Transcripts For CSPAN Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20240622

Appropriate review for congress. It allows us to take action, or we dont have to take action. It recognizes the fact that the sanction regime was passed by congress and that we have a role to play in regards to implementing any agreement as we now see in the jcpoa, that congress has a role to play. So its set up an orderly process. And this hearing is part of that process. It took you two years to negotiate this agreement. It took you two months in vienna to get to the final details. Were on day 4 of our review of 60 days. I have not reached the conclusion. And i would hope that most members, i would hope the members of the congress would want to get all the information allow those who are directly involved to make their case. We have hearings set up next week and the following week, and well get outside experts. Many of us have taken advantage of that opportunity in the past. And i would hope that weve all used that opportunity before drawing a conclusion. This is a very important agreement from the point of view of u. S. Foreign policy. Iran in that region is critically important to the United States security. But theres a second objective to the act, and that is to concentrate all of our effort on the bad guy, iran. And speak with unity as much as we could in the United States. So our negotiators could concentrate on vienna and not on washington. In dealing with getting the very best possible agreement. And i must tell you, mr. Chairman, i looked at the framework that was agreed to in april. And looking at the final agreements that weve gotten today. And our negotiators got an awful lot. Particularly on the nuclear front, which is beyond my expertise. We got things that there were many rumors during these last couple of months of what was going to be in this agreement and how it was going to be weakened from the april framework that, in fact, have been strengthened since the april framework. So i just want to applaud our negotiators for taking the strength of our unity and turning it into results in vienna. And well be talking a little bit about that. As we go forward. The objective is clearly to prevent iran from ever becoming a Nuclear Weapon power. That is our simple objective. We know who we are dealing with. This is a state sponsor of terrorism. This is a country that abuses human rights. Violates the Ballistic Missile area. We know all that. But we singularly are trying to prevent iran from becoming a Nuclear Weapon power because we know that is a game changer in the region. Thats the objective of this agreement. And the standard that we have to use because there is no trust in iran, the Supreme Leader on friday after the agreements were entered into said, we will trample upon america. We dont trust iran. But weve got to leave a motion out of this. Weve got to look at the agreements. And weve got to determine whether the compliance with this agreement by the United States will put us on a path that makes it less likely or more likely that iran will become a Nuclear Weapon power. Thats got to be the test that we use. Mr. Chairman, i have many questions. That i hope we will get answers today. I hope those answers will provoke a debate among us in congress and American People and help us make the right decisions. Since there is no trust, the inspection and enforcement regime is particularly important. We need to understand how it works. Do we have sufficient time to discover if iran is violating the terms of this agreement in order to take effective action to prevent iran from becoming a Nuclear Weapon power . Thats a question that we need to understand. We need to know the breakout times. We need to know what happens after the time periods. Do we have sufficient opportunity to prevent iran from ever becoming a Nuclear Weapon state . The commitment they make under this agreement. Are the inspections robust enough to deter iran from cheating . And if they do will we discover and be able to take action . Mr. Chairman you raised the 24hour window. I think all of us recognized there was going to be a protocol for inspection. But we need to know whether the 24hour delay knowing what iran is likely to do. Does that compromise our ability to have effective inspections . And i hope our witnesses will deal with that today because that is a matter of major concern. We need to note the answer to that. Have we cut off all pathways for iran to obtain a Nuclear Weapon . Particularly the Covert Military operations. We know thats a major concern. Thats why the pmd is particularly important, the chairman mentioned the pmd. And the work that the iaea are inspectors, International Inspectors. They have great credibility in this area. But we will want to know whether they have the capacity to do what were asking them to do. Will they have the access that we need . Because we do need to know about their prior military dimension in order to be able to go forward to make sure that we can contain any opportunity they may use for covert activities. Will we discover it and be able to take action . These are questions that we were going to ask. Weve read the agreement and still have questions. And we hope well get answers as to whether we have effectively prevented iran from using covert activities to develop a Nuclear Weapon. Will this agreement provide us iaea with sufficient access to the people, places and documents . So that we know their prior military dimension . Are the snapback provisions for reimposing sanctions adequate if iran violates this agreement . Thats an issue that i hope we will have a chance to talk about. At the end of the time limits in the agreement, iran will have the capacity to expand as the chairman rightly pointed out to an industrial capacity. They can get through there and Nuclear Enrichment and uranium enrichment. That, they can do. Do we have sufficient capacity knowing their commitments for nonproliferation, knowing their requirements of the Additional Protocols. Is that going to be adequate to prevent iran . Do we have a sufficient enough breakout time that if iran tries to become a Nuclear Weapon state after the time period that we have sufficient tools to prevent them from becoming a Nuclear Weapon power . These are questions we need to have answers to. Before we can make our judgments. Now, there are other areas. I wanted to be reassured that the United States still has the flexibility to impose nonNuclear Sanctions on iran for the support of terrorism, human rights abuses, and against a Ballistic Missile program. No one expects irans bad behavior to change on implementation date. We know who were dealing with. Will we be able to use the powers weve used in the past and build upon them to take action against iran, particularly in light that theyll have Additional Resources . Can we do that . And can Congress Work with the administration to strengthen those tools . Without violating the jcpoa . I want to know how the administration is updating the regional deterrent strategy against nefarious and stabilizing iranian activities and how were going to work with our partners to build up their capacity to counter iran, especially israel. The chairman mentioned the lifting of the International Arms embargo. Thats of great concern as to how it would impact on our regional partners. How will it impact an arms race in that region of the world. These are questions we need to get the best information we can in making our decisions. And lastly, let me mention this because i think its critically important. What are our options . If the United States walks away from us. How will we be perceived internationally . Will we be able to maintain effective enforcement of sanctions with our International Partners . And will iran come back to a negotiating table with a country that has walked away from an agreement . These are questions that we need to understand. We need to know that the options are right now, do we go forward . And what are the options . What are the consequences if we dont go forward . Mr. Chairman we have a full plate. And i look forward to hearing from our witnesses. And i hope that the members of this committee will use the information that we get today to debate the issue take the time that we have, and do whats right for the American People and ultimately make the decision that we think is best to prevent iran from becoming a Nuclear Weapon power. Thank you senator carden, i appreciate so much the way weve worked together on so many issues and the entire committee. With that, i know that our witnesses here today need no introduction. Theyre well known not only here, around the world in spite of our policy differences. I think each of us deeply appreciate the that make this. That may not be policy differences in some cases. But we deeply appreciate the tremendous effort that you put up put out on behalf of our country. We thank you for being here today. We thank you for being willing to be here today as long as it takes for everybody to get their answers. And with that, id like to introduce collectively secretary john kerry who used to serve with us and sit on this side of. Helpful to all of us in understanding the technical aspects of the deal. And someone we all appreciate deeply. Secretary lew who served in multiple positions here has been certainly affirmed by this committee in several towns. We thank you all for your Great Service to our nation. In spite of some of the concerns that we have here today. I think you all understand the drill. Take five minutes or so to explain as ive looked at your testimony. I know its very brief. Just to warn people in advance. Im going to defer my questions ben, and move to you immediately thereafter. And use my time to interject as things move along. So with that, secretary kerry. Well, thank you, mr. Chairman, Ranking Member carden, members of the committee and friends and former colleagues. We really do appreciate the chance to discuss with you the comprehensive plan that we in our p5plus 1 partners have developed with regards to this program. Let me emphasize to everybody here, this isnt just the United States of america. These are other Nuclear Powers. France, britain, russia china, they have a pretty good understanding of this field and of the challenges. And i appreciate the way in which they and germany which was the plus one all came together, all contributed, all were part of this debate. So youre not just looking at what this table negotiated. Youre looking at what the International Community, the p5 plus 1 negotiated. And theyre not dumb. Theyre experts every one of them in Nuclear Technology and ratification and verification. Smart people who spent a lifetime at this. I thank all of you for the role congress played. I was privileged to be the chairman of this committee when we passed the iran sanctions effort. And we all remember the debate, we passed it unanimously and it played a very significant role in bringing iran to the table and in helping to make it clear that we needed to bring about a serious and productive negotiation