Transcripts For CSPAN U.S. Special Rep. For Iran At Senate F

This is just over 2 1 2 hours. T. Foreign Relations Committee of the senate will come to order. The chair would note we have a full house today and an enthusiastic audience, im sure. We ask you to be respectful, remind everyone that holding up signs or making verbal outbursts is disruptive and appropriate action will be taken if need be. This morning, we have a hearing on a matter that is really of pressing National Security importance. That is the relationship of the United States and for that matter the world with iran. This hearing is intended to do three things. Number one, we will consider the facts behind the maximum Pressure Campaign against iran. We will examine the elements of irans necessary Behavioral Changes that would satisfy u. S. And the worlds National Security interests. And thirdly, assess irans willingness to behave as a responsible member of the International Community. Their pursuit of regional domination following 1979 revolution transformed the fabric of the middle east. Dangerouslyregime weaponized religion against its neighbors. The regime triggered a sunnishieh war, threatens to unravel the greater middle east. The Nuclear Issue is but one aspect of the regimes malign conduct. Iran actively enables assads continued butchering of syria. They are working to subvert several regional g irans support of problems sis perhaps the most nefarious, ask any of our men and women in uniform who faced iranianprovided roadside bombs in iraq. Iran already has american blood on its hands. The lack of a more Firm Response by prior administrations has only encouraged further iranian violence. Inside of its borders the regimes abuses against its own people continue to be a concern. Iranian citizens live under constant threat of arbitrary arrest and torture, for expressing their most basic human rights including freedom of expression and religion. Indeed, despite the regimes claims of religious legitimacy, it is morally bankrupt. A kreptocracy that steals from its people to subvert its neighbors. And the most important policies to curb the totality of iranian behavior. It is my assessment that the maximum Pressure Campaign against iran is working and can serve as a bridge to more meaningful negotiations. As thee meaningful negotiations. I note that some of my colleagues have argued that the maximum Pressure Campaign is not working. I would be the first to concede that the campaign has not achieved its goals, but on the other hand, it is clearly working. Since may of last year, billions have denied of dollars in oil revenue. It will cost the regime is much as dollars annually every it the iranian economy faces unprecedented strains after rounds of highly targeted sanctions. Shrinking at ais rate that should alarm tehran. Nearly a 6 reduction in gdp for 2019 is estimated. , these are clear indications and clear evidence that indeed, the sanctions are working. For the first time, irans terror proxies have seen a reduction in funding. Has bola has been reduced has has beenezbollah reduced to panhandling. Mistake, every dollar that we deny the regimes money not spent on terrorism. For totaluests sanctions relief in order to come to the table should be and is a nonstarter. It regime must demonstrate is willing to negotiate in good faith or face continued pressure. The pressure must have an international face. For too long, our european friends have sought to preserve a moribund nuclear deal that offered iran a financial escape hatch to continue destabilizing the region. We have had numerous conversations with our european friends regarding that. I welcome the joint statement from the u. K. , france, and germany following irans attack in saudi arabia. Apart from rightly identifying iran as the corporate, our partners stress the importance of addressing the Regional Security issues, as well as the nuclear question. This is well received by us, but they must go further than that. Musturopean partners follow the United Kingdoms lead and support the pursuit of Behavioral Changes in irans part. My thoughts on the jcpoa are wellknown. A deal that only partly addressed to the Nuclear Issue and very importantly ignore the rest of irans terrorist conduct and enriched the regimess terrorist proxy. Any new deal should address iranian conflict curbing the Ballistic Missiles program, ensuring freedom of navigation consistent with international law, ending iranian adventurism, and the regimes efforts to promote civil war through its proxies. The Nuclear Solution should not merely Delay Development of a Nuclear Weapon or sunset in a manner that allows regime scientists to sprint to the finish line. It is in our vital National Security interest and the interest of the entire world that iran never possess a Nuclear Weapon. Finally, a topic has emerged in Public Discourse that should be addressed. There are many that blame the u. S. Diplomatic and economic efforts as the root cause of irans acts of violence. To you i say, you could not be more wrong. There is only one party to blame for irans acts of violence and that is the Iranian Regime. There is only one bad actor here and that is the Iranian Regime. The Iranian Regime is feeling the weight of the growing community against them. Absent an attack on americans or American Assets abroad, we should not be moved by iranian outbursts or attacks on shipping. We should remain steadfast and continue to apply pressure until the regime excuse me, we should continue to apply pressure until the regime capitulates and changes behavior. The Iranian Regime is faced with a sharp choice. Is long time that they enter the International Community is a good actor and enjoy the benefits that peaceloving nations take delight in. Otherwise, it will remain a pariah state. This is an important issue and im glad we have the attendance we have today to examine this issue and with that, i will recognize senator menendez. Thank you mr. Chairman for holding this important hearing. I just want to urge the chair, global events come at us fast and furiously. This committee historically has played a role in fashioning the u. S. Foreign policy and as we face the challenges in ukraine and syria, i hope that the chairman, i know that the Committee Democrats have written to the chair asking him for a hearing in ukraine, i think that would be echoed in syria. These are vitally important issues in terms of the Foreign Policy of the United States, the role that russia is playing, iran is playing, so i certainly will honorhe chair those requests and hold a hearing on both of those issues as expeditiously as possible. Now, this committee has not had a hearing on iran since march 2017, more than 2. 5 years ago. Because itfortunate has been one of the administrations biggest stated priorities and one in which i believe there is at least a basis of bipartisan consensus from which we could work. There is no doubt that and ronnie and Nuclear State would pose a threat. Iranian no doubt that proxy action is ongoing and destabilizing. UseUnited States should strategic diplomacy with our International Partners and allies to most effectively counter iran. Is everyone i think in this committee knows, i did not support the joint comprehensive plan of action. When the Trump Administration withdrew from the deal without a strategy and without partners, i worried that this unilateral approach would put our nation in the dangerous and lonely path that would ultimately leave iran emboldened. Im afraid to say i think i was right. Seems starvedgime of some financial resources, but that is all as far as i can tell. Beyond sanctions, our maximum Pressure Campaign only extends to sending american troops to pressure protect saudi arabia. The rest of the policies across the middle east seem to only have emboldened iran. Pardoned its political supporters and most devastatingly helped entrench itself in bashar alassads syria. You said that the two goals of the maximum Pressure Campaign or to deprive the Iranian Regime of money to stop its malign activity and to bring iran back to the negotiating table. However, application of this policy is confusing. One minute, the president is willing to make a deal, the next he is threatening to wipe out the iranian economy. You have utilized just about every sanctions Authority Available to you, but sanctions are only a viable tool if they are consistent. , a man was arrested in turkey in 2016 and correction with one of the largest iran sanctions of asian schemes in history. While his criminal case was i understand you are at least aware of these efforts. What does that say about the viability of american sanctions or this maximum Pressure Campaign . The iranians are holding out because they believe they can. They will not come to the table for a kim jongunlike photo op. My fundamental question mr. Hooks where are you in the harder diplomatic art of this campaign . How have you utilized the pressure to get iran to a negotiating table . I also would like to live in a world where we could sanction iran into stopping its support for terrorism, treating its own people with dignity and respect, and to releasing all unjustly at detained americans including a Princeton University student, but i live in the real world, where i know that in order to make a deal, you have to give something to get something. Now, seems like the ideal time to harness the pressure you have created. Im curious to know if you have laid out the parameters of a deal that the administration would accept, including limitations on research and development, limitations on enrichment and stockpile thents, and whether or not iranians will seek relief in the United States. Whether you have gone through back channels to try to engage iran in that regard. In negotiated agreement with iran with buyin from our International Partner to meaningfully constrain the Nuclear Program and address other malign activity. A