Silenced as we prepare to begin and for those watching online youre welcome to send questions or comments emailing speak speaker heritage. Org. He is a veteran Foreign Policy specialist who has written widely on the middle east and issues of International Terrorism since coming to the Heritage Foundation in 1979. He has authored dozens of papers on iran, its Nuclear Program, and has testified before congress on Irans Nuclear program and other middle east security issues. Please join me in jwelcoming ji phillips. Thank you. The Iran Nuclear Agreement has been in force now for more than a year exhib, but yet it faces uncertain future. As a president ial candidate, donald trump indicated that he would overturn the deal or also indicated that he may enforce it so tightly that the iranians may walk away from it, but as president he has been in no hurry to rip up the deal and it appears the administration is still reviewing its options. Our critics charge that the nuclear deal only slowed irans Uranium Enrichment Program and did not halt it and the promises that the deal would help to moderate irans behavior has not come to pass. Iran does very provocative missile tests and supports terrorism and expanding a military intervention in syria and harassing u. S. Navy ships and other International Ships in the persian gulf. Supporters of the deal indicate almost all of those things were not included in the deal and that the deal did reduce irans stock piles of uranium enrichment for a few years in order to buy time for diffusing this crisis. How well has the nuclear deal worked and the joint comprehensive program of action. How well has the jcpo worked, what are the strengths and weaknesses, what position should the Trump Administration take on the deal Going Forward . To answer these and other questions we have a very knowledgeable panel of experts and ill be introducing them as they speak. First speaker is fred flights. Hes the Senior Vice President for policy and programs at the center for security policy. Fred served in the u. S. National security positions for 25 years at the cia, dia, department of state and the House Intelligence Committee staff. During the administration of president george w. Bush, he was chief of staff to john bolton, the undersecretary of state for arms control security. He was the staff expert on the iranian and north korean Nuclear Programs and briefed key National Intelligence estimates on these issues to committee members. After he left government in 2011, he founded and served as director of the Langley Intelligence Group network, the news and forecasting services. He has published numerous articles in the various journals and newspapers and published the book obama bomb, a dangerous and growing National Security fraud. Let me turn it over to fred. Thanks, jim. Its a pleasure to be back to discuss this urgent National Security issue and its very humbling to be on a panel of some of americas leading experts on this issue. I mean, jim, youve written extensively on this issue. Hes a former official who i have known for a number of years and knows exactly whats going on with Irans Nuclear program. David David Albright has reported to his center and reports he has been producing despite pressure in the Foreign Policy establishment and the Obama Administration to pull the pi h punches. I really respect his organization. Donald trump said repeatedly during the campaign that the nuclear deal with iran is one of the most deals the United States has ever negotiated. He has implied he will tear up the deal and other options being discussed right now. Mr. Trump is right, this is a terrible agreement that is a danger to u. S. And interNational Security, but the question is what will mr. Trump do about it . Im going to discuss three options on the table for mr. Trump to deal with the deal, but i first want to talk about why this is a bad deal and theres two principal reasons for this. First of all, the jcpa legitimatizes and normalized Irans Nuclear program and allows iran to engage in Nuclear Weapons activities while the agreement is in place. Iran built its Nuclear Infrastructure under the treaty. It did it in secret. It cheated. Its a state sponsored terror. It had been the position until early in the Obama Administration, there had been certain technologies iran should not be allowed to pursue because they are to easy to use to make weapons, however the Obama Administration was so desperate for an agreement it made concession after concession to give away these dangerous technologies because they wanted to get a legacy Nuclear Agreement from president obama. The Main Technology is highly enriched uranium. The administration stuck with the policy that iran cannot have urani uranium. This is while the agreement is in place. This allows iran to increase its expertise and technology it can later use to make Nuclear Weapons. Iran should not be allowed highly enriched uranium. It should be our position too. Iran had a reactor it was building. Proponents have not been in favor of this. This reactor will be built by the chinese. It will be the source of a quarter of a weapons worth of platinum a year. Even if thats not useable as weapons, this agreement