Holding a discussion at the iran Nuclear Agreement. They focused on how it might be alter in the coming years. Well hear from experts in International Relations and global security. This is an hour and 15 minutes. Its great to see such a full house. We realize after this very quiet and unmweekend there isnt much worry about in the world. Seriously this is an Inflection Point is as important as world war i and world war ii. Working to ensure constructive u. S. Engagement the world remains as relevant as ever. We are delighted to be partnering with the iran project for our third major event on the Iran Nuclear Deal. We worked a lot before that in getting there in the first place barbara has been at the Tipping Point of getting all of that done. I also want to salute an executive member of the executive committee of the board and with secretary chuck hagel one of the kcochairs the future of Iran International advisory council. It has now been a year since the joint comprehensive plan went into consideration. The consensus is other parties have largely met their obligations but there is discontent about the impact of the deal on both sides. We are also honored to welcome after the first panel senator chris murphy to discuss the deal from the congressional point of view, so we are delighted we will take time out of our crowded schedule. I turn it over to provide welcoming remarks. Thank you, fred. Thanks to the Atlantic Council. It is so remarkable. This is a well run organization. As you know, it is a good place to come for these things. This is the first time we have had one of these in which the Iran Nuclear Deal isnt front page news. Im hoping that the wisdom that will come out of this meeting will be such that it wont have to be or ever again be front page news. The final thing is we prepared for you a joint comprehensive plan of action. So thank you very much, all of you, for coming. Thanks everyone for coming. We are delighted to have this collaboration with the iran project. Before we get to the first panel i want to Say Something about the news of the past few days. Many of us worried under the Trump Administration. I think we never anticipated the first blow would come in the form of a ban on ordinary iranians coming to the United States. He is calling us a violation and this is something we are obviously going to discuss. I wanted to say personally for six years and has been visiting iran for 20 years that i hope the Trump Administration will reconsider the visa band or at least not extend it. With that i will introduce our panelists caroline is head of the delegation of the european union. She oversees overall management including sharing a weekly meeting for coordination among the 28 states. Caroline will be followed by mark. I am delighted he accepted our invitation to come. He is for defense of democracies. He coleads and he has been very influential on capitol hill in terms of designing sanctions. He has been a prominent critic. We welcome his voice. Then well have jim walsh from m. I. T. Jim worked on Nuclear Issues involving the middle east and east asia. She wrote an excellent paper. It is call add new strategy for u. S. i ro u. S u. S. iran relations. I hope that you will tweet on this event. We welcome you and welcome our panelists to the stage. Thank you [ applause ] okay. There isnt much to talk about, is there . Thank you for agreeing to be with us. When i think of the role in all of this i think of kathy and so its appropriate we have a woman here given the role they played in organizing and helping the negotiations along. If you could tell us from the european perspective, how well has the deal been implemented . What are the problems and challenges you see Going Forward . Yeah. I was just pointed out, we have just passed the First Anniversary of the agreement. I want to thank them because i think it is very timely. I think its just after i mean a year is a good time for a first assessment. We are often eager to want to go and assess things after one week and say it doesnt work. I think a year can give us some what of a perspective of how this is working. It has been a huge undertaking in many senses both the negotiations where it was very well very involved as you just described. We also have those that are engaged in this agreement. And it must be underlying that all of the states have sort of agreed to this and is a part of constructing the views on the implementation of the agreement. We think it has been a successful first year. Iran has complied with the agreement. There have been a few minor issues. Those have been detected and corrected immediately, which we think is very good. It is an important part. Mistakes can always happen. The important thing is how they are dealt with and that they are dealt with promptly and in agreement. We also are being very engaged in trying to provide the other side of the agreement because of iran giving up their abilities to get to a Nuclear Weapon. They have asked for lifts of the sanctions lifting of the sanctions which was done immediately. It is also of course to restart so they get some economic benefit out of it. As you pointed out there has been complaints. It is not happening as it should, etcetera. There are Different Reasons for that. The Iranian Society and the private sector is not very easy to deal with. Its not somebody you do quick business with. So there are many contacts that have been laying down for many many years. Those contacts have to be viewed and before you get to deal with them so you can show them in numbers it takes quite a while. There has also been issues around the Banking System and we have worked intensively with our american counterparts