deal that includes permanent and longterm restrictions, tackling the Ballistic Missile proliferation and addressing Regional Support for terrorism. About forward to hearing your progress to address this ongoing National Security priority. Want to agreend i with you 100 that this hearing is important and i think probably one of the most prescient issues facing the United States. It is the issue that has the most potential for having miscalculation by the other side and winding up with a situation that we really dont want to be in. I think that potential is there and more so with this regime than any other regime on the planet. Secondly, i agree that this committee has historically played an Important Role in Foreign Policy and continues to do so. I note that members of this committee are very active making statements stating their both to, giving advice the state department and the white house, members of this committee regularly communicate with the state department in the white house. We will of course continue to do that. I want to address briefly you mentioned that i had received a letter from you and members of the minority in the committee wanting certain hearings scheduled. I have taken that under advisement and im in the process of vetting that. Im doing some foundational work on that and i have talked with most members of the committee, not all, but almost all, i want to talk with other interested parties before i respond to that and it will respond in writing just as you did. I want to correct you respectfully regarding your criticism of the administrations withdrawal from the jcpoa. You indicated you supported the withdrawal or you did not support the jcpoa, but you supported the withdrawal. I urged the president to withdraw. The president withdrew with a very Clear Strategy and that strategy was to go back to the Pressure Campaign that was in place before the jcpoa negotiations started. It was not called the maximum Pressure Campaign, but it was the same thing. Tot i did agree with was stop the maximum Pressure Campaign and start negotiating when they were at a point when they had to negotiate. At the present time, we have a maximum Pressure Campaign, i reiterated the things that i think are pressuring the country. Talkpect mr. Hook will about that quite a bit more. Urging is that we stay with the strategy we have. That is continue to exert maximum pressure on the regime until they capitulate and they will, they will have to. With all that, thank you, and we have the honorable brian hook, special representative to iran. Mr. Hook leads the iran action group, responsible for coordinating all iranrelated activity within the u. S. State department. We could not have a better witness or a more informed witness or a more competent witness to address these issues before the committee. On a personal momo, ive had the good fortune to talk to mr. Hook on many occasions about these issues. I find him to be receptive, i find him to be wellinformed. And acting in the best faith in the best interest of the United States as we move forward. With that, mr. Hook, the floor is yours. Chairman thank you, for your very kind words. I would also like to thank the Ranking Member menendez for his Opening Statement and distinguished members of the committee. Ive appeared before this committee a number of times, mostly in private, so im very happy to have an opportunity to have a discussion on iran in a public setting. I have a longer prepared statement ive submitted, but why dont i go over some parts of that . We have implemented an unprecedented Pressure Campaign with two objectives, to deny the regime the revenue it needs to fund a revolutionary and expansionist Foreign Policy. Increase the is to incentives for iran to come to the negotiating table. Theou look at the history, 40year history of the United States have had, you see a consistent pattern that you need to have. More of these are what inform irans decisionmaking calculus. Foreign policyr squarely within the left right limits of economic pressure and diplomatic isolation. The president has also repeatedly expressed the United States willingness to negotiate with iran. Meet with willing to the iranians without preconditions. We are seeking a comprehensive deal. It needs to address four areas. Veryeds to address in a comprehensive way the threats iran presents International Peace and security. The Nuclear Program, Missile Program, it support to terrorist groups and proxies, and its 40year history of hostagetaking. This includes the arbitrary detention of u. S. Citizens. Before we exited the deal and reimposed sanctions and accelerated air pressure, iran was increasing the scope of its malign activity. We now have newly declassified information relating to irans Missile Program that i can share today. While the United States was still in the jcpoa, iran expanded its Ballistic Missile activities to partners across the region, including hezbollah, Palestinian Terrorist groups, and she of militias in iran. Transferredran whole missiles to a designated terrorist group in the region. Iran is continuing to develop Missile Systems and related technology solely for export to regional proxies and while we were in the jcpoa, iran increased its support to hezbollah, helping them produce a greater number of rockets and missiles. This arsenal is then used to target israel. Beyond continuing advancements to its Missile Program, iran was deepening its engagement in regional conflicts. Dealunder the iran nuclear , iran was given a Clear Pathway to import and export dangerous weapons. 18,days from now in october we will be exactly one year away from the expiration of the United Nations arms embargo on iran. Because of the Relations Committee<\/a> of the senate will come to order. The chair would note we have a full house today and an enthusiastic audience, im sure. We ask you to be respectful, remind everyone that holding up signs or making verbal outbursts is disruptive and appropriate action will be taken if need be. This morning, we have a hearing on a matter that is really of pressing National Security<\/a> importance. That is the relationship of the United States<\/a> and for that matter the world with iran. This hearing is intended to do three things. Number one, we will consider the facts behind the maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> against iran. We will examine the elements of irans necessary Behavioral Changes<\/a> that would satisfy u. S. And the worlds National Security<\/a> interests. And thirdly, assess irans willingness to behave as a responsible member of the International Community<\/a>. Their pursuit of regional domination following 1979 revolution transformed the fabric of the middle east. Dangerouslyregime weaponized religion against its neighbors. The regime triggered a sunnishieh war, threatens to unravel the greater middle east. The Nuclear Issue<\/a> is but one aspect of the regimes malign conduct. Iran actively enables assads continued butchering of syria. They are working to subvert several regional g irans support of problems sis perhaps the most nefarious, ask any of our men and women in uniform who faced iranianprovided roadside bombs in iraq. Iran already has american blood on its hands. The lack of a more Firm Response<\/a> by prior administrations has only encouraged further iranian violence. Inside of its borders the regimes abuses against its own people continue to be a concern. Iranian citizens live under constant threat of arbitrary arrest and torture, for expressing their most basic human rights including freedom of expression and religion. Indeed, despite the regimes claims of religious legitimacy, it is morally bankrupt. A kreptocracy that steals from its people to subvert its neighbors. And the most important policies to curb the totality of iranian behavior. It is my assessment that the maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> against iran is working and can serve as a bridge to more meaningful negotiations. As thee meaningful negotiations. I note that some of my colleagues have argued that the maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> is not working. I would be the first to concede that the campaign has not achieved its goals, but on the other hand, it is clearly working. Since may of last year, billions have denied of dollars in oil revenue. It will cost the regime is much as dollars annually every it the iranian economy faces unprecedented strains after rounds of highly targeted sanctions. Shrinking at ais rate that should alarm tehran. Nearly a 6 reduction in gdp for 2019 is estimated. , these are clear indications and clear evidence that indeed, the sanctions are working. For the first time, irans terror proxies have seen a reduction in funding. Has bola has been reduced has has beenezbollah reduced to panhandling. Mistake, every dollar that we deny the regimes money not spent on terrorism. For totaluests sanctions relief in order to come to the table should be and is a nonstarter. It regime must demonstrate is willing to negotiate in good faith or face continued pressure. The pressure must have an international face. For too long, our european friends have sought to preserve a moribund nuclear deal that offered iran a financial escape hatch to continue destabilizing the region. We have had numerous conversations with our european friends regarding that. I welcome the joint statement from the u. K. , france, and germany following irans attack in saudi arabia. Apart from rightly identifying iran as the corporate, our partners stress the importance of addressing the Regional Security<\/a> issues, as well as the nuclear question. This is well received by us, but they must go further than that. Musturopean partners follow the United Kingdom<\/a>s lead and support the pursuit of Behavioral Changes<\/a> in irans part. My thoughts on the jcpoa are wellknown. A deal that only partly addressed to the Nuclear