Doha: The sentiment bubbled just below the surface of a televised debate organised by the Qatar Foundation to address whether Iran should be trusted not to build a nuclear weapon.

But it wasn't until the last few minutes of the hour-long discussion that a member of the studio audience finally dropped the bomb.

"Why in the first place should Iran seek the trust of anyone?" the audience member asked. "Iran is an independent, sovereign country, and it has every single right to defend itself. If it wants a bomb, definitely it should have one."

Applause erupted.

"What I don't understand is this love for war and nuclear weapons," responded Baria Alamuddin, one of the panellists who argued that Iran should not be trusted. "Don't people want to live? Don't people want to enjoy themselves?"

The emotionally charged debate, which is to be broadcast seven times this weekend on BBC World, exposed a wellspring of anxiety and anger about Iran's nuclear programme among those in the Middle East who might be caught in the crossfire of any war.

Ultimately the proposition — "This house trusts Iran not to build a nuclear bomb" — narrowly failed, 48 per cent to 52 per cent, with a slim majority of the audience saying Iran should not be trusted.

But sympathy for Iran's nuclear ambitions evident in the applause was perhaps the most surprising outcome of the debate, part of a monthly series organised by the foundation and hosted by former BBC Hard Talk host Tim Sebastian.

For years, Western diplomats and analysts have been advising their governments that Arabs view Iran's nuclear programme as a greater threat to regional stability than anything else. But the response of an audience mostly made up of Anglophone Arab and Muslim elites as well as a smattering of expatriates suggested some support for Iran's nuclear ambitions.

"There is something called balance of power," one male in the audience said. "As long as there is Israel, we need a nuclear bomb."

The hour-long discussion featured two diametrically opposed representatives of Iran's ideological spectrum. Voice of America commentator Alireza Nourizadeh, a fixture of Iran's exile opposition, argued against trusting Iran. Tehran University professor Mohammad Marandi articulated the Islamic Republic's view that its nuclear programme isn't cause for concern.

"Since the revolution, Iran has been trying to break the Western monopoly over high-tech research, development and industry," he said. "There is no doubt that oil will soon fail us. Such technologies must not be monopolised by a few powers."

Marandi and Iran expert Mahjoob Zweiri of Jordan argued that Western propaganda bathed Iran's nuclear programme in an ominous light. "Iran has a problem with perception," said Zweiri, of the Centre for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan. "How the West perceived Iran is a matter [of importance]."

Prior actions

Nourizadeh teamed up with Lebanese journalist Alamuddin to argue that the nature and prior actions of the Islamic Republic made it untrustworthy. "How can you trust a government that kills its own people, tortures them, rapes them, kills them on the streets of Tehran in front of your own eyes, and then the president comes and denies it and says that was a conspiracy?" Nourizadeh said, referring to the government's treatment of protesters after disputed June elections.

Many members of the audience also voiced doubts about the Iranian system.

"How can we trust that any supreme leader, now or future, will not issue a fatwa saying it's a Muslim duty to nuke or attack another nation?" asked an Egyptian woman. Qatar could suffer consequences in any war stemming from Iran's nuclear activity.

"What guarantee [is there] that Iran is not hiding something right now?" asked one Iranian-Canadian woman, a resident of Qatar. "They have hidden so many things. And the government is so unpredictable."


Do you agree that Iran does not need to seek trust? Do you think every country has the right to build its own nuclear weapons?