And that was the original premise of this conversation. Iran could not get a Nuclear Weapon. That was always the discussion. What i am going to be able to say and we will be able to prove is that this, by a wide margin is the most definitive path by which iran will not get a Nuclear Weapon and we will be able to achieve that with the full cooperation of the World Community and without having to engage another war in the middle east. Charlie in washington secretary of state john kerry told congress that the rejection of the accord would give to rent a green light to tehran a green light to accelerate their program. Secretary kerry this will be rigorously scrutinized or no deal. That is the choice. Charlie i am pleased to have tom friedman back in this table. It is a big deal. Tom 36 years that we have had this hostile relationship. In 1979 i was a reporter on fleet street for upi london and my losses came to me one day and said the number two man in the bureau has been shot by a man robbing a jewelry store. Would you like to go to beirut . The radiant revolution was just happening. We are we were in the middle of it. That is when i stepped into the middle east and i realized thinking about it in the wake of what happened, my entire career has been framed by this u. S. Iranian cold war. Charlie connected to it. You were there with the president the day after he announced the deal. Youre sitting with him. Give me a sense of how it felt in terms of him in terms of his sense of what this moment was about, this conviction that this was the only way to go, and his sense of what it meant for him personally. Tom two words stand out to me. This was the morning of. One you just used, conviction. This was not pretend. This is a president who agree with him or disagree with him, really believes he is has shut off the pathway for iran to break out with a Nuclear Weapon for the next 15 years. Number two, he has an extremely tight logic around which he makes that argument. And number three, something he does not say but i really believe he believes. Obama is someone who believes in hunting big game. That is what you are here for. And if you can in a prudent way, in a way that serves the National Interest and leaves us protection to reverse things if they go bad, if you could take a radel ship like the u. S. Iran relationship and begin to turn it in another direction, that is a really important thing. It is a high risk thing. I believe he feels he came there to hunt big game. This is one of the biggest game he was out to hunt. Charlie the other big game was obamacare and getting osama bin ladin. Osama bin laden. This deal did not start yesterday. They began to build the sanctions hoping it would deliver what happened last week. Tom the first illicit iranian programs were revealed under president george w. Bush and when he took power them a iran had several hundred centrifuges. The bush administration, condi rice gets credit for putting the p5 together. This Contact Group to negotiate with iran. Where the first First Bush Administration failed, they launched and lost the iraq war. When you launch and lose the iraq war, you completely open the wider arab world to iranian influence because we broke the dam of sumi sunni power and did not replace it. You discredited the military option. Were i think bush failed is it is an important predicate, this is important. Internally they could never agree to use a military option to stop with the iranians were doing or the diplomatic option. Cheney was a hardliner. Even though they construct the p5 to do negotiations, they could never quite get their act together to frame the negotiations. Obama comes in and i think he says two things. Even that he says all options are on the table he does not believe that and no one believed anymore that force was an option because there was such more fatigue in the country war fatigue in the country. People did not want to go to war over this. Obama does, what i will do is construct a real diplomatic choice. I will get the sanctions wrapped ratcheted up so the pain on iran is high and i will put a carrot on the table that you can and this was very controversial and remain so, you can keep acres constraint Nuclear Infrastructure if you eliminate your ability to make a weapon. Charlie he is a guy who believes in negotiation believes in dialogue. Whether it is the law professor background or whatever it is. The bush people would not agree they lost the iraq war because they believe they were able to do what they did because of the surge. And the question of whether he had given up the military option, i suspect if someone walked into his office, they would say we would have to do something. I would not have iran getting a Nuclear Weapon on my watch. Tom the iranians were very smart about that so they always stayed below that threshold. Charlie he does have that conviction. Is he right . Tom i hate to resort to that cliche. Here is what i feel. I feel like there is a party we have not heard from very much at all in this and that is the iranian people. Ultimately, i think they are going to be the most important determinant of this. Why do i say that estimate is go back to a conversation we had a couple of years ago when ronnie rahani was elected president. The ayatollah allowed five men to run for president. There was mr. Black, and mr. Black. The overwhelming number of iranians voted for mr. Slightly light black. They were tired of being isolated from the world. One of the things you learn is they have had enough islam to know they want less of it and they have had enough democracy to know they want more. Charlie they thought the previous election had been taken away from them. Tom that is, the Supreme Leader had to let rahani be elected. Charlie they knew what they were doing when they selected the foreign minister. Tom look at what the Supreme Leader has done since that crackdown in the 2009 revolution. They have used up a lot internally. These guys are survivors. And so all i am saying is that people who will