Issue<\/a> and very importantly ignore the rest of irans terrorist conduct and enriched the regimess terrorist proxy. Any new deal should address iranian conflict curbing the Ballistic Missiles<\/a> program, ensuring freedom of navigation consistent with international law, ending iranian adventurism, and the regimes efforts to promote civil war through its proxies. The Nuclear Solution<\/a> should not merely Delay Development<\/a> of a Nuclear Weapon<\/a> or sunset in a manner that allows regime scientists to sprint to the finish line. It is in our vital National Security<\/a> interest and the interest of the entire world that iran never possess a Nuclear Weapon<\/a>. Finally, a topic has emerged in Public Discourse<\/a> that should be addressed. There are many that blame the u. S. Diplomatic and economic efforts as the root cause of irans acts of violence. To you i say, you could not be more wrong. There is only one party to blame for irans acts of violence and that is the Iranian Regime<\/a>. There is only one bad actor here and that is the Iranian Regime<\/a>. The Iranian Regime<\/a> is feeling the weight of the growing community against them. Absent an attack on americans or American Assets<\/a> abroad, we should not be moved by iranian outbursts or attacks on shipping. We should remain steadfast and continue to apply pressure until the regime excuse me, we should continue to apply pressure until the regime capitulates and changes behavior. The Iranian Regime<\/a> is faced with a sharp choice. Is long time that they enter the International Community<\/a> is a good actor and enjoy the benefits that peaceloving nations take delight in. Otherwise, it will remain a pariah state. This is an important issue and im glad we have the attendance we have today to examine this issue and with that, i will recognize senator menendez. Thank you mr. Chairman for holding this important hearing. I just want to urge the chair, global events come at us fast and furiously. This committee historically has played a role in fashioning the u. S. Foreign policy and as we face the challenges in ukraine and syria, i hope that the chairman, i know that the Committee Democrats<\/a> have written to the chair asking him for a hearing in ukraine, i think that would be echoed in syria. These are vitally important issues in terms of the Foreign Policy<\/a> of the United States<\/a>, the role that russia is playing, iran is playing, so i certainly will honorhe chair those requests and hold a hearing on both of those issues as expeditiously as possible. Now, this committee has not had a hearing on iran since march 2017, more than 2. 5 years ago. Because itfortunate has been one of the administrations biggest stated priorities and one in which i believe there is at least a basis of bipartisan consensus from which we could work. There is no doubt that and ronnie and Nuclear State<\/a> would pose a threat. Iranian no doubt that proxy action is ongoing and destabilizing. UseUnited States<\/a> should strategic diplomacy with our International Partners<\/a> and allies to most effectively counter iran. Is everyone i think in this committee knows, i did not support the joint comprehensive plan of action. When the Trump Administration<\/a> withdrew from the deal without a strategy and without partners, i worried that this unilateral approach would put our nation in the dangerous and lonely path that would ultimately leave iran emboldened. Im afraid to say i think i was right. Seems starvedgime of some financial resources, but that is all as far as i can tell. Beyond sanctions, our maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> only extends to sending american troops to pressure protect saudi arabia. The rest of the policies across the middle east seem to only have emboldened iran. Pardoned its political supporters and most devastatingly helped entrench itself in bashar alassads syria. You said that the two goals of the maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> or to deprive the Iranian Regime<\/a> of money to stop its malign activity and to bring iran back to the negotiating table. However, application of this policy is confusing. One minute, the president is willing to make a deal, the next he is threatening to wipe out the iranian economy. You have utilized just about every sanctions Authority Available<\/a> to you, but sanctions are only a viable tool if they are consistent. , a man was arrested in turkey in 2016 and correction with one of the largest iran sanctions of asian schemes in history. While his criminal case was i understand you are at least aware of these efforts. What does that say about the viability of american sanctions or this maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> . The iranians are holding out because they believe they can. They will not come to the table for a kim jongunlike photo op. My fundamental question mr. Hooks where are you in the harder diplomatic art of this campaign . How have you utilized the pressure to get iran to a negotiating table . I also would like to live in a world where we could sanction iran into stopping its support for terrorism, treating its own people with dignity and respect, and to releasing all unjustly at detained americans including a Princeton University<\/a> student, but i live in the real world, where i know that in order to make a deal, you have to give something to get something. Now, seems like the ideal time to harness the pressure you have created. Im curious to know if you have laid out the parameters of a deal that the administration would accept, including limitations on research and development, limitations on enrichment and stockpile thents, and whether or not iranians will seek relief in the United States<\/a>. Whether you have gone through back channels to try to engage iran in that regard. In negotiated agreement with iran with buyin from our International Partner<\/a> to meaningfully constrain the Nuclear Program<\/a> and address other malign activity. A deal that includes permanent and longterm restrictions, tackling the Ballistic Missile<\/a> proliferation and addressing Regional Support<\/a> for terrorism. About forward to hearing your progress to address this ongoing National Security<\/a> priority. Want to agreend i with you 100 that this hearing is important and i think probably one of the most prescient issues facing the United States<\/a>. It is the issue that has the most potential for having miscalculation by the other side and winding up with a situation that we really dont want to be in. I think that potential is there and more so with this regime than any other regime on the planet. Secondly, i agree that this committee has historically played an Important Role<\/a> in Foreign Policy<\/a> and continues to do so. I note that members of this committee are very active making statements stating their both to, giving advice the state department and the white house, members of this committee regularly communicate with the state department in the white house. We will of course continue to do that. I want to address briefly you mentioned that i had received a letter from you and members of the minority in the committee wanting certain hearings scheduled. I have taken that under advisement and im in the process of vetting that. Im doing some foundational work on that and i have talked with most members of the committee, not all, but almost all, i want to talk with other interested parties before i respond to that and it will respond in writing just as you did. I want to correct you respectfully regarding your criticism of the administrations withdrawal from the jcpoa. You indicated you supported the withdrawal or you did not support the jcpoa, but you supported the withdrawal. I urged the president to withdraw. The president withdrew with a very Clear Strategy<\/a> and that strategy was to go back to the Pressure Campaign<\/a> that was in place before the jcpoa negotiations started. It was not called the maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a>, but it was the same thing. Tot i did agree with was stop the maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> and start negotiating when they were at a point when they had to negotiate. At the present time, we have a maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a>, i reiterated the things that i think are pressuring the country. Talkpect mr. Hook will about that quite a bit more. Urging is that we stay with the strategy we have. That is continue to exert maximum pressure on the regime until they capitulate and they will, they will have to. With all that, thank you, and we have the honorable brian hook, special representative to iran. Mr. Hook leads the iran action group, responsible for coordinating all iranrelated activity within the u. S. State department. We could not have a better witness or a more informed witness or a more competent witness to address these issues before the committee. On a personal momo, ive had the good fortune to talk to mr. Hook on many occasions about these issues. I find him to be receptive, i find him to be wellinformed. And acting in the best faith in the best interest of the United States<\/a> as we move forward. With that, mr. Hook, the floor is yours. Chairman thank you, for your very kind words. I would also like to thank the Ranking Member<\/a> menendez for his Opening Statement<\/a> and distinguished members of the committee. Ive appeared before this committee a number of times, mostly in private, so im very happy to have an opportunity to have a discussion on iran in a public setting. I have a longer prepared statement ive submitted, but why dont i go over some parts of that . We have implemented an unprecedented Pressure Campaign<\/a> with two objectives, to deny the regime the revenue it needs to fund a revolutionary and expansionist Foreign Policy<\/a>. Increase the is to incentives for iran to come to the negotiating table. Theou look at the history, 