Obama: Violating the Nuclear Agreement Will Have Real Consequences for Iran

A press conference with the President of the United States regarding the nuclear agreement between six world powers and Iran was held on Wednesday, July 15, at the White House, where Mr. Obama described the agreement as "historic" and stated that if it is violated, Iran will face real consequences. He said in his remarks, broadcast live on television networks, "Our strategy has been that if Iran has a nuclear bomb, it poses a danger to the United States and the region. Accordingly, we acted, and all sanctions were imposed in this manner. Even some parties that had no major issues with Iran joined us, and we focused on preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, which this sanctions regime pursued." He added, "This strategy has not only been mine. Previous U.S. administrations and even Benjamin Netanyahu's strategy have been based on the same premise that Iran should not reach a nuclear bomb. The agreement that U.S. negotiators reached fulfills this goal: that Iran does not obtain a nuclear bomb." He stated, "We will still be in contact with the Iranians on every issue. Of course, we have not normalized relations like with Cuba, but there is still a way for dialogue. I am criticized for saying that since this agreement does not solve other problems we have with Iran, we should set it aside. However, this argument is not logical." The U.S. President emphasized, "But another issue with Iran is that it continues activities in the region that create problems for us and our allies." He added, "However, when this agreement is implemented and a large amount of Iran's enriched uranium is removed, the workload of centrifuges decreases, the operational goals of the Arak heavy water facility change, and a monitoring system is established over all of Iran's nuclear activities, if Iran wants to move towards a nuclear bomb, we will be aware of it." According to Mr. Obama, "Even experts say that with this arrangement, Iran will not have a nuclear bomb anymore." The U.S. President also clarified, "We still have issues with Iran's support for terrorism, such as support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and some interventions in Yemen. I think the implementation of this agreement will allow us to be in contact with Iran and expect them to act better, cooperate, and act responsibly." "But we have not counted on that. This nuclear agreement is not going to suddenly open the doors to democracy. We only worked on preventing nuclear bomb acquisition." Mr. Obama stated, "The difficulty here is that we have to monitor all of Iran's activities, but in any case, when they do not have a nuclear bomb, we will be better able to pursue this work." He expressed, "We will be in contact with the Iranians on every issue. Of course, we have not normalized relations like with Cuba, but there is still a way for dialogue. I am criticized for saying that since this agreement does not solve other problems we have with Iran, we should set it aside. However, this argument is not logical." One reporter asked the U.S. President, "Don't you think it's strange that Bashar al-Assad supports this agreement and Tehran is satisfied with it, but Israel, the main ally, is dissatisfied?" Barack Obama responded, "I am not surprised that Bashar al-Assad or someone in Tehran wants to use it for their benefit. Every politician uses the situation for themselves. We no longer predict based on a tweet, for example, that the Iranian leader has sent. Now we have a written agreement and a series of specific inspections in place. The facts remain. I am not concerned about how others think." I understand Israel's concerns. It is located in a dangerous region and is dealing with a government that denies the Holocaust and calls for their destruction. I have conveyed this to the Israeli Prime Minister as well. However, all these dangers become acute when Iran has a nuclear bomb. But none of the opponents of this agreement – in the U.S. Congress or elsewhere – have offered any alternatives. Yes, they say this is a historic mistake and endangers Israel, but my question is: what alternative do you propose? When 99% of experts and most world leaders say this agreement prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, against that, if one person is opposed, perhaps that one person should also have an alternative." Barack Obama added, "Regarding Congress, I hope members can evaluate their grievances based on facts, not political interests, and understand what is ultimately in the interests of the United States, not a particular party or candidate." "I understand Israel's concerns. It is located in a dangerous region and is dealing with a government that denies the Holocaust and calls for their destruction. I have conveyed this to the Israeli Prime Minister as well. However, all these dangers become acute when Iran has a nuclear bomb. But none of the opponents of this agreement – in the U.S. Congress or elsewhere – have offered any alternatives. Yes, they say this is a historic mistake and endangers Israel, but my question is: what alternative do you propose? When 99% of experts and most world leaders say this agreement prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, against that, if one person is opposed, perhaps that one person should also have an alternative." The U.S. President emphasized, "Now we either have to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue through diplomacy and negotiation or through war and military intervention. These are the two paths ahead. Some may say we could have achieved a better agreement. Perhaps some critics might say a good agreement would have been for Iran to have no nuclear activity at all. The problem with this logic is that Iran will never agree to that. The view of the international community is also not that Iran should have no peaceful nuclear program." Mr. Obama, referring to the opposition in the U.S. Congress to the Iranian nuclear agreement, said, "I ask the opponents to read it before commenting. And then to precisely indicate where in this agreement Iran is allowed to obtain a nuclear bomb and then propose an alternative." "We have designed a specific inspection system for Iran's nuclear activities that will be implemented. Now the question is, if they want to create parallel activities and build a bomb, how? If Iran wants to do this, they must pursue all these activities from the source to enrichment elsewhere, and if they want to do this, we will understand it." We have designed a specific inspection system for Iran's nuclear activities that will be implemented. Now the question is, if they want to create parallel activities and build a bomb, how? If Iran wants to do this, they must pursue all these activities from the source to enrichment