with iran. From the day that those talks began, we were Crystal Clear that we would not accept anything less than a good deal. And we defined it up front. As a deal that closed off the four pathways to a bomb. The two iranian pathways plutonium pathway and the covert pathway. So we set our standard and we believe we have achieved that standard. After almost two years of very intensive talks the facts are really Crystal Clear. The plan that was announced last week in vienna is, in fact a deal that does shut off those pathways. And provides us with guarantees for the lifetime of the npt and the participation of iran that we will know what they are doing. Now, the chairman mentioned in his opening comments, some phrase about unless we give iran what they want folks, they already have what they want. They got it ten years ago or more. They already have conquered the fuel cycle. When we began our negotiations iran had enough material for 10 to 12 bombs. They had 19000 centrifuges up from the 163 that they had back in 2003 when the Prior Administration was engaged with them on this very topic. So this isnt a question in giving them what they want. Its a question of how do you hold their program back . How do you dismantle the Weapons Program. And weve achieved that. Nobody has talked about dismantling their entire program. Because when that was being talked about they went from 163 centrifuges to 19,000. Everybody here at this knows what it takes to stop that. Its called military action. Theyre not going to stop it otherwise. Theyve proven it. Proved it during all those years. So under this terms of this agreement, iran has agreed now to remove 98 of the stockpile. Voluntarily, theyre going to destroy 98 of the stockpile of enriched uranium. Going to dismantle 2 3 of the installed centrifuges, and theyre going to take out the existing core of an existing heavy water reactor and fill it with concrete. Iran has agreed to refrain from producing or acquiring highly enriched uranium and weapons grade plutonium for at least 15 years. And if they began to do that, ernie moniz will tell you we will know it immediately. Iran has also agreed to accept the Additional Protocol and the Additional Protocol is an outgrowth of the failure of the north korea experience, which put in additional Access Requirements precisely so that we do know what iran is doing. And they have to ratify it before the u. N. Sanctions are lifted at the end of this process. They have to have ratified it. They have to have passed it theyve agreed to live by it from day one. Theyre going to live by the Additional Protocol. In addition, there are additional transparency measures. We can go into in the course of this hearing. Now, if iran fails to comply we will know it. And we will know it quickly, and we will be able to respond accordingly. By reinstituting sanctions all the way up to the most draconian options that we have today, none of them are off the table at any point in time. So many of the measures that are in this agreement are therefore not just for ten years, not just for 15 years, not just for 20 years, not just for 25 years of which there are measures for each of those periods of time but they are for life forever. As long as iran is within the npt. By the way, north korea pulled out of the npt. Iran has not pulled out of the npt. Remember that two years ago when our negotiations began, we faced an iran that was enriching uranium up to 20 at a facility that was secret and buried underground. And they were rapidly stockpiling enriched uranium and had installed nearly 2,000 nuclear centrifuges. They were building a heavy water reactor that could produce weapons grade plutonium at a rate of enough to produce one or two bombs per year and experts assess that the breakout time then as a result the interval required to rush to be able to produce enough material for one Nuclear Weapon was about two to three months. If this deal is rejected, we return immediately to this reality. Accept that the diplomatic support we have built with these countries that we have accumulated would disappear overnight. Let me underscore the alternative to the deal that we have reached is not what ive seen some ads on tv suggesting disen disingenuously. Some sort of unicorn arrangement involving irans complete capitulation. That is a fantasy plain and simple. At our own Intelligence Community will tell you that. Every Single Department of our Intelligence Community will reinforce that to you. The choice we face is between an agreement that will ensure Irans Nuclear program is limited, rigorously scrutinized and wholly peaceful. Or no deal at all. Thats the choice. The fact is that there are 189 nations that live by the npt. Five of them are as we know the main Nuclear Powers of the u. N. , and 184 of them are nonnuclear. In power. But they live by it. And we have lived by what the iaea does with respect to ensuring the surety of what all those 184 nations are doing. Including 12 that enrich. Now, if the u. S. Congress moves to unilaterally reject what was agreed to in vienna, the result will be the United States of america walking away from every one of the restrictions that we have achieved. And a great big green light for iran to double the pace of its uranium enrichment, proceed full speed ahead with a heavy water reactor, install new and more efficient centrifuges and do it all without the unprecedented inspection and transparency measures that we have secured. Everything that we have prevented will then start taking place. And all the voluntary rollbacks of their program will be undone. Moreover if the u. S. After negotiating this multilateral agreement with five other partners were to walk away from those partners, were on our own. Our partners will not walk away with us. Instead, they will walk away from the tough multilateral sanctions regime theyve helped to put in place. And we will have squandered the best chance we have to solve this problem through peaceful means. Now, make no mistake president obama has made it Crystal Clear that we will never accept the Nuclear Armed iran. Hes the only president who has developed a weapon capable of guaranteeing that. And he has not only developed it, he has deployed it. But the fact is iran now has. We all dont like it. Whether we like it or not iran has developed experience with a nuclear fuel cycle. To produce the material for a bomb, and we cant sanction the knowledge away. Remember sanctions did not stop Irans Nuclear program from growing steadily to the point that it had accumulated enough material to produce those ten Nuclear Weapons. By the way they didnt choose to produce them. Unlike north korea that developed one and exploded one and iran has done none of that. The truth is the vienna plan will provide a more strong and comprehensive and lasting means than any alternative that has been spoken of. To those that are thinking about opposing the deal because of what might happen in year 15 or 16 or 20 remember, if we walk away year 15 or 16 or 20 starts tomorrow. Without any of the longterm verification or transparency safeguards we have put in place. Over the past week i have spoken at length about what exactly this deal is, and i want to make clear what this deal was never intended to be. First of all, as the chief negotiator i can tell you i never etuttered the words anywhere anytime nor was it every part of the discussion we had with the iranians. This plan was designed to address the Nuclear Issue. The Nuclear Issue alone, because we knew that if we got caught up with all the other issues we would never get where we needed to stop the Nuclear Program and it would be ropeadope, staying there and negotiating one aspect or another and the highest concern for president obama was to make sure iran could not get a Nuclear Weapon, and we were disciplined in that. We didnt set out even though we dont like it and i have extensive plans i will layout if you want them about how we will push back against irans other activities, and its contributions to sectarian violence in the middle east and all of those are unacceptable and pushing back an iran with a Nuclear Weapon is very different than pushing back an iran without one. Ash carter was there yesterday, and the foreign minister said that Irans Nuclear deal appears to have all the provisions necessary to curtail irans ability to obtain a Nuclear Weapon, and saudi arabia, and the foreign minister of iran will be in the emirates this weekend. I would suggests effectively we will continue to press iran for information about the missing american and the Immediate Release about americans that have been unjustly head and there is not a challenge in the entire region we wont push back against if iran is involved in it but none of those challenges will be enhanced if iran gets a Nuclear Weapon. So the outcome cannot be guaranteed by sanctions alone and i wish it could but it cant be. By the way, it cant be guaranteed by military action alone. Our own military tells us that. The only viable option here is a comprehensive diplomatic resolution of the type that is reached in vienna and that deal we believe, and we believe we will show it to you today, and in the days ahead will make our country and our allies safer, and it will insure that Irans Nuclear Program Remains under intense scrutiny forever and we will know what they are doing and it will insure that the World Community is youtube knighted and insuring that Irans Nuclear activities will remain peaceful. We believe this is a good deal for the world, a good deal for america, and a good deal for our allies and friends in the region and we think it does deserve your support. Thank you. Secretary mmoniz. The agreement provides strong verification measures and it gives us time to respond if iran chose to violate the terms and fundamentally takes none of our options off the table. I want to stress that americas leading Nuclear Experts at the National Laboratories were involved throughout the negotiations argan livermore oak Ridge Pacific northwest, and Savannah River and the white 12 National Security complex and the kansas city plant all played important roles. They were essential in developing technical proposals and support of the u. S. Delegation and as a result of their work i am confident the technical under pinings of the deal are solid. The deal meets the president s objectives verification of iranian Nuclear Program that is exclusively peaceful and sufficient time to respond if it proves otherwise. The jcpoa will extend for ten years, the time it would take for iran to build a Nuclear Weapon. The first point i would like to make is the parameters as the Ranking Member mentioned are maintained and infact strengthened, not weakened, but strengthened in the final agreement. This means restricting the number, type and location of centrifuges, dialing back the rnd program and dramatically reducing the irans stockpile of low enriched uranium, and infrastructure is removed. All the reasons taken together are taken to establish the oneyear breakout timeline for accumulating highly enriched