40year history of the United States<\/a> have had, you see a consistent pattern that you need to have. More of these are what inform irans decisionmaking calculus. Foreign policyr squarely within the left right limits of economic pressure and diplomatic isolation. The president has also repeatedly expressed the United States<\/a> willingness to negotiate with iran. Meet with willing to the iranians without preconditions. We are seeking a comprehensive deal. It needs to address four areas. Veryeds to address in a comprehensive way the threats iran presents International Peace<\/a> and security. The Nuclear Program<\/a>, Missile Program<\/a>, it support to terrorist groups and proxies, and its 40year history of hostagetaking. This includes the arbitrary detention of u. S. Citizens. Before we exited the deal and reimposed sanctions and accelerated air pressure, iran was increasing the scope of its malign activity. We now have newly declassified information relating to irans Missile Program<\/a> that i can share today. While the United States<\/a> was still in the jcpoa, iran expanded its Ballistic Missile<\/a> activities to partners across the region, including hezbollah, Palestinian Terrorist<\/a> groups, and she of militias in iran. Transferredran whole missiles to a designated terrorist group in the region. Iran is continuing to develop Missile Systems<\/a> and related technology solely for export to regional proxies and while we were in the jcpoa, iran increased its support to hezbollah, helping them produce a greater number of rockets and missiles. This arsenal is then used to target israel. Beyond continuing advancements to its Missile Program<\/a>, iran was deepening its engagement in regional conflicts. Dealunder the iran nuclear , iran was given a Clear Pathway<\/a> to import and export dangerous weapons. 18,days from now in october we will be exactly one year away from the expiration of the United Nations<\/a> arms embargo on iran. Because of the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a>, countries like russia and china will soon be able to sell conventional weapons to iran. The Un Security Council<\/a> needs to renew the arms embargo on iran before it expires. We have made this a priority. Visited the unas Security Council<\/a> to her three times to highlight the Expiration Date<\/a> of the arms embargo. Nearly every measure, the regime and its proxies are weaker than when our pressure began. Militant groups have stated to the New York Times<\/a> that iran no longer has enough in the past. Them there is one who said the golden days are gone. Unprecedented austerity plans. Their leader went on tv and said hezbollah needed public support to sustain its operation. In various parts of lebanon, you can see piggy banks and Grocery Stores<\/a> soliciting spare change from lebanese citizens to support the operation. We are also making it harder for iran to expand its military capabilities. Beginning in 2014, irans military budget increased every year through 22017. Nearly 14 billion. From 2017 until 2018, we saw a reduction in military spending in nearly 10 in the first year and in the 2019 budget, which was announced in march there was a 28 cut to the defense budget. Cut for irgc a 17 funding. Because of our sanctions, iran will be unable to fund this thin budget for 2019. The irgc Cyber Command<\/a> is now low on cash and the irgc has told shia militia groups they should look for new sources of revenue. Our policy is at its core a diplomatic and an economic one. This administration does not seek Armed Conflict<\/a> with iran. We are relying on american pressure and american diplomacy economic pressure and american diplomacy to raise the costs in iran and force meaningful behavior change. Unfortunately, iran has responded to our diplomacy with violence and kinetic force. In recent months iran has launched a series of panicked attacks what secretary pompeo has called panicked aggression to intimidate the world into halting our pressure. Iran was responsible for the , the assault on two oil tankers in oman, and the attack on saudi oil facilities. The message to the International Community<\/a> is quite clear and this is important that i think people understand the regimes paradigm. The message to the world is if you do not allow us to conduct our normal level of terror, then we will behave even more badly until you do. Iran has long used its Nuclear Program<\/a> in this way and for this reason. The world ought to recognize this extortion when it sees it. When the world comes together to push back against iran and we saw this recently in the context fifa, and fifa stood up to the regime, made very clear that there needed to be a change and for the first time iranian women theyadmitted into a game, were segregated from everybody else and they were capped in a cordoned area, but it is an imposing isolating to thed pressuring iran kind of behavior change we are talking about. ,hen the world comes together we do see iran change its behavior. This administration will do its part and we are succeeding in having others join us. During the monday of the u. N. General assembly shortly after the attacks, france, germany, and the United Kingdom<\/a> called for iran to accept negotiations on its Nuclear Program<\/a>, Ballistic Missiles<\/a>, and regional activity. This has been the position of the United States<\/a> for 2. 5 years and we were pleased to see the tocall on new negotiations have a new and comprehensive deal. I think it is very much the case that the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> has come at the expense of this nonproliferation in the middle east. I think ive said to this committee probably a year ago, i know i said it a year ago when i was at the United Nations<\/a>, if we do not restored deterrence against the iran missile proliferation, we are accumulating risk of a regional war. We saw this one year later in the iranian attack on saudi. The longestthat suffering victims are the iranian people. We wish nothing more than a future with a truly representative government. With much Better Future<\/a> the American People<\/a> and the iranian people. Chairman, Ranking Member<\/a>, and members of the committee, i think you for devoting a hearing on the subject of iran and im happy to answer your questions. Thank you very much. Thank you for those comments. I feel like we are in good hands with your firm hand on the tiller on this issue. With all due respect and i want to thank you for appearing before this committee. Senator menendez indicated we had not had a hearing on iran since 2017. A june 19, you appeared in joint committee before us and the Armed Services<\/a> committee along with two other informed witnesses in this important issue and we thank you for making yourself available to that. , it is very troubling, the fact that in october 18 the u. N. Resolution is going to aspire the sale of conventional arms to the country. Obviously, we would like to pass another resolution, but with russia and china having veto power over that kind of an action by the u. N. , realistically, what do you think what is thend prognosis on this whole thing . Mr. Hook the secretary and i have had many discussions with russia and china about promoting a more peaceful and stable middle east. Ive had separate discussions with both china and russia talking about talking about the attack on september 14 and the impact of it. We have to be honest with ourselves that the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a>s approach to the iranian Missile Program<\/a> facilitated missile testing and it also allowed iran to proliferate missiles to its proxies without much cost. The European Union<\/a> has not taken one sanction against irans Missile Program<\/a> since the adoption of the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a>. Yet during the same period, iran has increased its blissful Ballistic Missile<\/a> testing and the provision of weapons to its proxies. Ive seen some accounts where there is a lot of interest in the buyers and the sellers in october 18 a year from now so only byn cannot conventional weapons, but also sell them. We see a role for the Un Security Council<\/a> after the attacks of september 14 in saudi arabia by iran. This is an act in clear violation of the United Nations<\/a> charter. The Security Council<\/a> is vested with responsibility for resolving International Peace<\/a> and security. This violation of saudi sovereignty. It was an attack in so many ways in the global market. Iran is trying to create global shock in the energy markets. They have failed at that to date. Russia that china and will play a constructive role to get serious about irans missile proliferation. Russia and china voted for the arms embargo on iran. , they a resolution supported it before, there is no reason they can sit warded again. There is a clear case to be made for it in light of iranian aggression. Thank you, i appreciate that view. One of the troubling aspects of this for me is that the asked by the world to iran is and ask that iran has thumbed its nose andn a very haughty manner absolutely refuses to even agree what is appropriate international accepted conduct. I view it very different than ,he situation with north korea kim jongun actually capitulated and was willing to talk about when everyone wants, nuclearfree peninsula. The iranians are not even near that from an attitude standpoint. It has not gotten where we wanted, it is a work in progress, but at least it is a work in progress. These things can resolve if you have two parties that have a Common Objective<\/a> and then once the Common Objective<\/a> is agreed to, than the two parties acted in good faith. We have neither of those. What is your view on that from strictly an attitude standpoint . Mr. Hook we have not seen a change of heart in the Iranian Regime<\/a>. They seem to have doubled down on their strategy, which is a 40your