shape irans behavior more than anything is that wider public opinion. Charlie back to the president s conviction. You seem to argue in your columns that it is the best option and can be an effective option is properly implemented and augmented. Tom i think that is really important. One of the things that has concerned me from the beginning, you can see do a simple armscontrol deal with someone you trust. You can do a complicated deal with someone you do trust. We have that with south korea and japan. Complicated armscontrol treaty with someone you do not trust is really complicated. The opportunities for mess ups, sensors not working, someone not showing up, for cheating it puts a huge, especially when youre talking about entire sites and the supply chain. The bad news is that it is comprehensive. The complexity of overseeing something this comprehensive i think we are going to hear a lot more about that challenge. Charlie the president is making this argument. There are no better alternatives. This may not be a perfect deal as he would like. He did not get everything he wanted. When you look at the alternatives it leaves much to be desired. Tom i have written in the runup to this deal i am concerned we have not gotten up from the table and walked out. Charlie we do not need this deal. Tom they need it more than we do which i ultimately believe they did. The issues the question of observing and getting access to suspicious sites not covered in the deal. I would have liked to see half that at the maximum. 24 days as longtime is a long time to get access to a suspicious site. There are things i wish we would have bargained harder on. That i would have liked to see is hold the line on. The one where they are most vulnerable, once you decide that iran will keep its basic infrastructure which was a huge concession which again, they believe they had to do because iran had built all this and they had the knowhow and the could rebuild it again. Charlie they were not going to tear everything down. Tom once you took the military option off the table you had no leverage. There is the question of an assist to suspicious sites that are not covered by the deal and the other and i understand why it is not art of the negotiations but where the iranians could give a huge boost to the president is releasing the four americans. That would get peoples attention. Charlie why did they hold on in the first place . Tom it is the revolutionary guard holding them to screw up the deal. The question now, is the Supreme Leader going to say enough is enough . You want one of the things that struck me, i have been to iran and saudi arabia in a short time in the 1990s. What strikes you must about iran is iran has real politics. The Biggest Issue being debated was someone had it up a resolution and the iranian parliament, why are we giving all this money to the palestinians . I did a double take. That is a real story. These are persians. Why are we giving this money to arabs is the undertone of this. What you are going to see is more real politics emerge rate of that i am certain. I would predict no linear path but on the question of no option , i have listened closely to the critics because i consider myself not a soft liner. Iran having a potential Nuclear Weapon is a huge blow to the Nuclear Nonproliferation regime and that affects is very much in america. In a region that is already a powder keg. I just do not hear anything coming from the critics that persuades me that will be better than this. I understand Prime Minister netanyahus reluctance, but what do i hear him saying . More sanctions would lead to a better deal. The iranians are perfect and logical. If you increase the pressure, they will increase the concessions. Tuesday and thursday he says they are wild and crazy. If you give them a bomb they will drop it on the jews the next day. Are they rational or irrational . I do not take israels concerns lightly. I covered a lot of irans handiwork firsthand. I covered the bombing of the u. S. And this embassy. I covered the bombing of the u. S. Marines in beirut. I was in israel when has blood emerged. Has blood has been a terrible organization. First and foremost for lebanese shiites and for lebanon in general. I am stunned the degree to which hezbollah has become the catchall entirely catspaw of iran and not a Lebanese Organization promoting the interests of lebanese shiites. But show me a credible pathway that will deliver more security to more people in more places. Charlie the president argues this thing ought to be looked at only in the confines do we stop them from getting a tom. That has to be a high priority. We ought to do with this and perhaps we can embed this deal in terms of some new effort along that line but if they did have the bomb and they were doing all these things, there would be much more of a terrible weapon for them to have in their own if areas activities. Tom i share that view. You have to stay focused, eyes on the prize. Lets lock a way a bomb at your way from assembly for the next 15 years. Lets also remember something else. We have basically because we have been so isolated from iran our view of the middle east for 36 years has been deeply colored i relationships with israel and saudi arabia and the arab gulf states and they have their own interests. And turkey as well. The idea that iran is all black and they are all white as the driven snow is simply a fantasy. 