uranium. Something we have not stressed but i do want to add, at the end of the ten years, iran will have far fewer than 19 centrifuges because they acknowledge the breakage rate and they will not have a large replacement capacity because of the agreement. In addition, iran will have no source of weapons grade plutonium and the reactor is transformed under International Oversight and participation to produce far less plutonium than their current design and essentially immediate recognition if they try to deviate from that practice furthermore, all of the plutonium bearing fuel for the reactor goes out of life of the reactor. Iran will not engage in several activities that could contribute to the development of a Nuclear Explosive device including multiple point explosive systems. These and neutron special neutron sources. These commitments are indefinite. And for 15 years iran will not pursue plutonium, because iran will not engage in activities where that would be needed. To be clear, the deal is not built on trust its pretty hardnose requirements that will hreul. Iran limit irans activities. This is not what iran wanted. Its a substantial dialing back of their program. To preclude cheating International Inspectors will be given unprecedented access to all the nuclear facilities, and i guess there could be an exception if there were military occupation, but thats not the case and any other sites of concern. As well as the entire Nuclear Supply chain from the iranian supply to centrifuge manufacturing and operation. This access to the iranian supply chain comes with a 25year commitment and beyond 25 years even after a quarter century of compliance with a peaceful program assuming we get there, we still have as we have said many times, Additional Protocol in place to monitor Irans Nuclear activities but another thing we have also in perpetuity is their adherence to modified code 3. 1 which means they must notify the iaea even before they Start Building any nuclear facility. This eliminates kind of a loophole where one could do something covertly and say, oops we were planning to notify before we bought Nuclear Material. They must do this now in the planning stage so its another thing that we have beyond 25 years. The iaea will be permitted to use advance the technologies, including things like realtime inreachment monitoring which is a Technology Developed by our laboratories, in this case by the way oakridge played a major role, mr. Chairman. If the International Community suspects iran is going to cheat they can request access for inspection, and much has been made about the 24day Inspection Period where they could get access, and i did say the words anytime anywhere, and i many a pleased that yesterday a member of your caucus acknowledges however, the full sentence was anytime, anywhere in the sense of a welldefined process with a welldefined end time so i am pleased that we have established that. In fact, the iaea can request access to any suspicious location with 24 hours notice under the Additional Protocol which iran will implement. The deal does not change that baseline. The issue if an agreement is not reached then when the iaea requests access the 24day clock will start. This is a new tool a finite time, a new tool for resolving disputes within what we think is a short period of time and short is defined because of our confidence in environmental sampling that we will be able to have to implement to detect microscopic traces of materials even after attempts are made to remove the evidence of activities with Nuclear Material. In fact, irans history provides a good example. In february of 2003, the iaea requested access to a suspicious facility in tehran, and it was denied and negotiations dragged out for six months but even after that long delay environmental samples taken by the iaea revealed Nuclear Activity even though iran had made a substantial effort to remove and cover up the evidence, and we have an addition conducted our own experiments to verify the ability to detect very very small traces of uranium. The agreement will be implemented in phases, as has been said already. Some 10 years 15 years, 20 and 25 years, and then the key transparency measures that stay beyond 25 years, of course as long as iran is in the npt and if they were not in the npt, every alarm bell would go off and appropriate actions would be taken. In closing i want to acknowledge the tireless work of the negotiating team led by my colleague, secretary kerry and the u. S. Multiagency delegation worked together seamlessly, and the e3 ue plus 3 played a big role in the endeavor. The u. N. Security council is crucial to making sure iran come replies. I just want to say again, the deal is based on science and analysis because of its deep grounding and exhaustive Technical Analysis carries odd by our doe scientists and engineers, and its a good deal for america and our allies and global security. Iran will be thwarted from a Nuclear Capability with rather than without this agreement. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. Look forward to the discussion. Thank you very much. Secretary lew. Thank you mr. Chairman. Members of the committee, thanks for the opportunity to speak today about the joint comprehensive plan of action. A Foreign Policy decision of this significance deserves a thorough review. I am confident a full and fair debate on the merits will make it clear this deal will strengthen the u. S. Security and that of our allies. These measures have clearly demonstrated to irans leaders the costs of International Law cutting them off from the worlds march etc. And crippling their economy. Today the iranian economy is 20 smaller than it would have been had it remained on a pre2012 growth path. The United States government stood at the forefront with the bipartisan support of congress and this committee. We established a web of far reaching international ansanctions to come to the table. The worlds major powers have been and remain united in preventing a Nuclear Armed iran. That unity of purpose produced four tough u. N. Security Council Solutions and sanctions in many countries. The point of the sanctions was to change Irans Nuclear behavior while holding out the prospect of relief if the worlds concerns were addressed. Accordingly, once its verified irans provided key steps and extend its breakout time to at least oneyear phased sanctions. There is no signing bonus. There will be no immediate changes to u. N. Eu or u. S. Sanctions. Only if iran fulfills the sanctions, sanctions that target thirdcountry parties doing business with iran. We must guard against the possibility iran does not hold up its side of the deal so if iran violates the commitments once we suspended the sanctions we can snap back both u. N. And u. S. Sanctions. Since preventing the snapback requires an affirmative vote from the u. N. Security council United States has the ability to reinforce the sanctions. Our primary u. S. Trade embargo, with very limited exceptions iran will continue to be denied access to the largest market and maintain powerful sanctions targeting irans support for terrorists groups such as hezbollah, and its Missile Program and its human rights abuses at home. Just this week, treasury sanctions hezbollah leaders building on designations last month targeting the facilitators. Some argue that sanctions relief is premature until iran ceases these activities and i understand the concerns, but irans ties to terrorists groups are exactly why we must keep it from ever obtaining a Nuclear Weapon. The combination of those two threats would raise a nightmare scenario. A Nuclear Armed iran will be a far more menacing threat. If we cannot solve both concerns at once we need to address them in turn. Jcpoa will address the Nuclear Danger freeing us and our allies to check irans regional activities aggressively. By contest walking away from the deal would leave them with a short and increasing Nuclear Breakout time. We must measure realistic and what sanctions relief will mean to iran. Irans 100 billion in restricted foreign reserves which many fear will constitute the countrys longterm savings and not the budgetary allowance. After sanctions relief iran will only be able to freely access about 50 billion, and thats because over 20 billion are donated to china where it cannot be spent and additional funds are to irans energy and banking sector. Iran cant spend the usable resources as they will likely to be needed to meet International Obligations for external net and imports. Moreover president rawouhani, he faces over 500 trillion500 half a trillion dollars. Backing away from this deal to escalate the economic pressure and try to obtain a broader kau pitchlation from iran will be a mistake. Even if one believed that extending the sanctions pressure than resolving the threat of Irans Nuclear program, that choice is not available. Our partners agreed to impose costly sanctions on iran for one reason to, put a stop to its Nuclear Program. We could be left with neither a nuclear deal nor effective sanctions so its unrealistic that sanctions would force iran to toelgly capitulate. The joint comprehensive plan of action is a strong deal with phased relief only after iran fulfills its commitments to roll back a Nuclear Program and a powerful snap back later if they break the deal. It blocks irans path to a nuclear bomb. Thats an overriding interNational Security priority and should not be put at risk not when the prospects of an unconstrained Nuclear Program are such a threat to america and the world. Thank you and we look forward to answering your questions. Thank you very much. Senator cardin. It has been stated many times the United States maintains its ability to impose sanctions relative to support terrorism and Human Rights Violations and Ballistic Missile issues. I have read the jcpoa and there are several paragraphs that give me concern. Let me just read one. Its paragraph 29. The parties will refrain from any policy specifically intended to directly or adversely affect normalization of trade and economic relations with iran. Secretary lew, i want to get your assurance we have full ability to use the tools of sanctions against iran for its support of terrorism, human rights and nonnuclear type of activities which include congressional action that Congress Might want to take . Senator cardin, it was a matter of extensive discussion in the negotiations. We made clear in the negotiations that we retained the ability and we were going to keep in place sanctions on terrorism on regional destabilization and Human Rights Violations. In fact, we are not lifting sanctions that are based on those authorities and we are not designating entities that were designated for those reasons. We also have made clear we reserve the right to put additional sanctions in place to address concerns about terrorism, human rights when you say we that includes the congress of the United States . Congress has authorities in this area, and i know there is legislation pending regarding hezbollah, and we would work with you on