Both sides will exchange reversible concessions for reversible concessions and you reversible concessions for you irreversible concessions for irreversible concessions. Thank you. That is a great place to stop. Underlying all of this is the bitter history of the u. S. And iran. No one better to talk about that then john, who has experienced it in many different ways. Is this really going to make a difference between the u. S. And iran . As our iranian friends like to say, there are only two possibilities. It either will or it wont. So there we are. It is quite simple. They have been speaking and writing very sensibly about iran for many years. This is a very passionate subject in this town. I tell my students at the Naval Academy one could spend his life going to iran in events in washington, whether it is the wilson center, the foundation for the defense of democracy. View. Ideological point of you would never run out of subjects to talk about. It is an issue that a small number of people carob out cap care about passionately. Probably 30 of that group is here in this room tonight. About, i going to talk will put the question of so what and now what . We andthe iranians the iranians finally getting off nowhere, a road that we have been on for 30 years . Of 2009, president obama offered the iranians a new beginning based on digital mutualMutual Respect, mutual interest, that lady behind the grievances of the past that lay behind the grievances of a past. It caught the iranians this it caught the iranians offguard. Discredited decades of anti american rhetoric, a staple of the diet in tehran. How does one paint as an enemy someone who sends you greetings, who speaks of Mutual Respect . The response to the president was at this offer was disappointing. It was as though the iranians saw him not as an enemy, but as something more dangerous, as arrival. Means cohey used wife, something more dangerous, more attractive, and younger. Something you fear more than the enemy. Now it has been five years since that original outreach and finally these efforts are getting a response. What ever the value of the Current Nuclear deal, whether you do announce it or whether you supported, you cannot deny that today we are in a very different lace with iran than we have been for the last 34 years. Look at what we have. The two Foreign Ministers are having professional and productive discussions. Timeember this, the last ofore september of 1979 2013 that the two Foreign Ministers met was in october of 1979. Disastrous. Gs were diplomatcool polished walked out of those meetings completely exasperated. What should we do . Before we jump in and say this is a great deal or this is a terrible deal, we should step and and take a deep breath admit that we and the iranians are now talking to each other, interacting in a way that five , just ago was unthinkable could not imagine it. Some will credit the sanctions sidesushing the iranians to change their approach. I am cautious. In the case of the sanctions, you need to make a distinction between what you know to be true and what you wish to be true. I think there are people who wish the sanctions had done this and therefore they say the. Anctions did it what we know to be true is that the iranian economy is in bad shape. Resources,ts educated population, with its geography, it should be a paradise. It is clearly not. It is clearly not a paradise. Frome end with something it was echoed in a beautiful poem by robert frost called the pastor. Pasture. It looks like we may at last be theing in a field beyond ideas of centrifuges and subterfuges. We are not there yet, but there is at least possibilities that just a few months ago no one could have imagined. Thank you. [applause] i will play devils advocate. You accuse me of being too positive. Let me take the view of those who say this is an historic mistake and that we are being cheated and that the iranians will not keep their part of the bargain and sanctions will unravel and we will lose all of the leverage that we have developed. You said the iranians gave more than the americans did in this round. Am not so sure i am not so sure. The sanctions it is worth a few million dollars. Symbolically, when you look at the fact that the entire International Community had coalesced around these sanctions, now those sanctions are going to begin to be eased. The question is once you start down that path, will you ever be able to get sanctions up to the point that they are at now . That is one of the critiques of this deal. That if we dont do a deal the sanctions would ll be there he was this extremely different american president that the iranians could not wrap their heads around because he was speaking well and his middle name was hussein. As a result of back and the fact that the president really tried , butdiplomacy, it failed the narrative that got created was that it fell through because the iranians. The president could tell the rest of the world to agree to sanctions that they never had agreed to before. The Bush Administration never even dare to dream about. Now they could agree to it he cuts there was the sense that the United States actually tried. Is playing the same trick on the United States. Rosh hashanah greetings to the jewish people. His foreign minister is extremely charming. They are serious about diplomacy. In the last rounds of negotiation, a day was spent on just to decide when and where the next meeting will be. Negotiate made made suggestions like kabul. Everything was a negotiation. Now it takes about five minutes to decide. The venue is now set, it will always be geneva. There is no excuse. That has translated into a lot of countries who have agreed to the sanctions and have agreed to , they do grudgingly not like to impose sanctions. Several of those countries are in europe. They are not putting pressure they are now putting pressure on the United States. Because of your congress, congress is playing politics. If it fails now, it it will not be difficult. Easy for theo be iranians to shift the blame away from themselves onto the United States. At that point, the iranians can get four more sanctions released can get far more sanctions released. 