strategy of deniable attacks, using proxies in the gray zone to conduct attacks against American Partners<\/a> and interests. What i think i would highlight are the number of diplomatic off ramps that this administration has offered to the regime. It is not just the United States<\/a>. Prime minister abe was the first japanese Prime Minister<\/a> to visit the Islamic Republic<\/a> of iran and he went there, he asked President Trump<\/a> if he thought that would be useful, and the president encouraged him to go. He went, the Supreme Leader<\/a> put out a series of tweets rejecting the Prime Minister<\/a>s diplomacy and while Prime Minister<\/a> abe was in country, the regime blew up a japanese oil tanker. Has repeatedlyn tried to intervene. Iran has not met our diplomacy beingiplomacy, despite offered many opportunities. The president has said he would be willing to meet with the regime, so has secretary pompeo. When the United States<\/a> was in the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> and i attended what turned out to be the last meeting, i requested a meeting to talk about the hostages, so this is an administration that is very open diplomatically these issues. Now that you have seen the e3 also recognize the need for a outdeal, i would also point at the beginning of the uns general assembly, i think david sanger wrote a New York Times<\/a> article about how they are experiencing a very chilly reception at the United Nations<\/a>. What they did in terms of attacking the Worlds Largest<\/a> oil facility is indefensible. So, i think more people are recognizing that and that is a good thing for our diplomacy. I think your observations about their reactions, particularly what they did to the japanese, is very troubling. The attitude issue to me is something that is troubling. Everybody wants a diplomatic result here. Everybody wants diplomatic movement, but they just are not shing ansis whatsoever of going in that direction. Thank you for your thoughts. Comments two comments. This is the first public hearing into and a half years and i believe the public has a right to know about what our iran policy is in we have not had a public hearing in two point five years. Secondly, i would just say is someone who is the staunchest opponent of the jcpoa that in fact to leaving the jcpoa without a strategy at the end of the day, without allies at the end of the day, has not left us in a better position. I dont care for the jcpoa. Leavingme token, without a strategy has not left us in a better position. Isnt it true that iran has hijacked oil tankers . Mr. Hook they did take one oil tanker. Isnt it true that they have struck oil tankers . Mr. Hook yes, they have. Isnt it true that they had a stealth attack on saudi arabias Oil Refineries<\/a> . Mr. Hook yes. Isnt it true that iran has exceeded the limits imposed on its stockpile of uranium . Mr. Hook yes. Isnt it true that it has enriched uranium to higher levels of concentration and permissible in the jcpoa . Yes. Isnt it true it has begun using more advanced centrifuges for enrichment . Mr. Hook yes. When i listen to that and i could go through a list of other things, we are right now in a worse position visavis iran then we were before. Then we were before. Let me ask you something. Withdrawing troops in Northern Syria<\/a> and green lighting turkeys brutal incursion gives new life to isis and hands over the keys to our National Security<\/a> to putin, iran, and assad. All the sanctions in the world are not going to fix that. Does the administration have a plan for countering iran and syria and can you explain what it is and how it will account for recent gains by iran backed Regime Forces<\/a> filling the vacuum we created an Northern Syria<\/a> . Mr. Hook i like to answer your first question and i will take the next one. Not pose a first question, i posed a first question as it relates to that. First, answer my question. Mr. Hook the president s decision with respect to syria is not going to change our iran strategy or the efficacy of it. Iran has given assad 4. 6 billion in lines of sent 2500 ofhave their own fighters and helped to support assad. Thatiplomatic work investor jeffrey is heading is to ensure as part of a political solution that all of the forces in iran under a running and leave syria. We are withholding a reconstruction assistance as one of the levers that we have. You really think that after having withdrawn and let the iranians what we have here is something that we, by our presence up devoid we have the possibility of a land bridge that iran has sought over syria to attack our ally, the state of israel what commitments do we have from any of these parties that in fact they will prevent iran from moving fighters and supplies from iraq through Northern Syria<\/a> . As far as im concerned, iran isnt an agent of russia, they have their own interests, they have spent their own blood. Russia is not going to tell them, thank you, get out. They are going to have their own interests. All we have done is perpetuated their interests and created a greater risk for our ally, the state of israel. Mr. Hook i would say this. I think our pressure on iran threatens their position in syria in three ways. It starves the irgc and hezbollah of operational funding. It disrupts their Financial Support<\/a> to assad. I talked about the billions of dollars that iran has provided. Our pressure is making it harder for iran to give a sought Financial Support<\/a>. We are also impeding their ability to sell oil to syria. We have sanctioned one oil shipping operation and we sanctioned russia and a syrian one of the ways that it has been financing its operations is through illicit oil shipments. We are going to keep after the oil, we are going to keep after that, we are going to continue our pressure do we have any commitments from turkish or iraqi authorities to prevent iran from moving fighters in supplies from iraq through Northern Syria<\/a> . Mr. Hook that is something up and with the secretary to iraq to discuss that in a regular basis. But we have no commitments . Mr. Hook the specifics of this im happy to follow up with you in terms of which minister or leader we spoke with about this, but we have raised this issue repeatedly as a security concern. Well, it seems to me that heres a perfect example of what maximum pressure without a strategy that ultimately brings iran to the negotiating table leaves us in. More attacks, more consequences, greater limiting the breakout to nucleare pathway weapons, a land bridge, a land bridge for iran to attack our ally, the state of israel. If that is success, if that is your measurement of success, that i have a real concern over where we are headed. Thank you. Mr. Hook two quick things on that, when the president got out of the iran deal, secretary pompeo released our iran strategy within a week or two. We did exit the deal with a strategy. And the secretary put in place very clear articulation of the 12 areas where we need to see a change in iranian behavior, so the speech he gave in may 2018 is the same policy we are pursuing. That is a wish list. Mr. Hook it is not a wish list. Going toink you are get everything pompeo listed, you are going to have virtually no relief to iran, and they are just going to succumb. I would like to believe that is the real world, but that is not the real world, mr. Hook. Mr. Hook heres the real world. We dont negotiate with ourselves. The 12 areas, requirements, are a mirror image of irans threats security. Nd most of those you can find in a Un Security Council<\/a> resolution. Do you believe the more he asked you ask for the more you have to give . Mr. Hook he has taken up my time. Ive heard it often said that there is this that during the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> iran was behaving and since we got out of the deal, things have gotten worse. I would like to submit for the items ofat this is 71 iran regime malign activities during negotiations with iran and during the jcpoa. It is 71 items long. I think that we dont do ourselves a Great Service<\/a> about understanding the historical record if we ignore what iran did during the negotiations and while the jcpoa was being implemented. I would like to submit this for the record so that people can review everything iran was up to while we were in the deal. Thank you. That will be submitted. Senator menendez, the last word. Let me ask you questions. Isnt it, virtually anywhere in the world, the more you want, the more you have to give . Or do you believe you can get everything that secretary pompeo asked for and just return to what was the status quo in terms of irans relief . Mr. Hook United States<\/a> tried taking a bifurcated approach. Focusing on one aspect of irans threats to peace and security and it was the nuclear deal and that has enabled iran to expand its missile tests. That is not a response to the question. The more you ask for, do not expect the more that you will have to give austin mark give . Mr. Hook yes, and if you look at the strategy laid out in may, the conclusion of the agreement, which we will submit to the senate as a treaty which we applaud. Mr. Hook i worked closely with this committee to show that we need. Support for what we are doing and if we are able to get into talks with iran, we will be fully apprised. It is also the case that in that , we are prepared to end all of our sanctions and welcome iran into the International Community<\/a>. That is very significant and has never happened before. Many of our sanctions stayed in place. Many of our sanctions will start unraveling. We have put out incentives for the regime and the decision they face is whether they are going to come to the table and recognize that it is deepening isolation, come to United States<\/a> , come to the table to negotiate a full and comprehensive deal. Thank you. Senator johnson. I would point out during the jcpoa debate, it was my amendment