legislation. The thing that we cant do is we cant just put it right back in place everything that was part of the Nuclear Sanctions and just put a new label on it. We reserved our rights to put sanctions in place that address those continuing malign activities. The iran sanctions act expires at the end of 2016. We will still be in the jcpoa period of time where a snap back of sanctions a viable hedge against irans cheating. Congress may well want to extend that law so that that power is available immediately if iran were to violate the agreement. Is that permitted under the jcpoa . I think if its on expiration its one thing and well advanced its another. Coming out of the box is very different than what you do when it expires. Let me ask the question is why would that be, its either allowed or not allowed and we will get to that, but the 24 days you referred to and i appreciate your explanation, but there are three types of activities that could place in violation of the jcpoa by iran, and they could be using material in violation and you have already addressed that issue as far as the 24 days, but it could involve weaponization or it could involve research not using Nuclear Material. Would the 24day delay compromise our ability to determine if iran is in compliance with the agreement. With the Nuclear Material, i think we addressed and is quite secure. Clearly when it goes into weaponization activities, even there there is a spectrum, for example, working with uranium metal is something that would involve Nuclear Material and i think we would have very, very strong tools there. When we go to other activities without getting into too many specifics, they will still be a variety of signatures for example, my secretary priority on the weaponization list would be explosively driven neutron sources, and i think there are there are certainly tell tale signs that we would have access to, and all the inspectors more precisely would have access to. Clearly as one gets into other areas, such as computer modeling and thats a different kind of detection challenge, and in all of these cases to go to undeclared sites we will rely upon our intelligence capabilities and those of our partners to be able to point the iaea to suspicious activities. But there are nonnuclear signatures, but it does get more complicated. Secretary kerry i want you to elaborate a little more on the capacity after the time limits and irans obligations after the time limits on its Nuclear Enrichment towards weaponization of a Nuclear Weapon. I understand they still have obligations under their nonproliferation treaty and they still have obligations with the additional proceeded calls under the nbt but can you tell us how much lead time we will have, what a breakout looks like after the 15 years and what assurances do we have that we will be able to detect and take action before iran becomes a Nuclear Weapon state after the 15 years . First of all, senator, after throughout the entire life of the agreement, the Additional Protocol provides for the right of access, and that is where the 24hour notice access comes from and they have to respond to it. So if we had any intelligence regarding a suspicious activity or suspicious site i might add among many, israel, countries in the region, we will have an incredible amount of sourcing for this and we would be able to put the ask to them and they have to respond to that and if they dont respond to that we have the ability to convene and vote and put back in place sanctions or to take other actions if we deem that appropriate. After the 15 years . Yes. Yes but let me just fill out for you, we also have a 20year component which allows us televised tracking of their centrifuge production of the wroters and bell yos on the centrifuges centrifuges, and we have access and monitoring tracking of the life of the uranium cycle, so from the mining and the mills and the gasification and the centrifuge out into the waste, we will have an ability the iaea will have the ability to appropriately monitor that every step of the way. If we have x amount of uranium coming out, or in the mill, if there is x amount of milling taking place and something is diverted and we dont see it go into the place its supposed to go to we will have extraordinary insight into this. Under the iaea process for civil Nuclear Programs, all of the facilities are declared because its a civil Nuclear Program. As such, there is literally 24 7 visitation in those sites. They are not even requests sort of situations and its only for the undeclared facility that you have a suspicion that you have to go through the other process. We will have amazing insight because they are living by the nbt, or allegedly they will live by the nbt, and thats what we have to make sure they are doing. They have daytoday insight to that. I might add to all of the colleagues, under the interim agreement, which by the way a number of people called a historic mistake and tragedy and you heard all of the same rhetoric now, and those same people asked for us to keep that in place two years later because it has worked. The fact is iran has lived up to every component of that over the course of the last year, they reduced the 20 uranium and undid iraq and so forth and so forth. I wont go through it all now. We will have a level of insight that is not being examined enough and understood enough, and nothing ends at 15 years. Simply, the size of the stockpile limitation ends and the enrichment they can enrich further, but we will have insight to that enrichment. 5 is the high end of it. If you start to enrich higher up around the 20 , you are talking about the Tehran Research reactor or a few other things. There is no rational whatsoever for something bigger. We would be all over it, and able to respond. We would actually have months to respond, to be honest with you. So the fact is the Breakout Team never goes down to a level below which we have an ability to respond, and i think earnie can speak to the full breath of the scrutiny. Mr. Chairman, may i ask one footnote because its what could be a collateral benefit of this agreement is that going to the uranium supply chain, the safeguards, i just want to add this is something the iaea really wants to have something more broadly so this would be a first in moving towards cradle to grave safeguards. I might add there are other firsts that unfortunately we cannot talk about relative to some of their procedures which i eluded to, and i would say to mr. Secretary, yes people have said that they would rather keep that in place and that doesnt mean they liked that in the first place but its on comparison, and i wanted to just clarify. We really need to leave emotion out of this, and i couldnt agree with you more, and it should be done in a nonemotional way but that doesnt mean we have to leave common sense out of this with all due respect. We have gone from the mantra of no deal is better than a bad deal and i have heard everybody say that a couple few weeks ago, and now we have gotten to the point where, well you have to accept this or else its war. The mantra has changed dramatically. All i can say is after reviewing this, and even in a cursory fashion, anybody who believes this is a good deal really joins the ranks of the most naive people on the face of the earth. When you are dealing with the people that we are dealing with here, with the history they have of cheating and everything else, anyone who can say this is a good deal i know the justification is well, its not perfect, but its not even close to that. I join the chairman in this in a closed hearing yesterday, we have been told we have no choice in this because we have gone from the position where we started, where we had iran isolated and they were viewed on the world stage as a poria, and if we dont go along with this, were told, the other negotiators are going to go along with this and the United States will be isolated on this issue and we will be the poria on the national stage. Just think about that. Where these negotiations have taken us from a situation where we had iran exactly where we wanted them to now if we dont go along with this then we are going to be the isolated poria character on the national stage. Well, look, the other thing that was so important in this was verification. We have to have verification. Everybody said this is the number one thing on verification. Well, everybody here knows that there is a site called parchin, it was designed i heard the secretary say that we are going to insure that their Nuclear Ambitions are only for peaceful purposes. How in the world does parchin fit that. It was designed and operated as an explosive detonation place and they designed a detonation trigger for a Nuclear Weapon. That stays in place. Does that sound like its for peaceful purposes. Let me tell you the worst thing about parchin, and you agreed to not even taking samples there. They are going to be able to test by themselves even the nfl wouldnt go along with this. How in the world can you have a nation like iran doing their own testing . I know secretary moniz who by the way, one of the brightest guys i know, he says we will watch it on tv and theres a good chain of custody for the samples being taken and are we going to trust iran to do this . This is a good deal . This is what we were told we were going to get when we were told that dont worry, were going to be watching over their shoulder and put in place verifications that are absolutely bullet proof. Were going to trust iran to do their own testing . This is absolutely ludicrous. The one thing that bothers me incredibly about this is the billions of dollars that irans going to get. We have been briefed on the fact that while they have been in the horrible Financial Condition and we have gotten them to a horrible Financial Condition, one of their National Priorities has been to support terrorism. They have supported hezbollah, hamas, the houthis with every kind of aid there is and everything we are trying to do in the world has their fingerprints on it trying to do us in. These billions of dollars will be put back in their hands in im told, about nine months. And it doesnt matter what we do, congress go ahead and do your thing, it doesnt matter, because we dont have control over this matter, and it was the other people sitting at the table that have control over the money and no matter what we do they will release the billions of dollars. Well, i got to tell you, this is a very heavy lift when you sleep at night and you say, well i am going to vote to release, and people are trying to kill our allies. To say to be able to walk away from this and say that this is a good deal with ludicrous. With all due respect you guys have been bamboozled and the American People are going to pay for that. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator boxer. Can we respond at all to any of that . [ laughter ] my time is up, mr. Chairman. I suspect we will hear lots of responses. Isnt there time built in for answers or comments . I want to make sure this gets a full and fair hearing. Let me start at the beginning here the comment was made that what is it naive if you think this is a good deal. This is an article from the washington post. I urge you all to read it. How the iran deal is good for israel according to israelis who know what they are talking about. I urge you to read it. It says here a host of prominent security establishments came out in support of the obama administrations efforts. In an interview this week with the daily beast, the former head of israel top Security Agency suggests israel politicians were playing with fears and a fearful society and he praised it as a measure to curb the iranian threat. I dont think he is tphaunaive. He praised the former chief of israels spy agency hailed obamas victory. Folks, you can throw it around, and senator you said we had them exactly where we wanted them 19,000 centrifuges and enough materials for 10 to 12 bombs . Is that where we wanted them . What was the purpose of the sanctions . To dismantle their operation. I was chairman when we passed those sanctions and our purpose was to bring them to negotiations so we negotiated. I guarantee you, the first 15 years you have unbelievable restraints that make it impossible to even think about making a bomb. They can think about it but cant do anything about it. So at the end of 15 years, you have every option that you have today. Your decision is whether you want those 15 years to be right now or take the 15 years and figure out whether or not this is going to work. Thats really the choice. I dont know what you mean by we had them right where we wanted them. To what end. Giving you a talking point with the 19,000 sepbcentrifuges, ten of which are operating, but we all know they are antiques. They are antiques. We all talk about the number of centrifuges but this deal lays out their ability to continue research and development on the hour sixes and eight, and year eight they can industrial that for a peaceful program. Let me finish. I let you talk. They said the ir 8 is their future, and ir 1 doesnt operate most of the time and its slow and they want to get rid of those. They did a masterful job to get the west and other countries to focus on something over here that is of no use to them while they are able to draft them an agreement that allows them a pathway so they could put in a covert facility and enrich in levels and pace they never can imagine. With that, secretary boxer. Mr. Chairman, if i may add, i must say every element of the rnd program is rolled back in time. The fact is they right now they are very active in all of these areas and its significantly delayed. Thats a fact. And it is a fact in year eight they are given that time in year eight, and thats why the president said in year its an incorrect characterization, and i apologize, but in year eight they are in industrial activity and its a small cascade they can start to do years after their current plans. And many people thought it was going to take that long to have the capacity to do that. As i mentioned from a standpoint there, they have been brilliant. I dont think there is one person involved that doesnt believe iran is a bad actor, and so thats why i believe we need to curb their Nuclear Ambitions. I think its essential. I dont think the American People want another war and at the end of the day i know some disagree with this. I think thats at the end of the day, thats really the option. Which everybody tiptoes around. Now, you know i support the right of my colleagues to say anything they want but you have sat there and you have heard two of my colleagues go after you with words that i am going to repeat. You were fleeced. One said. The other said you have been bamboozled. So putting aside the fact that i think thats disrespectful and insulting, thats their right to do. There are other ways to express your disagreement, but that goes to your core as a human being and your intelligence, and i think you are highly intelligent. Let me ask you, and if you could answer yes or no and i know its hard for you, secretary kerry for you to do so because were senators and its not our way and then i can get through the rest of my list. So my colleagues think you were fleeced and bamboozled and that means everybody was fleeced and bamboozled, everybody, almost everybody in the world. I want to ask you does the united kingdom, our strong ally support this . Yes. Does australia, one of our strongest allies support this accord . Yes. Does germany support this accord tphao yes. Does france support this accord . Yes. Does new zealand support this accord . I have not seen their statement. They are on the Security Council, and they voted for it. Oh, in the vote, yes. Either by voice support or a vote. Did jordan voice its support in their vote . Yes. Did spain, did nigeria and lithuania . Yes. You get the drift. If you were bamboozled, the world has been bamboozled. Thats ridiculous and unfair and wrong. You can disagree for sure with aspects of this agreement but i think we need to stay away from that kind of rhetoric. Now, i have the agreement right here and i have read it and one thing that i was surprised as i sat down to read it i thought you know, will i be able to understand this document. Its very understandable. I want to say cite a couple things in here. Iran reaffirms under no circumstances will iran ever seek, develop or acquire any Nuclear Weapons. Thats one phrase. Another one is and thats this one is number 16. Iran will not engage in activities including at the rnd level that could contribute to the development of a Nuclear Explosive device including uranium or plutonium and thats in this accord. So one of the things i want to do is send out a message to iran. Not to the people of iran, who i think are really good people, but to those folks there that are so dangerous, and that is you said it real clearly, and if you dont live up to it, i guarantee you the consequences will not be pretty and i think thats an Important Message that has to go out, because they signed it and they said it and the whole world is watching them. Secretary kerry i authored the u. S. Israel Strategic Partnership act, and president obama signed both. It means that we stand shoulder to shoulder with our closest ally and we know israel does not like this agreement. I am very glad you read those comments of the paper. I would hope as somebody who has stood so i was going to say tall, but its hard for me to say that. Stood so tall for this relationship with israel. At the end of the day, i think this relationship is going to be even more strengthened. I want to get your view on that, because i know that ash carter went to israel. Do you have anything to report about that meeting and how that went . Well secretary carter went with the intention of laying out and beginning a dialogue in great detail, which he did with the defense minister of israel. They had, i think, almost a daylong meeting in which they discussed the many ways in which we are prepared to work with israel understanding the obviously understanding the very dangerous dynamics of the region right now. And secretary carter, in fact, went up to review with them what the threat is currently from isil, daesh, and so forth. These are all things we are prepared to push back on in any number of ways, and we also believe theres the potential of a kind of new alignment in the region, and i will be going to speak speak. I want to press you on that, because we were reading about saudi arabias words today in the press and i just i dont i have not had time to check it out and i wanted to ask you, do you believe the saudis are supportive now despite the fact they review iran as aversaryadversary. I met with the foreign minister a few days ago and he indicated to me they were prepared to support it if certain things are going to happen. Those things i believe are going to happen. I anticipate that. Senator, sorry to divert but i forgot the quote and i dont want to be accused of being a person saying the choice is military or otherwise. Anybody who followed the events in iran has to admit truthfully that he never believed iran would ever agree to discuss these issues let alone agree to the measures imposed on them by the world powers. The alternative would be military strikes which would plunge the region into deeper insecurity and would likely not be successful he said. So were not alone in describing that. This does not end the possibility of a confrontation with iran, obviously, depending on the choices they make. I want to say, thank Wendy Sherman for me personally. Donald trump said something why dont you bring women into the negotiations, it would go much better. She is fantastic and wish she was here. She is absolutely spectacular. She did an extraordinary job. We would not be where we are without wendy and jack and an incredible team, a team, by the way, all across the government of the United States experts whose life is spent analyzing iran and analyzing nuclear prolive nation that came from the Energy Department and Intelligence Community and from the state department elsewhere, all who worked together, and believe me theyre a savvy group of people and nobody pulled any wool over their eyes. Thank you. Senator rubio. Thank you, thank you all for being here today. Secretary kerry the administration publicly stated that you expect this deal is going to be rejected by majorities in both houses of congress, and you said while winning approval of congress would be nice your goal is to basically convince enough democrats so you can override a detail so as far as the administration is concerned this is a done deal. As far as american sanctions are concerned this is a deal whose survival is not guaranteed beyond the term of the president , and i hope the next president is somebody that will remove the National Security waiver and reempose the congressional sanctions passed by congress because this deal is fundamentally flawed. I believe it weakens our National Security and makes the world a more dangerous place and throughout the process by the way, this administration in my opinion repeatedly capitulated on important items and the examples are endless, and it allows what we were pressing about inspections. I understand all the disputes about the terms but clearly there was a perception created among my colleagues and both sides of the i will that we were pressing for anytime anywhere inspections, and then the snapback sanctions are also hollow. We have a complicated 24day iran will test and exploit over and over again. They know that once the International Sanctions are gone they will be impossible to snap back. Quote, once the sanctions collapse it will be impossible to reconstruct it and he bragged earlier this week that violations of the agreement would not be prosecuted. No matter what happens iran will keep the more than billions of dollars its going to receive up front as a signing bonus, and iran will be allowed to continue to develop longrange ballistic weapons for nuclear warfare. All of these promises that they are making about never pursuing a weapon and