elsewhere, and if they want to do this, we will understand it. The U.S. President added, "Now let’s assume Iran is fully pursuing covert activities to build a nuclear bomb. The International Atomic Energy Agency can say that a specific site looks suspicious. They can tell Iran that we want to inspect. If Iran refuses, we have a way for that. We do not need Russia and China, for example, to reject Iran's objections. If Iran does not cooperate, sanctions will be reinstated. Furthermore, this is not something that can be easily hidden. If we find a suspicious site, we will monitor it and investigate it. Physics even at the high school level tells us that if uranium or materials for building a nuclear bomb are somewhere, they are traceable and cannot be hidden, and we can work on it." Mr. Obama said, "Can Iran cheat with all these mechanisms? Maybe they want to. But we have predicted enough, and we will be quickly aware of it and quickly reinstate sanctions without needing the Security Council. Or if you want to say that if Iran is so secretive that even with all these measures they are still pursuing a bomb, then your answer is not negotiation. You go to the core issue that military action must be taken. This view can be put forward, but its implementation is debatable." Another reporter asked, "Aren't you worried that by lifting the arms embargo, weapons will reach Hezbollah in Lebanon and other Iranian supporters in the region?" The U.S. President responded, "There are concerns about support for the Houthis in Yemen or other activities. One way is the Security Council resolution. When Iran shows it has no military nuclear activity and changes its role in the region, then we will get to weapons. We have reached this point; there will be five years of arms embargo and eight years of ballistic missile sanctions in place." "We not only have this resolution – sanctioning Iran for its nuclear program – but also have limitations in other Security Council resolutions on selling arms to Iran. As a result, we have enough legal tools to monitor Iran's military activities. It is not that, for example, the United Nations monitors Iran's activities like a police force. We, in cooperation with allies, track any arms shipments from Iran. For example, Hezbollah and the weapons they have are not because the weapons they have are legal or easily obtained. We have committed with our allies to cooperate more and better scrutinize any transfers, but beyond that, we have legal tools at our disposal." The Syria and Iraq Problem Mr. Obama stated, "Regarding the Middle East, my main goal is to ensure that when I hand over the situation to the next president, I make sure that the situation is improvable. Focusing on Syria and the civil war requires that Iraq reaches unity, not just against the Islamic State, but to work better together. One goal is to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear bomb. We also have close cooperation with Israel. With all of this, these problems are not solvable, and the President of the United States cannot solve them all. It is up to the people of the Middle East to take action themselves. I want to leave only a suitable foundation. I believe that if good security and economy are established in the region, groups like the "Islamic State" cannot deceive them. This work is not ours alone, but requires cooperation from governments, religious leaders, and civil groups." "I agree that as long as Turkey, Russia, Iran, and the Arab countries in the region do not cooperate, the Syrian problem cannot be solved. To solve it requires the cooperation of powers that have interests in Syria. Iran is one of these actors, and it is important that they be part of this dialogue. Again, I repeat, I do not think we will resume normal relations with Iran soon or in the near future. However, clearly, Iran plays a role in Iraq. Iraq has a Shiite majority. Some key factors in Iraq are expected to be in contact with Iran – like the Prime Minister of Iraq – but some Shiite militia groups, if they are close to Iran, may cause violence. We are cooperating and examining how we can work with the Prime Minister of Iraq to improve the situation. These discussions are ongoing and will continue. U.S. cooperation in Iraq and our support is aimed at supporting the Iraqi government." The Fate of Four American Prisoners in Iran One reporter asked the U.S. President, "Don't you think you should have somehow pursued the fate of the four prisoners in Iran?" He replied, "The idea that I am celebrating while four Americans are in prison in Iran is really meaningless. I have met with some families of these prisoners. Our diplomats are working very hard to get them out. If the question is why we did not link the nuclear negotiations to the release of these individuals, think about the logic of what you are saying. If Iran thinks another issue is related to the nuclear discussion, it will change its course. Even if we had not reached a nuclear agreement, it would have had no bearing on the release of these individuals, and we are still pursuing their release." Financial Support for Bashar al-Assad and Hezbollah in Lebanon One reporter raised the question, "They say a lot of money is now flowing to Iran, and your government says Iran spends this internally. But what if it spends it on Bashar al-Assad or Hezbollah in Lebanon?" Even if we assume Iran does not cheat in the next ten years, after this period, some restrictions will be lifted, but inspections will remain in place. Iran's responsibilities under the NPT remain, and Iran will remain committed to it. The Additional Protocol will remain in place and will be implemented. There is no scenario in which a future U.S. president, if Iran wants to build a nuclear bomb, will not be in a position of power. Iran has made international commitments, and even if it wants to say, well, let’s cheat or even explicitly say we want to build a nuclear bomb, it will still be in contradiction with this agreement. At that time, all countries involved in the discussions will react. Iran will not be stronger than it is now to build a nuclear bomb. By that time, we will not be weaker, and we are not going to reduce our military power. Barack Obama responded, "Hassan Rouhani, in his electoral activities, called for improving the economic situation, and it is expected that the money will be spent on domestic affairs. Now, if money suddenly goes to the Revolutionary Guards or other groups, there is a possibility that these groups will have additional resources. Iran supports Hezbollah in Lebanon and may increase this support. Is the question whether it will continue to help? Yes. Should we be concerned about this support? Yes. Will preventing Iran's interference from intermediary groups in the region stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb?"