that would have deemed that a treaty. We would be in a far better place today. Yourook, thank you for service. As somebody who has observed ,ran for a long period of time they want to be a nuclear power, they are developing Ballistic Missiles<\/a>, they continue to support their terrorist proxies around the world. What is their ultimate goal . Do you have a sense in what they are actually trying to achieve . Mr. Hook it is you have a president , a foreign minister, a military, but it also has this revolutionary guard corps. I highlight revolutionary guard corps. It has it has an opaque financial system. So it can move money around for money laundering. It is all in the service of promoting clerical oversight, weaponizing shieh grievances, undermining the sovereignty of regimes around the middle east. Did they want to topple regimes and put in place some kind of iranian surrogates or total iranian control over areas of the region . Do they want to greater iran . Mr. Hook yes, they would like a greater iran. When you look at their engagement with iraq, if you look at where they engage in lebanon, where they take a country like lebanon and that military should have a monopoly on the use of force, but then hezbollah undermines that. They are trying to do the same thing in yemen. They have an ambition to become a power broker in yemen on the saudi southern border, so that it will be in a position to attack uae, saudi, bahrain, and also the u. S. Navy. A but to eventually install regime in these countries either favorable or direct control of iran . Mr. Hook yes. We need to understand that. The situation in syria is incredibly complex. I would like your evaluation. What is the current relationship with iran and russia as it relates to syria . I think russia has tried to have it both ways, both with syria and israel. I think russia knows that it is going to have a very hard time getting into a postconflict stabilization for as long as forwardusing syria as a deployed missile base to attack israel. I think there are incentives for russia to direct Iranian Forces<\/a> out. At the same time, i think russia has also said to the israelis, you should do whatever you need to do to defend yourselves against attacks coming from inside syria. President putin is playing both sides. Hard forng to be very syria, they are not going to see a return to normal. The forcesirect under iranian control to leave. I think there are incentives both for assad and putin to get to a postconflict stabilization, but for as long as they have Iranian Forces<\/a> there with another agenda there is not a cooperative relationship between russia and iran and syria . They are not overtly cooperating . Both have aey Common Objective<\/a> of saving assad. What is irans attitude toward isis . Mr. Hook that is something which during the there are people i would probably defer to nea for the more specifics around this and the history of that that occurred in the last administration. In our mission to defeat isis, the president made a priority coming into office of working with secretary mattis to liberate the territorial caliphate from all of the lands under that control. But i dont have anything to add beyond that. Iran, they are kind of agnostic . Happy to have isis destabilize the area . There is no evidence of support in any way, shape, or form . Mr. Hook this is something which i would probably defer to my colleagues who have been on the counter isis campaign. Im happy to take that that far. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Hook, thank you for your service. In your statement, you point out concern over miscalculation in the region that could spread into a much more serious conflict. Clearly, the iranians could make it miscalculation. Clearly, the saudis could make it miscalculation. Now, israel might make it miscalculation based upon the increased concerns about iranian strength. Toant to backup one moment assess the history here. Jcpoa and ie strongly disagreed with the administrations decision to pull out of the jcpoa. And you pointed out that you wanted to go to a maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> against iran. I support that. Support you point out that iran was violating international standards. It was not covered under the agreement. They were in compliance under the agreement. As President Trump<\/a> had indicated , you and i had indications that we now had maximum pressure with our european allies to get their support for sanctions against iran in the Ballistic Missiles<\/a> and other issues in which they were doing activities against international norms. In fact, we could have had a maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> against iran in the activities you are referring to, but the president pulled out of the jcpoa. That is the fact that you when i know that even the eu was prepared to go along with us provided the United States<\/a> state in the jcpoa. I want to underscore the point of senator menendez, since pulling out of the jcpoa, look at the facts, look at what has happened. , look atboldened iran the attack against the saudi oil field, the capacity to do major damage. They have had they have partnered and strengthened their position with russia and the assad regime in syria, giving them additional capacity. Toy are now closer restarting a Nuclear Weapon<\/a>s program than they were when we were in the jcpoa and we have nobody to challenge that within the jcpoa. Now you talk about the u. N. Vote in the embargo, conventional weapons, and the United States<\/a> influence is so much weaker today because we have isolated ourselves, we dont have the support of china and russia, and we have lost the credible support of our european allies in regards to iran. When you talk about a maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a>, it seems to me we gave up that maximum pressure when we pulled out of the jcpoa and isolated america. I want to get to the most recent decision in President Trump<\/a> inling out of Northern Syria<\/a> a conversation with president erdogan and then the Turkish Forces<\/a> going in and out kurdish fighters that worked with us in Northern Syria<\/a> now engaged in their own military campaign. It is clear from the facts on the ground that it has given additional influence in syria by concernnd there is now that iran can be emboldened, including in the bridge to israels border. So, i just want to get your view. The fact that we now have forces ine turkish embedded without u. S. Presence to go in and fight the kurds, does that help us or hurt us in regards to iran . It is a simple question, i hope i can get an answer to that. We are very comfortable with our iran strategy in syria. But the specific question im asking us about the Current Situation<\/a> with the kurdish fighters now engaged with the turks, does that help us or hurt us in regards to the iranian strategy . Mr. Hook it does not hurt our iran strategy. So it is helpful for us in regards to iran to have the kurdish fighters who were are stabilizing force in northern iran keeping russia and iran out . That is a positive . Mr. Hook our forces in northeast syria have never had any wrong mission set. But now that we are not there and we now have the ability of russia to take the greater capacity of syria, allowing iran to come into that to be more emboldened in syria, you are saying that does not affect us . Mr. Hook no, because our strategy from the beginning in syria is always been around using diplomatic leverage, withholding reconstruction assistance, so that we can get forces under iranian control out , and then our maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> while they were in the deal, they were able to give assad many billions of dollars. I understand the money. Im trying you dont think there is now a greater chance of a miscalculation with israel looking at the iranians having greater access to syria that could use drones in a similar type of attack that we saw against the saudis . You dont think that is a greater risk today because of what is happening in syria . Mr. Hook we dont see it as a greater risk, no, because israel will continue to do what it needs to do to defend itself. We know that, but israel is now in higher alert. Mr. Hook i havent seen that. I havent seen that. If you look at our core drivers from the beginning and nothing has changed with the president s recent decision of withdrawing troops in syria, our strategy is around denying revenue and using diplomatic leverage in syria to get Iranian Forces<\/a> out. It is undeniable that during the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> iran was able andse the sanctions relief give iran many billions of dollars and 12,500 fighters. That was the big mistake. Now we are trying to do everything we can to put this back in the box. Back in the box but it starts with denying them revenue. That, we last point on could deny them support from urope, on sanctions, but instead, we chose to pull out of working rather than with our european allies. You know that was on the table out e the president pulled of the jcpoa and we lost that pportunity to get european sanctions. R stronger let me make a points on that. Thehe last couple of years, president directed negotiations with the uk, france, and germany see if we nths to could fix the deficiencies of the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> of i led negotiations and we met in paris, london, berlin, and over gton multiple times six months. We made great deal of progress. Weak inspections regime and the absence of intercontinental Ballistic Missiles<\/a> from the deal. The biggest priority was ending as sunset clauses, and for much as people supporters of the deal may like the deal, it expires. Permanently address irans Nuclear Program<\/a>. And so i spent six months the europeans, and the biggest thing for us, i largely achieved, agreement on inspections and on icbms. We