they are all revealed as lies when they are looking at making a longrange rocket to put a Nuclear War Head on them. And it allows the arms embargo to end. On terrorism, this deal provides possibly hundreds of billions to a regime that directly threatens the interests of the United States and our allies and nothing holds iran to account for human rights. Quite the opposite. The regime is being rewarded for its atrocious human rights record. I know you said you brought up the american hostages in every negotiation, and we thank you for that, but this deal brought no new information regarding loved ones whereabouts. And in fact, you personally met and negotiated with an iranian official who impressed on jasons case and lied to the world and lied to the world by saying we dont jail people for their opinions. This deal does nothing for the marine corps charge who dictated a letter from the prison that said, quote, secretary kerry sits politely with the iranians and shaking hands to save them from economic meltdown, unquote as iran adds hostages and does nothing for the pastor whose only crime was practicing his religion. The only people this deal does anything for directly are the iranian officials that want to continue to jail and execute their people and who hate israel and hope to wipe them from the has not planet and want to help assad slaughter people. Secretary kerry i do not fault you for trying to strike a deal for iran, i dont. I do fault the president for striking a terrible deal with iran. I hope enough of my democratic colleagues can be persuaded to vote against this deal. The Iranian Regime and the world should know this deal is your deal with iran i mean yours meaning this administration and the next president is under no legal or moral obligation to live up to it. The Iranian Regime and the world who know the majority of the members of this congress do not support this deal and the deal could go away on the day that president obama leaves office. In that realm, i wanted to ask about this. If you today, are a company that after this deal is signed and go into iran and build a manufacturing facility and the next president of the United States lifts the security waiver or iran violates the deal do the sanctions supply against that facility Going Forward . If a company goes into iran after this deal and builds a manufacturing facility of any kind, car batteries, and iran violates the deal and the sanctions kick back in, will that facility be able to continue to operate without facing sanctions . Senator if a company acts to go in and do business with iran while the sanctions are lifting that would be permitted. If iran violates the deal and the sanctions snap back they would be able to continue to the reason why its important, its important for companies anywhere in the world to know that whatever investment they make in iran they risking it, and they are betting on the hope that iran never violates the deal and they are also hoping that the next president of the United States does not reimpose u. S. Congressional sanctions by which they would become a sanction entity. One more specific question about the deal. Theres a document that states those thato cooperate with iran on the implementation on Nuclear Security guidelines and best practices and 10. 2 reads cooperation through training and workshops to strengthen irans ability to protect against and respond to Nuclear Security threats including sabotage and physical protection systems. Here is my question. If israel decides it doesnt like this deal and it wants to sabotage an iranian Nuclear Program or facility, does this deal that we have just signed obligate us to help iran defend itself against israeli sabotage or the sabotage of any other country in the world . The i believe that refers to things like physical security and safeguards all of our options and those of our allies and friends will remain in place. Well, i guess thats my point. If israel conducts an air strike against the physical facility does this deal, the way i read it, does it require us to help iran protect and respond to that threat . No. It does not . No. The purpose of that is to be able to have longerterm guarantees as we enter a world in which cyber warfare is increasingly a concern for everybody that if you are going to have a nuclear capacity, you clearly want to be able to make sure that those are adequately protected. But i can assure you, we will coordinate in every possible way with israel with respect to israels concern. If israel conducts a cyber attack against the iranian Nuclear Program are we obligated to help defend them . No, i assure you that people will be coordinating closely with israel as we do on every aspect. Thats not how i read that. I dont see any way its possible well be in con confluctuate with sbralisrael with what we want to do there. I listened to your long list of objections about it, but theres no alternative that you or anyone else has proposed. I sure have. I have secretary kerry. Im confident the next president of the United States will have enough common sense if this is being applied prop ir lyerproperly, theyre not going to arbitrarily they might want to engage and if theres a way to strengthen or do something. I cant imagine someone arbitrarily deciding lets go back to where we are where they are free to do whatever they want, without any inspections without any restraint or insight. I dont think any president would do that. Before you signed this deal, iran was already in violation of existing mandates and restrictions, including things they signed on to. And this deal brings them back into compliance. If they dont live up to it, every option we have today is on the table. So we dont lose anything here. The way we lose is by rejecting the deal because then you have no restraints no sanctions, no insight, no inspectors, no reduction of their stockpile. If you want to conveniently forget the fact they had enough fissile material to build 10 to 12 bombs, thats the threat to israel. If you go back to that without any alternative other than what you know, most people think is going to be the alternative, which is confrontation. Nobody has a plan thats articulated and reasonable as to how youre going to strengthen this do something more when the Supreme Leader of iran and president of iran and others think theyve signed an agreement with the world. The rest of the world thinks its a good agreement. If you think the ayatollah will come back and negotiate again with an american, thats fantasy. Youre never going to see that. We will have proven were not trustworthy. We have 535 secretaryies of state. You cant deal with anybody. Thats going to do a whole lot to people that matter in the world. Thats whats at stake here. Mr. Secretary just to ensure that i have appropriately addressed the situation i want to refrain and say we have been fleeced and not make that thing thats directed at an individual. One of the way we brought them into compliance is that we have agreed to let them do what they are doing and actually agreed to let them do it on an industrialized basis. So i will have to say thats how we brought them into compliance. Senator this is a very important point. Were not alone in this. The Bush Administration proposed the exact same thing. This is not something that president obama just sort of dreamed up and thought was a good idea. June 12th 2008 president bush, through condoleezza rice, who signed the memorandum with the p5 1ed so said that in return heres what we were ready to do. Recognize irans right to Nuclear Energy for peaceful purposes. Treat Irans Nuclear program in the same way as any Nuclear State in the npt once the peaceful nature is restored. Protect Financial Assistance for peaceful Nuclear Energy, including state of the art power reactor, support for r d and legally binding fuel guarantees. Improve relations with iran and support iran in playing a constructive role in international affairs. Think about that. Work with iran and others in the region on confidencebuilding measures and regional security. Reaffirmation of the obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force. Cooperation on afghanistan. Steps toward normalization of trade. Civilian projects Civil Aviation cooperation. Assistance in irans social and economic development. All of that was offered by president george w. Bush june 12th 2008 but didnt happen because iran was not the one element that you left out that they did not agree to was enriching. Allowing them to enrich. Senator menendez . Thank you mr. Chairman. Let me start off by saying that i appreciate the enormous work and arduous quest that you have been in pursuit of. And i think that no one would want to be applauding you more than i who has been following iran since my days in the House International committee nearly 20 years ago. As one of the authors of the sanctions regime that are recognized to bring iran to the negotiating table. However, i am concerned that the deal enshrines for iran and in fact commits the International Community over time to assisting iran in developing an industrial Scale Nuclear Power Program complete with enrich. While i understand the program will be subject to irans npt, it fails to look at irans history of deception in its Nuclear Program and its violations of the npt and it will in the long run make it harder to demonstrate irans program is not being used for peaceful purpose because iran will have legitimate reasons to have advanced centrifuges and enrichment program. Well have to demonstrate if, in fact, thats the case, that its intention is dual use and not justified by the Nuclear Power program. Thats a much more difficult burden. Mr. Secretary, youve always been skeptical about sanctions. When you were chairman of this committee in a hearing on sanctions legislation that i was authoring, when the administration was vigorously arguing against it your comment was to Wendy Sherman and david cohen, so what you are really saying is this is a very blunt instrument which risks adverse reaction as opposed to a calculated effort. In that hearing i remember i had to come back because i didnt expect that even the question of the amendment was going to come up. And they were there trying to excoriate the effort. It passed 990 and subsequently was embraced as the reason iran has come back to the negotiating table. So let me ask under the sanctions heading paragraph 26 says, and i quote the United States Administration Acting consistent with the respected roles of the president and the congress will refrain from reintroducing or reimposing sanctions specified in annex to, the sanctions this committees and Congress Passed, that has ceased applying. So secretary lew, i read that to mean we cannot reintroduce or reimpose the existing sanctions that Congress Passed into law. Is that right . Senator, we have been very clear that we retain our right and we will if we need to reimpose sanctions for reasons that are not nuclear if they live with the Nuclear Agreement and violate im talking about existing Nuclear Sanctions. If snapback provisions