic and supportive of
[00:21:49] America. But after Abu Ghraib prison, after
[00:21:51] Guantanamo and torture, public opinion
[00:21:55] turned. Now Mr. Netanyahu is also accused
[00:21:59] of crimes against humanity and war crimes.
[00:22:02] Therefore, a part of the Democratic
[00:22:05] Party, a part of the Republican Party, are against
[00:22:09] Netanyahu's policies. I don't see a contradiction.
[00:22:12] Thank you very much. With thanks to Aram Hesami,
[00:22:15] Sahila Wahdati Bana, and Kian
[00:22:19] Tajbakhsh.
[00:22:21] We have reached the end of the US election coverage on BBC Persian. Thank you for joining us. I hope to see
[00:22:25] you on Tuesday as well. Until then, have a good time.
[00:22:29] The brain and skin are made