were not able to get an agreement on ending the sunset. Greater out the pressure on iran from the financial point of view because of the length of the jcpoa. Say that one more time. We turned down the opportunity to get europe with sanctions against iran because we wanted a longer term provisions. Ar i understand that. But you turned down maximum ressure in order to get an extension of a Nuclear Agreement<\/a> already e was compliance on. Its inconsistent of what youre saying that you pulled out to pressure on iran. We tried to remedy the of the deal and i dont know who here supports ending the Nuclear Restrictions<\/a> iran. And they need i supported your efforts to the nuclear but agreement did not have any limitation on time. It was a permanent restriction iran. Its not. Yes, it was. Not allowed ever to have Nuclear Weapon<\/a>s. The nuclear deal expires. Going to start expiring a year from now. Youll get your shot. Were well over time. This is a good experience to go but gh, to litigate this lets try to do it as simply as we can and with that, senator rand. You, mr. Chairman. That ok, my reading is rans power position has changed quite significantly as a turks going into yria, wiping out our friends, the kurds, that remain, rushing pledging support to assad. This changes the dynamic for i presume in irans view, a very positive way. Smiling from was ear to ear as turkey rushed in to syria. Really ht that this changes the dynamic for iran and regionally . Erhaps we do not believe that it changes the dynamic with iran in terms of our strategy. Things are not better for iran in the middle east as we have gone, as turkey has hit the the kurds have now allied with assad, so assad, urely assad is stronger, and this isnt good for iran . A look at what our u. S. Special representative said for some time now, our military is in isis. For our diplomacy is focused on iran. Thats why jim jeffrey and i worked together very what i do on the pressure side, and what he does n withholding reconstruction assistance is mutually reinforcing. I hear you, but diplomacy has impact if there is a military thats strong in the region, and when our ally now aligns with assad, that is, in my opinion, not helpful for for macy and not helpful our interest in the region. Thats so dramatic a perspective iran is not that celebrating whats happening in extraordinary to me. Let me turn to a different area is, i do agree that there s an enormous benefit in putting pressure on iran, whether its maximum pressure or not, i dont know. Nation thate that a decides to go nuclear should cost for doingic so. Whether or not they are at their knees or not, i dont know, and hard for us to tell from the outside whats actually going on inside iran, but clearly, it would have a dramatic effect if other nations us in applying maximum pressure. What are the prospects for our uropean friends, for other nations around the world joining s, either with a snap back provision being applied or not, on a snap back basis, what are prospects of us actually seeing truly maximum pressure because its applied not just by by our friends as well . There is no precedent in irans history for the kind of pressure that we have put on has said he regime this publicly. Experiencing the kind of Economic Contraction<\/a> that is and will be worse than happened during the iraniraq war in the 1980s. Have done a very good job of rawing up iran sources of export revenue but weve also voted as much energy to nforcing our sanctions, and especially in the case of the sanctions. And i think the fact that the uk, france, and germany have now acknowledged something that we iran metime ago, that the deal is insufficient to address security and nd that when youre inside the deal you cant touch your energy or sanctions. Ial that was the deal. So being out of the deal gives great deal more leverage to objectives of denying iran a Nuclear Weapon<\/a>. Im not one of those that should be back in jcpoa and i do believe that enormous ld be an price paid by a country that decides to go nuclear. I dont know whether well iran make a see different decision. But my question is, is there of our being able to get other nations to join us in applying maximum pressure on iran, or must we continue to do it alone . Think it depends on how europe has done a lot. Hey have not reimposed the financial sanctions that were in place, but when you look at what done since the time that we left the iran deal, its extensive list, and they have germany and i believe the uk, have all enied landing rights to the iranian commercial airline which is a dual use commercial airline ferries terrorists and weapons around the middle east, to their proxies. The e. U. Did impose sanctions on intelligence y of for terrorism in europe. E3 send aso have the number of letters to the u. N. Ecurity council condemning missile, youlaunch had Boris Johnson<\/a> a few weeks ago say the iran deal is a bad with many, many defects. Thats been our position. Mr. Chairman, my name is up. Want to point out that letters and speeches are but crippling anctions on the part of our allys would make a real difference in exacting a very and antial price on iran hopefully causing dissent within their own country. A high it should be priority of our country to get ther nations to join us in those crippling sanctions. My time is up. Can i say one other thing. Happy to submit for the record these pages of european july 28, rting on going up to september 24, 2019. Weekly basis with my european counterparts. Just hadthe e3 but we poland in town. We did a global ministerial on promote peacet to and stability in warsaw poland. We had 65 nations from almost continent attend. So weve made working with our priority. A thats under secretary hail, second pompeo, deputy secretary and so im happy to submit for the record three everything that europe has done to counter irans threats. Will be included in the record for full disclosure to and with that, senator shaheen. Without taking the senators time, can you tell me how were going to proceed. S the chairman intending to keep the hearing going as members come in and out to vote. I think this is an important vote. Agree. Probably what we want to do is get down to the vend and take come t break, go vote and back. I know, i see a lot of friends partsmy over here that would like to bite the apple and i want to to them every opportunity do so. With that, senator shaheen. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to follow up on the line of questioning that my pursued with e respect to syria. By kurdish shift forces who are our partners in the fight against isil away from he United States<\/a> and into alignment with iran and russia i believe will have serious syria and the r region and its hard for me to understand that you think there at least you appear to think there is no connection to happen ts going in syria and our efforts to address whats happening in iran. Now, the president said on twitter that anyone, and im wants to nyone who assist syria protecting the kurds is good to me whether its russia, china or napoleon. Great. They do were 7,000 miles away. Does anyone in the president extend to iran and are you concerned about a kurdishiranian alliance in the impact and its what its impact on the u. S. Interest in be . Region will as i said earlier, syria is not going to see a return to direct forces ey under iranian control to leave. Leverage have enormous in that space. Speaking just just further elaborate what our leverage is me given appears to the pullout of troops, and i appreciate what youre saying about reconstruction dollars but is, they are years away from reconstruction at this point. And so, we had a very small amount of troops partnering with forces to maintain a significant area in northeast stable. At was the United States<\/a> had influence, where we were wanted, and what telling me now is that we have pulled out those troops and wehave greater leverage than had before . I didnt say that. Saying is that our Pressure Campaign<\/a>, because, as i have shia fighters dont the money that it used to, iran doesnt have the money it used assad and its proxies. Iran will face a dilemma. They can either support guns in or prioritize the needs of and own people at home, that is the choice that were trying to force upon the regime. And have we not just empowered them further by of northeast syria and giving iran more influence ability gion, and more to negotiate with russia . Ou know, i heard the Obama Administration<\/a> talk about how we were going to starve syria of the funds they needed to to engage in a civil war and that never happened. Our experience has been with cripping sanctions, i think they are important but they are only way, the only tool in the tool box for us to address these conflicts. So i guess i would go on to ask you, in september, you noted clear, we need to reestablish deterrence. Were one missile strike away regional war. I think thats a quote. Ould you speak to how this administration plans to reestablish deterrence against iran . Options, otherfic than sanctions, are on the table o penalize iran for its destabilizing behavior . The first thing you have to o is to stop doing whats not working. And there is no question that ran increased its missile proliferation and testing i dont want to talk about jcpoa. To talk about is what the administration has on he table now to address irans destabilizing behavior. Im making that, but that is to stop t, is we have doing what were doing or were going to get more of the same. The paradigm of not having sufficient leverage and pressure to drive up the cost of iranian aggression. And so were only, what, five or six months into having all of sanctions imposed, because for the First Six Months<\/a> after deal, we t of the granted a few oil waivers. Now since may, were about five months into this and weve achieved record results. Have to also understand because its materially