of the sanctions are to be an effective deterrent as the administration has suggested of iranians breaking the agreement, will the administration agree to support the reauthorization of the existing sanctions that passed the senate 990, and which expire next year. Yes or no . Let me be clear that the sanctions that are being lifted if iran complies if they comply, we said we would not reimpose Nuclear Sanctions if they live with the Nuclear Agreement. My point is this. If youre going to snap back, you have to snap back to something. If you arent snapping back senator, let me mr. Secretary dont eat up my time. Im sorry with all due respect. Dont eat up my time. If the sanctions which exist that you all heralded and said brought iran to the table expire next year 2016, and we dont reauthorize it, there is nothing in that context to snap back to. So why wont you simply say that the administration supports under all the same provisions including the prltesidents waivers, the reauthorization of those sanctions so the iranians know if they violate that the snap back will also include snap back to what the Congress Passed. What i said earlier was that right now the sanctions remain in effect. We have a regime in effect. If iran complies, we will lift sanctions and its premature to talk about extending a law this expires next year. Irans obligations go out at least eight years before the rat ratification of the new protocol and thats only if Congress Lifts the sanctions. I dont understand how we have a credible belief that snapback means something if in fact youll not have the ability to have those sanctions in place. Let me ask this to the secretary. Is the president willing to make a clear and unequivocal statement, not nat all options are all the table because iran does not believe thats a credible military threat. Under no circumstances will iran be permitted to acquire a Nuclear Weapon. Secretary kerry . Did you hear my question . I apologize. Is president obama willing to make a clear and unequivocal statement, not that all options are on the table because theyll say iran does not believe theres a credible military threat that iran under no circumstances will be permitted to acquire a Nuclear Weapon. Absolutely. He has said that. He said all options are on the table. The president has said very clearly under no circumstances will they be allowed to get a Nuclear Weapon and, in fact ash carter reiterated publicly very specifically. Can i just no, im sorry i have limited time. Youve been with the iranians two years. I have seven minutes. Its worthy. Mr. Secretary im seriously concerned about the lifting of the arms embarringgring embargo that creeped its way into this. The ban on iranian missiles has been lifted. The new Security Council resolution is clear. Iran is not prohibited from carrying out Ballistic Missile work. The Resolution Says iran is called upon not to undertake such activity. Now previously in Security Council resolution 1929, the council used mandatory language where it said, quote, besides that iran shall not undertake any activity related to Ballistic Missiles capable of delivering Nuclear Weapons. Why would we accept inferior language that changes the mandatory shall to a permissive call upon. We often call upon a lot of countries to do or stop certain action in the u. N. But it doesnt have the force of shall not which has consequences if you do. Can you answer simply is iran banned from Ballistic Missile work for the next eight years . They are no. Do you want to answer it senator . I will. That is not accurate. The exact same language in the embargo is in the agreement with respect to launches. And that is under article 25 of the u. N. And that is exactly where it is today in the language. But in addition to that iran did not want it and we insisted on it. They are restrained from any sharing of Missile Technology, purchase of Missile Technology exchange of Missile Technology. Work on missiles. They cannot do that under article 41, which is chapter 7 and mandatory. And it does have the language still. It seems im reading to you from the Security Council resolution that was adopted codifying the the Security Council resolution. And that Security Council resolution im reading you explicit language. Iran is called upon correct. Not to undertake thats the article thats far different than shall not. Senator, thats exactly what it is today. Its the same language as it in the embargo now. We transferred it to this and thats what it is. Not the same language as Security Council resolution 1929. I dont know why you wouldnt just keep the same language which is that you shall not. Because there shall not exist there are consequences if you do. Mr. Chairman, final question. I heard the senator i dont know whether thats true or not though whole purpose of understanding the military dimensions is not for iranians to declare culpability but to understand how far they got along in their weaponization efforts. General hayden the cia director said we have estimates, but theyre just that. Is it true that the iranians are going to be able to take the sample he set because chain of custody Means Nothing if at the beginning what you are given is chosen and derived by the perpetrator. As you know senator thats a classified component of this. Its supposed to be discussed in a classified session. Were perfectly prepared to fully brief you in classified section with respect to what will happen. Secretary moniz has had his team, red team that effort and hes made some additional addones to where we are. Its part of a confidential agreement between the iaea and iran as to how they do that. The iaea has said they are satisfied they will be able to do this in a way that does not compromise their needs and that adequately gets the answers they need. Weve been briefed on it. My time is up. If that is true thats would be the equivalent of the fox guarding the chicken coop. Were confident the iaea has the ability to be able to get the answers they need and secretary moniz may speak quickly to that. You want to say anything . Sure. Yes, as secretary kerry said, this is a road map worked out between the iaea and iran. They have we do not have the those documents that are, as is customary confidential between the country and the agency but clearly, they have they know that they must have and be able to articulate a process with integrity in terms of making the measurements and being able to analyze them through their own laboratories and the network of laboratories including u. S. Laboratories that do the analysis of these kinds of samples. Let me just say burning up part of my seven minutes, you need to go down and have that meeting, and it will take about five seconds okay . You need to go down and meet with secretary moniz and get that answer. Ill also add that we as a nation dont even have a copy. Senator cardin and i have asked for this. We dont even have a copy of the agreement to even understand. Youll understand this very quickly in about five seconds for the secretary, but we dont have a copy of the agreement to ascertain on behalf of the American People whether the iaea process, which again, you should go look into this part of it, has any integrity. Its very disappointing. I know senator cardin this is a very important point. The documents in question are traditional between the country and the iaea and are kept confidential between the country, in this case iran, and iaea, but it is part of the jcpoa in regards to possible military dimensions, which are critical for us to have base line in order to deal with moving forward. So its a very important part. And from what we can tell if we can get eyes on that document it may answer some of our questions. Secretary moniz has raised questions and hes greatly respected in that regard. I think transparency could help us all better understand that. I hope in a confidential setting there would be an opportunity to review those documents. Were going to move on. Senator johnson, thank you. How can that be confidential . And why would that be classified . Okay. I can see iaea having those confidential agreements with normal powers. Iran is not a normal nation. Largest state sponsor of terror and we rush to the United Nations, had this deal approved and we dont even understand how those samples are going to be collected and the chain of custody. Its unbelievable. Secretary kerry, ive heard this deal described as historic. I wont use Vice President bidens full terminology but this is a big deal correct . This is a big deal . Its an important agreement. During our unfortunately limited debate on the Iranian Nuclear agreement, i tried to offer a third amendment. One was to deem this a treaty. I think its such a big deal that twothirds of the senate should approve such an historic deal. Unfortunately, that amendment failed. I never got a vote on my next step. Leet deem this a congressional executive agreement where at least both chambers would have to affirmatively approve this with a simple majority vote. The third amendment i tried to offer reflected what we end up getting in this convoluted process. A congressional executive agreement with a low threshold approval of only 34 votes. The parliamentarian said thats out of order. Thats very unconstitutional. Yet, thats what we have. My question is if you were so confident this is such a great deal, why wouldnt you have been supportive of allowing the American People to be involved in the decision through their elected representatives, as to whether that was by just allowing both chambers to have a simple vote of approval, rather than this convoluted process. You are quite confident youre going to win this. Youve run to the United Nations Security Council. Convince me this what were going through right now isnt just a big charade because im afraid thats what it is. Why wasnt this administration if you are confident its such a great deal why didnt you allow this body, this congress the ability to affirmatively vote, too prove this deal. It wasnt my decision. The administration certainly did not offer any kind of support for a more robust review process. You circumvented this congress by undermining our review process by having the Security Council approve this. On the contrary. This is a long time honored process for several centuries of executive of political agreements between countries. This is way more than a political agreement. I want to go on. Secretary moniz if iran wants a peaceful Nuclear Program, theres no reason for them to have to enrich uranium is there . Well i think, clearly there is uranium available on the international market. But its also the case thats many countries support their Nuclear Program with enrichment. If they wanted a purely peaceful program theres no need to enrich uranium. In the past when south africa and libya gave up their Nuclear Programs to be welcomed into the world of nations in a more normal fashion like iran supposedly wants, they completely gave up their enrichment. They dismantled that. Thats what we demanded correct . I believe so certainly with southd