20 of the sanctions would drift difference. E big 20 of the sanctions would drift away without the iranians giving one concession. Many of the sanctions would fall apart. Risk of overplaying our hand. When the iranians offered to stop the program at 3000 centrifuges and today they have 19,000, the cost of us overplaying our hand in the past is that they now have 19,000. Want to do that again . The leverage will also will be lost. Do you want to jump in on this . Theseind many of critiques, not yours, of course, barbara. I find many of these critiques about as predictable as a Clarence TomasSupreme Court decision. You and i could write these things. Assumption behind them you cannot trust them. They will cheat. I would say only this. Iranians could never agree on anything, what about what we agreed on in afghanistan . 2001, 2002. Inwhat we agreed on back same aboutargely the the lebanon hostages . If we and the iranians could never agree on anything at all, then i and 51 of my colleagues would still be in tehran. Is i have i have a theory and you tell me if you think it is crazy. Has been consistently negative about these negotiations. The proposald before it was finished. After it was announced, he said it was an historic mistake. Is it possible he is playing his assigned role in this . Is it actually helpful for him to be so negative . If netanyahu were jumping up and down for joy, it would be difficult for rouhani to say he had gotten a good deal. It maintains pressure on the United States to get more confessions concessions out of iran in the final deal. Click i like your theory. I have no idea if it is true or not. By opposing the deal the way he is, he is helping rouhani and others deal with some of their more difficult constituencies. I do not think he is doing this on purpose. Netanyahuse is that really still misses auckland in he was the gift that kept on giving as far as israel was concerned. At the end of the day, what is , there are about it a lot of currents within israel that are questioning his approach and saying, you are not serving the interest of israel by isolating it by getting into a public spat, public disagreement with the United States. You follow the israeli debate a lot. Is it useful that he remains so negative . Will that put pressure on the United States . Is he isolating himself . Will he be less relevant . He has become less relevant and that has been very problematic for israel. I wrote in my book that at the end of the day, to serve israels interest, it is more to be more helpful to the process and to ensure that you can be part of the process. Instead of taking this extremely negative public position. The israelis did not know about the secret channel. Content oft know the the conversation. It isy knew about it, difficult to understand why they were spreading data that was completely false. Why diddo the content, they deliberately Say Something that was not true . I think they did not know. Israel is paying the price for having adopted the position of netanyahu. The u. S. Thought they could not include israel. I do not think this is helpful for israel. It is helpful for the administration to have netanyahu come out and say this mistake. Orica anything, it costs the administration more than it has cost the iranians. It does not mean that they will not be strong allies, but on the issue of iran, on the issue of israelpalestine, and what is happening in the arab world, the israeli and the American Perspective have diverged. The americanled order in the region fell apart once the u. S. Invaded iraq. Is trying to adjust to a new reality. There will be rising populations in many different arab worlds. The u. S. Will no longer care and see the survival of these autocrats. When there was a coup in egypt, the u. S. Was not in favor of the muslim brotherhood, but not in favor of seeing egypt go back to him military dictatorship. The israeli perspective was very different. This has created a lot of tension. The chemistry between the president and the Prime Minister does not seem to be the best. The idea that this is some sort that isrdinated designed to add pressure on the notian negotiations, i do see them able to pull it off that way. It was a good theory. And we willcrophone pass it. If you could state your name. Please ask a question, do not give a speech. Asked a legitimate question. [inaudible] click stanley will be the first one stanley will be the first one. Getting giving netanyahu more credit for psychological scale. Regionre talking about a that has a history of self destructive behavior. Be subtle ando clever is just incredibly stupid. I think there would be some in the audience who take exception to that. Question, please. We have heard about these bilateral talks. I was looking at a story, the Islamic Republic news agency. Denying that there were any bilateral talks. Byy dismissed speculation the Associated Press about bilateral talks with the United States. They rejected the ap report. Why would the Foreign Ministry project this report . Is there some internal dissension . Bland,ter seemed very and his letter of endorsement in response to rouhani. He has embraced the deal. Rouhani gave a very happy speech , which he counts as his 100th day of his presidency. I would disagree and say the Supreme Leader has given a lot of support. The iranians still have a kind of allergy to admitting that they are doing what they are doing, which is negotiating with the americans. To learn there is deception going on in the Islamic Republic news agency. [laughter] that is just terrible. It is a