weaker today. That ppreciate on paper thats the case. But when we look at the behavior exhibiting, both in the region, and in terms of in the region, hey have increased that destabilizing behavior. It isnt an increase. Take a look at all 71 instances of this. Ran for 40 years has been running a steadystate of aggression and using terrorism as a tool of state craft. They want the world to accept a norm a level of terrorism as they defined it, then when the world stands up to them they increase it to a level to put pressure on people they will return to their normal level. We are breaking the paradigm. This e heard you make argument this morning, and i appreciate that thats an argument that the administration has. Im just not buying that argument at this point. Is, what areasking the plans what are the beyond al plans sanctions that will address their behavior . And my time is up, so im not going to ask you to respond to that but i do have one final question that i would like to and that is, do you believe that isis has been syria . Ed in the territorial yes or no. The territorial caliphate has been defeated. Weve liberated all the land that was held by isis. Its a separate question on the extremism. Thats a separate question. Do you believe the forces of defeated in e been syria . There is no one who will claim that the forces of been defeated not in the middle east in any administration. There is a crisis of islamic extremism that has been going on for many decades. And we have by hat we just exacerbated pulling american troops out of northeast syria, and we have potential for he isis to come back in syria, in region, andross the that empowers iran. It is clearly the case that iran, if you talk to countries in the region, and heres an youre going to hear complete agreement from the israelis and the other arab of tries on the front lines iranian aggression, is that iran expanded its power over the last many years, and we came into office with a regime that was healthy economy, a healthy military budget, trong proxies, and there was a deficit of trust that we inherited with our sunni partners and with israel. Say that our bilateral relations with all of these countries has been arkedly improved and weve helped to shrink the iran tumor. Ut were only at this for the first this has only been a matter of about leaving the and a half since leaving the deal mean, you dont have to take any word for it. In march the New York Times<\/a> front page story documenting that irans proxies are weaker today and the Washington Post<\/a> ran a follow in june documenting how irans proxies are weaker because of our sanctions. That were not es our en about prior to Pressure Campaign<\/a>. Senator paul, if we step back ask the question, do sanctions work, i think its a bigger, broader question. We think all we can do is we do more, maximum e, pressure. I think they are having an economic effect, no one uestions that but are they working to bring iran to the negotiating table, and they arent working. Its a fact of loss of trust, that iran feels that were not because of pulling out of the agreement that was worked on for so many years. Of ink its also a matter having naive expectations that they are going to agree to 12 points. Of which they didnt agree to in the previous agreement so i think its going to be very becauset to get started of the lack of trust and starting with some things that ere not agreed to previously and more specifically, agreed to different limits like no nrichment, and no Ballistic Missile<\/a> agreement. I think iran sees their Ballistic Missiles<\/a> as a i dont think ll they are willing to give up a rrent as they seesawed saudi arabia its about if you add in saudi they may not s, say, please, please, take my Ballistic Missiles<\/a>. Hey arent jumping up and down to do this and even against the worlds super power that can defeat them in a moment willing pricking and prodding because were unrealistic in what we ask and by pulling out were not to be trusted from their perspective. So your problem there is you partner. Unwilling in syria its a little different. N syria, weve been unwilling to negotiate in the sense that our goal has been, you know, assad, replace assad, so no one wants to negotiate with assad. That hasnt been picked up on yet and i think its ironic because everyone concerned about t permanent solution is much more likely to come from assad. Hes going to stay barring happening to ward him from his own people but the war is largely over and assad stays. Going to be realistic about this and we want to rotect the kurds, maybe the diplomatic arena has gotten simplified. Now essentially you have turkey one side and syria on the other so i think our goal, ever sanctions, out the which i frankly dont think will work, but i think really state y from the department thats involved with diplomacy ought to be saying, hy dont we try to use our leverage to get turkey and assad to talk but we would have to acknowledge that someone is assad and i to think if we did, the goal would actually be to allow the kurds live in the northeastern quadrant of syria similar to the way the kurds live in iraq. Wasnt always easy there. Its been very messy and there but been a lot of problems currently the iraqi kurds trade had the turks and have decent and robust trade thats increased so we shouldnt look oh, my goodness, the kurds are being wiped out and all of this. Should look at it as a breakthrough diplomatically who se weve simplified needs to talk to whom at this point so i would just hope and i guess my question is, is there state department actually looking to take an opportunity of the new dynamic 24 hours, that, if assad could reassure erdogan hat hes going to prevent incursions and hes going to respect the border with turkey and hes going to use a real ofernment with the stability a real government, is there a possibility erdogan would simply guarantee . Der that thats the kind of conversation that weve kind of prevented from happening because we let the we wouldnt kurds talk to assad so in some ways i think there may be a here. Hrough your comments . Well, my understanding is a member briefing in the works to try to be organized syria. Uld focus on so thats probably a question thats best left to my counterpart, jim jeffrey, who is the lead on syria. Aboutanswer your question do you see why the kurds could permanently live in syria kind of arrange. With the Syrian Government<\/a> . Im going the stay in my lane jeffrey answer that question but do i want to answer your iran question at the top. A history of coming to the table in the context of sanctions. Runup to that in the the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a>. In various een that times when the United States<\/a> but i think you have to be something. Offer simply saying were not going to offer relief. Offer re willing to relief of some of their exports to asia, yeah, i think they heartbeat that. Would be offering something and it would have been easier before they attacked saudi arabia. To offer them something now but six months ago had you offered them relief of some of the sanctions in order get the talks started i think you might have had a chance. No one wants to offer relief because of heightened tensions. Things are more difficult now to get started. Sanctions relief was not granted in the runup to what became the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a>. And i think once you establish that precedent you had a unified europe at that time. More pressure but you also had the engagement of the Obama Administration<\/a> actually talking there d they were was more trust then. There is less trust now because out of ally pulled something they were adhering to. On that, weve made it clear were open to meeting. Iran has rejected the offer, and, by the way, they rejected offer while we were in the deal. Iran rejected our offers of meeting while we were in the nuclear deal. It didnt happen after we left the deal. At any hey have consist timely rejected diplomacy. I think they have a theory that is greater than our pressure. Were very comfortable with the Foreign Policy<\/a> that we have in that the use we know regime has less revenue to spend on its military budget and on were forcing them to make very hard choices. Earlier, ive looked at the 40year history of it. F talking nicely with the iranians worked we would have solved this a long time ago but it doesnt. Regime that only respects and understands strength. They dont consider an their main export talking nicely to them. Im not saying its justified but you have to understand their perspective. They dont understand this to be nice talk when we have an embargo on export. Oil goes to fund terrorism. Oil they let iran sell use it for terrorist operations. So we dont want iran to sell its oil. We put in place the embargo i mean, sanctions we have on irans oil exports. And thats tens of billions of revenue that they ould otherwise spend on hamas, houthis in yemen, thats a good thing. Thank you, well have to take point. At this weve got some votes going on. Were going to vote on the two r one and the number and then well be back in session and appreciate your patience. You. Thank you. Senate foreign Relations Committee<\/a> will be in recess. Itt. [captions Copyright National<\/a> cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] the committee will come to order. Chairman. Ou, mr. For your thank you service","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia903103.us.archive.org\/11\/items\/CSPAN_20191017_050100_U.S._Special_Rep._for_Iran_at_Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee_-_Part_1\/CSPAN_20191017_050100_U.S._Special_Rep._for_Iran_at_Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee_-_Part_1.thumbs\/CSPAN_20191017_050100_U.S._Special_Rep._for_Iran_at_Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee_-_Part_1_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}