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9 11 were from saudi arabia. None of them iran. Iran was the only country that had spontaneous demonstrations in support of america after that. Charlie some argue what drives isis is wahabism. Tom last june, i was a Commencement Speaker at the university of understand. I was talking to iraqi officials because they said it was very interesting. The people said isis went around to doors and the homes of christians, they put an arabic [inaudible] four nazarene enans. We discovered it is an archaic term for shiites that comes from saudi arabia. Isis, my view is the Guidance System was straight out of saudi wahhabiism. The iranians pushed maliki to push and crackdown on the sunni arabs of iraq to the point where they were ready to welcome him. Theyre both arsonists and firefighters. They come and say we will help you put out the fire. You guys lit the fire. Charlie we have to do something about the fire regardless of whether they lit it or not. Tom the saudis are also arsonists and firefighters are you the idea that we have some our interests in the middle east are the following. We are there lets try to build order. Where there is order, try to make it a little more decent. Either is decent order, jordan uae, kurdistan, try to make it more consensual and where there is consensual order tunisia, lebanon, protect it like a rare flower. We got to go right down that checklist, it seems to me but do not buy into anybodys schtick. Theres a deep shiaarabsunni thing going on. I have said before exec. It is so deep. Iran is like your big brother walks out and slams the door. Charlie stakes the takes the stereo. And we have a soul relationship with dad in washington. 36 years later, big brother is back. I won my pen, i want my stereo, i want my bicycle, that is what is going on area the arabs are freaking out because there has never been an Iranian Ambassador in washington. They had the sole monopoly based on dialogue here. That is going to break down and that is a good thing because ultimately what have we learned . Have learned we have learned two things about the middle east. We tried in afghanistan and iraq and libya. There is a reason to act with humility and not think you can remake all of this. Number one. There is a reason to understand if you think one side is all black and the other side is all white, you have been there too long. You need to come home. Any to check out, spent some time in thailand or some other country because it is a confiscated story. A complicated story. Charlie one idea is if this deal does not work, the sanctions will fall away. They will not be able to if the u. S. Congress is no and the president s veto is overridden that there will be no chance to go back to sanctions because everybody views the uses the sanctions to get them to the table. We suffered from it because the economic consequences we bought into the argument that the deal was possible if we cap 2 tom we have fracking, we have no problem with oil but there are a bunch of countries, indonesia, malaysia, india, japan who need access and would and if it from access to irans natural resources. They are sacrificing. The idea that they will continue to sacrifice after we do a deal but then the congress decides to pull the plug at the behest of the Prime Minister of israel. How many of them will keep signing on to that . For how long . That is a real challenge. I would like to look at an alternative. This is an imperfect deal but i do not see one. The fairminded people who do not come at this hating obama or looking at it through politics i do not see a lot of fairminded people showing me a pathway that can get us from here to there. Could they have bargained better . Could john kerry have in more ferocious . That is open for debate and discussion but we are where we are. Charlie john kerry played a crucial role. Tom that is the strength of john kerry. He is not someone who gets up from the table. I will keep beating at you and he deserves a lot of credit. Charlie the argument is we will delay it for 10 to 12 years but they will get a Nuclear Weapon after 10 or 12 years. They can they continue to do research and in the middle east 10 or 15 years is not a long time. Once the get a weapon, all hell will break loose and the 21st century is changed. Tom a country of 85 Million People that has been a great civilization, that educates its men and women that believes in science and technology, if it wants to get a bomb, it will get a bomb and they have proven this under the most severe sanctions possible. The idea that we can somehow permanently prevent them from getting the Nuclear Fuel Cycle with sanctions or without is an illusion. They demonstrated they could do it. What the critics say and there is legitimacy to this but we are blessing it going forward. That is a matter of concern and dispute. They are going to get this capability. The question is, will they have the intention and i have argued we need to be signaling through Congress Much more forcefully authorizing the president. Clearly the right to destroy and iranian Nuclear Weapon if they develop one. Charlie we hope you are listening. This president and future president s can use all means necessary to stop you. Tom all in caps. They need to know if they get the cycle enriched, iran acquiring a bomb crosses a red line for us. It will be bad for the world. Charlie i do not understand why the Prime Minister said rather than trying to attack you to say this is a historic disaster, he might not have artistic paid it to say lets do what we were talking about so we are there on the inside try to have some influence because of the inevitable likelihood that you prevail, we are on the outside. The president made clear we will always support israel. Tom instead of getting himself invited by john boehner to give his third address to Congress Without informing the white house, he called the president barack obama and said this issue is so important, i want to bring the heads of the five Major Political parties in israel, all of us agree that iran must not get a bomb and the deal we are heading for his disasters, we would like to meet with you in private, sir, and kim david. You and your National Security team so you understand our view and our red lines and you can i would like to meet with the democratic and republican caucuses to share with congress our view. Charlie but not publicly. Tom not on the eve of my election which raises suspicion. Where did his motive start and his political interests start. Israel has legitimate concerns. You think of the eight years of ahmadinejad the Holocau