here to try to solve them and try to provide guidance. We are worried that if they do business with iranian banks it could have repercussions on the u. S. Business and anybody can understand if you have to choose between the u. S. And iran what you choose. So there have been a number of initial sort of obstacles but we are working every day to solve. We are very confident that iran will see advantages and that iran is also, by this, getting more people to people contacts which we think is also b benificial. And well go deeping on the next round. Zb thank you for being here. What is your impression of how well it has been implemented and what do you anticipate in terms of sanctions . We have heard that many republicans on capitol hill want to impose sanctions on other issues that in some cases replicate the Nuclear Sanctions or go beyond them. So barbara, first of all, thank you for inviting me. I want to congratulate you and others here on a tremendously successful organization. Im glad you brought together different perspectives and different voices. I think it will be critical to put our Heads Together and try to figure out the way forward. From my perspective i think the deal has gone as expected, which is that iranians are testing the deal to see what our response will be but ultimately the regime has no incentive to violate the deal, certainly not yet, because it gives iran a patient pathway to Nuclear Weapons. If they are smart they wont even test the deal. They will wait for restrictions to disappear over time so i think the deal is going quite well. We have to be on guard to deter violations but also to figure our way out from under the deal. From my perspective i think the Trump Administration is adopting the right posture early out of the gate. I have been on record for many months now saying it would be a big mistake. Uhhuh. The deal should be kept and vigorously enforced. The provisions they are interpreting in their favor. We should be very strict in interpreting the ambiguities in the deal and do what president obama and secretary kerry always said we should do. I think that if you were to predict where the new administration would go in the next 12 months my guess its only a guess, would be that you will see nonNuclear Sanctions it is hostage taking and slaughter in syria, supporting shiite malitias. It can be done outside and expect the new administration. Very good. Given what mark just said, whether these kinds of sanctions, even if you call them nonnuclear, will have the effect of undermining the deal and also the visa ban, frankly. The newspaper already called it a violation. In fact they said they said that its the result of the weakness of our countrys negotiating team and fruit of trusting the false promises of the United States. Thats not very helpful. It is good to be here with friends with this distinct panel. I was grabbing your throat, hug, whatever. And to thank the Atlanta Council and all of you. I am delighted to see you all here. It is a full house. I thought no one would care anymore and yet you have all come out which says something about you, i think. It may be a positive thing or negative thing. Im not sure. Youre jcpo groupies. It is an important topic. I would say briefly, yes, its the one Year Anniversary but we seem to forget we had two years of an interrum agreement. We are three years into a Nuclear Agreement they have confirmed as being obliged with. Thats pretty impressive. When you put that together with the data about the effect they have on Nuclear Behavior i think it should give us confidence Going Forward. Countries were interested in weapons started down that path, stopped as it turned back, an outstanding record. Some 40 countries have stopped and reversed course. Often it happens as a result of not agreements. In here we have the strongest nonproliferation agreement, stronger than the psi, stronger than the libya deal. So we have a track record of success general ri. We have a track record of success for three full years and then we have this agreement which stands out compared with other agreements. But that doesnt mean we are all going to get along and everything will be rosey. It is after all a Nuclear Agreement and should be judged first and foremost by the Nuclear Components and whether iran is bonding by them. I take notice and heart in the fact that there have been disagreements and incidents that have come up just like with the u. S. Soviets. There were disagreements or implementation issues that come up. In every case we have been able to bring attention and concerns about something. I dont see it that way. There wasnt any sort of this isnt Saddam Hussein with refusals and dodging and all of that. Things have been resolved quite quickly. I think thats a healthy sign. Now, i will take a moment and talk about what we might expect in the future. He said he expects and ill say that critics have predicted everything except that the agreement will succeed. They predicted there would be breakout, undeclard facilities, predicted know the agreements will work well. If you make the prediction eventually youll get one right. My view is that when it comes to Irans Nuclear intentions i follow the lead of the director of national intelligence. They do not say iran is champing at the bit and waiting to build a Nuclear Weapon after 15 years. They have said repeatedly since 2007 that iran had a Nuclear Weapons program, that it halted in 2003, that it has not made a decision to built Nuclear Weapons. Repeatedly it has said that and said that decision is a political one, not a technical one. If you know how to build a center f center have a Nuclear Weapons. It maintains Going Forward and 15 years