africa. They had a Weapons Program that was dismantled. If i may add the documents the iaea in south africa in a full Nuclear Weapons dismantlement program, remained confidential. Are you familiar with the emp commissions 2008 report . No, i am not sir. Youre not . Do you know what emp is . Youll have to explain it to me. Etloerkal magnetic pulse. No, im not sir. Im just not. I apologize. I can respond for the record if you have a question there. Ill send you a number of questions. The recommendations were for the department of Homeland Security and department of energy. We just held a hearing. Are you familiar with a dr. Richard garwin. Yes everyone is. He testified before our committee yesterday in combination with cia former director James Woolsey about the threat of emp. And one of the reasons i called that hearing is what i believe nobody knows how this is going to game out. The inevitable conclusion is eventually iran will have aure in clearNuclear Weapon. Are you familiar that theyve practiced ship launch using scud missiles . Theyve done that according to dr. Peter vincent frey. An emp attack would be conducted by somebody like north korea or iran and conducted from a ship off our coast using a scud missile and the fact that you as the secretary of the department of energy were not even aware of the 15 recommendations, basic recommendations. Things like evaluating and implementing quick fixes in the threat of an emp attack. For literally 20 million to 70 million we could protect 700 critical transformers that could help us recover from Something Like that. Im highly concerned. As you, secretary of energy, not even aware of these recommendations that were made public in 2008. Seven years later, we have done nothing, virtually nothing to address these 15 recommendations by the commission. First of all, i dont know that report, and the clearly many of them must apply to dhs and the dod. However, on the transformer question, if you look at our quadrennial Energy Review published in april we identify owe emp as a risk to transformers. Seven years later weve done virtually nothing to protect ourselves. My point being well provide a number of questions on the record to take some action to provide some protection. My final comment is weve heard 50 billion to 100 billion 104 billion in our terms doesnt seem like much. But thats 13 of irans economy. If for example the American Economy had interjection of 13 of our economy that would be 2. 4 trillion. This isnt chump change. Weve already seen what kind of actor iran is on the world stage. I cant predict this whole thing out but what this deal does is interjects tens of billions, 13 up front of irans economy into the economy of the largest state sponsor of terrorism. And so when the senator said we have them right where we want them, i agree. We certainly didnt want them with centrifuges but this deal puts them in a far better position. This strengthens their hands and from that standpoint im highly concerned. Can i respond to the point about the iranian assets. Lets be clear what those assets are. Its not money were giving to iran. Itsu rans money that setitscountries that were locked up to bring them to the table for a Nuclear Agreement. Weve gone through analyzing what that is. Thats not us giving them money. If theres a Nuclear Agreement that meets the criteria the sanctions were designed to achieve, that was the season they were locked up. There are competing demands for that, whatever it is. We think its about 50 billion. Theres at least 500 billion of domestic demand. They cant possibly scratch the surface of that need. Weve never said there isnt going to be a penny going to maligned services. Theyve managed to find money to put into maligned purposes. I would not exaggerate how much thats going to change things. The assessment that we have that our Intelligence Community has is that it will not be a change in direction. It will be on the margin not the kind of increase youre describing. By the way before moving to senator shaheen, while we havent lifted our sanctions on the irgc which has the nuclear file and is the entity that carries out all of the terrorism on behalf of iran what we uniquely did was we lifted saunkss on all the Financial Institutions they deal with. Theyll be the number one beneficiary of the sanctions lifting. We didnt lift sanctions on them. Its looikike not lifting sanctions on a Holding Company but on the entityies that feed them the money. Through Economic Growth and shipment of money and all the things they do will empower them. This is almost chump change compared to what will happen over the next decade. Senator shaheen . Could i just respond . We are not lifting sanctions on a bank that was sanctioned for reasons related to terrorism. Weve retained the ability but many other banking entities and others they rely upon have. If they violate the terms of our sanctions and regime for sanctions on terrorism could be sanctioned. We have not said that any of those institutions are protected. And in terms of the step back, the point senator menendez concluded is not correct. We have enormous tools to snap back sanctions through the ndaa sanctions on oil and financial sanctions. I would just like to move to senator shaheen by saying they disagree with that. Great britain disagrees, germany disagrees, france disagrees. The eu disagrees. The tools that we have through the nuclear file are not available to be applied. Senator menendez tried to pursue that. Most of the most accurate assessment of this deal from what ive been able to read has been coming from oohiran. If iran violates it could come back on nuclear and if they violate sankss we have the ability to sanction on other grounds. Its not a fair conclusion that institutions thats continue to engage in funding terrorism or regional destabilization are im immune from those kinds of sanctions. Its just not correct. I stand by assessment as do the other countries who negotiated the deal with you. The other cannotountries senator shaheen. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member cardin. Thank you to our witnesses for your testimony today and to the negotiating team for the tremendous effort that it took to get us to this point. Before i ask my questions, and i do have questions. I just want to say that i dont think its to the benefit of this committee this congress or the American People for any of us to impugn the motives or intellect of anybody involved in this discussion. I think people have strong views about how they feel, and its appropriate to express those views, but to because someone disagrees with you to suggest that their motives are not in the best interest of this country or that their intellect is questionable i think does not advance the debate in a way that it should be advanced. So, mr. Chairman, i appreciate you and the Ranking Member and hope that we will keep this debate in a civil discussion. I also want to point out for the record that everybody voted for the Nuclear Review act of 2015. Was unanimous. While all of us had concerns about everything, some of the provisions that were in it it was voted for by the committee unanimously. Now to go to my questions, i want to secretary moniz follow up on the issues raised with respect to the possible military dimensions of the past Iranian Nuclear activities. Because thats an area where i certainly am not clear about, how we can be confident the iaea is going to be able to get the information that it needs to complete its investigation. Can you speak to that a little bit and talk about why you believe that were going to have the information that we need . Again, senator all i can say is the iaea is very strong technically. I might add every inspector since like 1980 has been trained at Los Alamos National laboratory. They have a very strong reputation, which frankly, they need to guard to make sure that they have a process with integrity. It is their responsibility. Theres nothing unusual here. Theres no cite agreement. This is the way it works. The iaea negotiates with the country. We have achieved in the negotiation to get iran to the table with them because without satisfying their requirements by october 15th to satisfy the agency, they will not be any agreement Going Forward. Thats very clear. So after years of stiffing them, to be perfectly to use a technical term weve forced them to the table. They went to tehran not just the director general but the senior people who do safeguards et cetera and they came back and feel they have a process with integrity. In this environment i can only say the and i will say flat out, i personally have not seen those documents the chairman referred to. Had something of an oral briefing, general one. With that we have assembled a National Lab Team to think through the kinds of process that we anticipate and to recommend steps that might mitigate any risks. But again, ultimately, we rely upon the iaea. They will make a report. The director general has committed to trying to get that out this year this calendar year. And that report is then where one will see that what their conclusions are and what the basis for their conclusions are. And can i get this to you somehow . This is the iaea board of governors road map. Its a letter weve submitted with all the documents that lays out the agreement between iran and betweenu ran and the iaea as to what they are going to do and when and how. That would be helpful. Could we have it introduced for the record . I would like that very much. Once either before or after that report is produced will the Intelligence Community either hear or our other partner countries weigh in and assess whether they believe that that report reflects an accurate discussion of irans past activities . Well, i would have to defer to the Intelligence Community for their reaction. I can assure you that our d. O. E. Experts are going to be looking over this very very carefully. Thank you. Secretary lew, can you commit there will be no sanctions relieved i think youve said this, but to be clear again until iran has provided the iaea with this information and the access thats required . Absolutely. Untilu iran has completed all of its obligations well not be relieving any of the United States sanctions or the International Sanctions. I dont know who wants to respond to this but at the time we began negotiations, what was the best estimate of our Intelligence Community about the time for iran to break out with a Nuclear Weapon . The best estimate was two to three months. Was there agreement among our intelligence agencies about that estimate . By yes pretty much. There was a disagreement with a couple of other countries but not disagreement inner intel community. And as we look at if this agreement goes into effect, is there an estimate from our Intelligence Community about how long it might take to get to a Nuclear Weapon at the end of this agreement if iran decides to pursue that option at the end of theres a distinction senator. The breakout time as it is used in this negotiation is a hybrid of the traditional understand