very good question. Peculiarities. The twoyear it is on the american side. To kill you peculiararieties on the american side. Ministerputy foreign or some other negotiator in an awkward position, they have to go in front of parliament. There was an interesting comment. The anthropologist made an interesting comment this morning on npr and he talked about the dualities within iranian political culture, the ability to believe contradictory things at the same time. The fact that twitter and facebook are banned and blocked all have theirrs own facebook pages and twitter accounts. They are addicted to them. The fact that the negotiations are happening while they are not happening should not be very surprising. The people who lost the. Lection are not happy at all they are looking for ways to snipe, to bring down the government, to show this is not such a big deal. They are still there. Theyre temporarily contained, but they are still very much there. We have to be aware of it. They have their hardliners just as we have hours. Ours. Morell see who has discipline in which administration is able to keep its opponents in check better. My name is stephen. His nyahu lang to playing to his own house of representatives, not to the knesset . The idea that he is playing to his Political Base is true of having used a in his internal conversations in israel and playing up iran as a nexus into essential nexus existential threat, and a country like israel is so strong that could be faced as a threat like iran. Aaron miller told me on the radio that he would never have evoked a holocaust in the way that netanyahu is. After having done that and personified the idea that in is hitler inani sheeps clothing that he could not turn around and say, that is a great deal. He will have to oppose it until the very last moment. His political constituency will say, you told us this is a threat. Why did you not oppose it and to the last possible second . That is highly unhelpful for israel. Quickly shifting strategic environment, it Union Leaders that have the ability you need leaders that have the ability to quickly adjust to a shifting reality. Not in yahoo has locked himself in a will not play well netanyahu has locked himself in. Let me ask about the saudis. They have put out statements that are more neutral. Are they adjusting to this . Are they quietly fuming . I do not know the answer to that question. The saudis have made a statement which was much more moderate and much more measured. I am sure they are not happy about this. On the other hand, for a lot of reasons, they are not going to want to identify with what netanyahu is saying. It does not look good in their domestic political agenda for them for these two to be lining up together. I am not an expert on saudi arabia, but it is quite clear that there has been some interesting contradicting behavior. Companion for u. S. Security council seat. It indicates there are some significant divisions within the saudi elite right now, within the government. Contradictoryhe messages may continue and may not signal much more than that they are not sure what to do. The gentleman back there. Larry feinberg. How does this agreement differ from the agreement they negotiated with north korea . Korea. Ve covered north there are two analogies that come up all the time. 1938, munich, the not cease nazis. The other one is iran is north korea. [inaudible] the nature of the regimes are different and the agreements are different. North koreans cheated and therefore, the iranians will cheat. This was the 1994 agreement that clinton reached with kim jongil in north korea. Agreed for 10ans years the agreement worked. The North Koreans kept their plutonium reactor. The United States delivered heavy fuel oil. The u. S. Deliveries were often late because congress would not appropriate the money on time. This was a perpetual problem that North Koreans talked about. The reactors were never completed. Negotiations continued with the North Koreans. Went to northight korea in 2000. They were talking about negotiating a deal on north koreas missiles as well. The negotiations went well. Bill clinton had to decide and flip a coin at the end of his presidency whether he was going to go to earth korea or try to finalize an arab israeli peace agreement. Wrong choice. , colinw. Bush came in powell wanted to continue and wanted to pick up where north korea where clinton left off. He was publicly humiliated for making that statement. Bolton went about leaking information that the North Koreans might have a secret program to enrich uranium. Then there was a confrontation in 2002. The whole deal fell apart. The North Koreans started up the reactor again. There were other agreements that were reached with the North Koreans. In 2005, there was an agreement that was reached. The North Koreans broke it. The nature of that agreement was that they would stop the plutonium reactor. In return, they would get various concessions. Different,gimes are but north korea is a bizarre dictatorship that relies entirely on support from one country, china. Beenood aid that it has able to cage out of the United States over the years. Discussingat we are now with iran is quite different. The nature of the sanctions is quite different. I do not see that they are comparable. At some point, yes, we made promises to build reactors. Situationse that being the same and i do not think it is appropriate to make that comparison. We have to take each case on its own merit. We have to make sure we have verification and this is something that is built into this. The North Koreans kicked out the iaea. To this day, they have not permitted the kind of inspection that iran has routinely. We have a better sense of what the iranians are up to. The iranians are not as far along in terms of their ability to build weapons. The North Koreans have than working on their plutonium