is one where its not a consideration. It is an agreement. Its not what a lot of iranians say. It was extended by congress. They have had complaints about the implementation. We hear a lot of complaining. I think all sides i should say because it is an international agreement. All sides have come to a conclusion this is in everyones interest to pursue. As long as the agreement serves the interest of its parties then it can be sustained and we will prevent iran from detains the Nuclear Weapon. The moment we start to try to deny benefits promised under the agreement so that parties do not receive the benefits they expect then it will not be in the selfinterest of those parties to stay in the agreement. So i hope we dont take actions well intentioned or ill intentioned that Congress Might take. Im hearing a followon agreement even though the pre preamble given what we hear there is suspicion iran could abide by the deal and in 10 or 15 years start to work covertly. How do you see this sort of as a way to shore it up or improve it or is it something we should be talking about now. So i do think part of the confusion but differences that we hear continuously in the debate over the agreement is different assumptions about what were intentions during the negotiating period, whether you accept the judgment that has not yet been made or whether others believe this was a country that had already made the decision Nuclear Weapons would be a Strategic Asset and it was a legitimate National Security choice. So theres sort of going back to what were intentions at the beginning and also, what did the final diplomatic achievement, what were the per ramti ters of that achievement. We seem to circle back to divergent expectations. In the report that i did last year that you very kindly mentioned i said lets think of it as a new baseline. It doesnt mean that its sufficient to solve any of the other problems but it does set a new reality. It creates a new context where american and iranian officials can talk to each other. I think one of the great worries to an administration that has very strong views on iran is there wasnt enough value given to the continuity of those contacts. I worried that now we are in a post Nuclear Agreement, political environment that has new dynamics to it. I think its not necessarily realistic to think anybody has the stomach to go back to the negotiating table and say a new diplomatic process. I think its more likely to happen when the iranians test certain provisions or any one of the signatories believes that iran is up to the line of compliance or noncompliance. I think in the end what we will have is, you know, problem solving. Nobody mentioned yet the joint commission. I mean you eluded to it but there is a very interesting and important mek ncchanism that hat where any party to the agreement will bring issues. The parties to the agreement are not peers in the sense that its iran thats in the penalty box. Its not that each party has to demonstrate its own compliance as peers of iran. Its really that iran has to demonstrate first and foremost compliance and then theres an adjudication process. If there was a misunderstanding of how long they could hold before they had to etcetera. That mechanism seems to be working at a tier below the cabinet level officials. One would hope it could keep going. In one of the yearend assessments of the Nuclear Agreement, one very fine analysis suggested that the specificity of the Nuclear Agreement was also a vulnerability. It didnt it wasnt sufficient to solve all of the other problems. I would say the narrowness was a virtue and strength of the agreement. For the first time after decades of nontransactional interaction where iran it gave us something concrete and measurable. We can say are they complying or not complying . That to me is a strength more than a weakness because all other aspects are in a much more subjective domain where it is in the eye of the beholder. How aggressive is iran being in the region . Are the Human Rights Violations which seem to be getting worse, not better. Is iran in the region in the world by human rights standards. What would make them more susceptible, etcetera. I think of the agreement as a concrete achievement that sets a new baseline or new reality. It does not solve the big iran problem. There is still, you know, a multifaceted challenge because iran is after all a rescissivis power. They say we are not for regime change but from the perspective of most others iran is challenging the order for what its worth. And so in theory to me it is that ability to engage government to government that in theory creates a different and better opportunity to talk to iran about all of these other issues. It doesnt it has nothing that any of those other problems can be solved by disagreement. I think maybe later in the discussion well talk about these gray areas of when iran says this is a violation. It is a violation of the spirit of the agreement, not necessarily the letter of the agreement and how do we cope with that . Given how long it took to get this deal, the many many meetings, the hours and hours and hours, the numbers of diplomats that were involved, is there any appetite with all of the other problems europe is dealing with now, for any kind of renegotiation and is there any thought being given to how this deal would be extended perhaps . There is it has to do we believe this is a good deal. It is the best deal we could get. I do completely agree with ellen it is probably possible to sort of control it and contain it. We had maybe hoped that this would sort of this deal would set off a spiral of better relations in the region. Unfortunately it has not