will allow iran to acquire expertise in the construction and operation of a heavy water reactor. This was an outrageous concession by the United States and its something that is going to make us considerably less safe down the road when this reactor is completed. In addition this reactor has been exempted from an oversight process to safeguard the technology bre technology being provided for the construction of this reactor is not being diverted for weapons purposes. Verification under the agreement is very weak. Now, supposedly this has the strongest verification measures of any Nuclear Agreement in history. In fact, the verification mostly applies to the declared supply chain and declared nuclear sites. There is a procedure to get access to suspect facilities in nondeclared sites, but there has to be a vote of treaty parties to get that inspection. If iran refused in, in theory, sanctions would be snapped back, sanctions that had been suspended under the agreement. If the Trump Administration attempts to get an authorization the answer will be no because the europeans wont agree with him and the irans have said they will withdraw from the agreement. I dont think thats an option. In addition iran is refusing to allow inspections of military facilities. If there are weapons related activities going on its happening at weapons facility. Iran will not allow inspections of those facilities. That alone means this agreement is a big problem. This agreement will reduce or eliminate the threat of Irans Nuclear program, it will improve relations with the United States. We know that has not happened. Iran has fired at least a dozen missiles since the Nuclear Agreement was announced. Missiles have been fired by the rebels, which is an iran proxy into the american red sea. Iran has continued to support its support of terrorism, probably financed by the enormous amount of money it received in sanctions relief under the agreement. But missiles is something thats worth talking about at a little bit of length. We were told early in the Nuclear Talks that missiles would be included in the agreement, but the irans refused to include it so instead there is a provision concerning a missile test that endorsed the agreement, but what wasnt known at the time that this language barring iran missile tests for eight years weakened Previous Security Council res laolution d only applies to missile tests designed to carry nuclear war heads. These are not being built to fire monkeys into space. They are Nuclear WeaponsDelivery System to carry Nuclear Bombs against israel, the United States and europe. Thats their purpose. Iran is the only nation in history to have a missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers or more without having a Nuclear Weapon system. Lets not pretend this is not part of the Nuclear Weapons program. It was an irresponsible concession by the Obama Administration to get this deal that it allowed the agreement to go through without this as part of it. This is why when iran tests a missile and theyve tested about a dozen since the agreement was announced they have not been in noncompliance with the Nuclear Agreement. The irans have baggragged they worked to get this language so they could test missiles. I think this is a bad deal for many reasons and i think it makes us less safe. I think it gets iran closer to a Nuclear Weapon and i think iran is able to cheat on the agreement and will not be caught. What should President Trump do about it . Tear up the agreement, renegotiate the agreement or pursue a policy of strictly enforcing the agreement. In my view tearing up the agreement is the best option. This agreement is a fraud. It was fraudulent to the American People. There were numerous side deals not disclosed to congress when it voted on the agreement in september of 2015. It was negotiated not only over the objections of israel, one of our closest allies, but behind its back and behind the backs of our allies in the middle east. When we conducted Nuclear Negotiations with north korea, we included regional states. This agreement was initiated with no input from regional states. They were surprised. Jay solman writes about how regional states were stunned at what iran was allowed to keep under an agreement to reduce the threat from its Nuclear Program. It was a betrayal and i think this is the best reason why this program has to be stopped. Also, this agreement undermines important nonproliferation efforts that the United States had been pursuing to stop the proliferation of uranium enrichment and fuel processing. This is something the Bush Administration worked hashedrd n which well share Nuclear Technology provided that the nation were sharing it with will agree not to enrich or process platinum. The Obama Administration backed away from that standard. I think this was a serious mistake because the more nations who are allowed to enrich fuel means more nations will have Nuclear Programs. We to return to a process of not permitting uranium enrichment. I think that of the options that the president is looking at, renegotiation is more likely. I can live with renegotiation because im confident that a trump team ultimately will either push for a deal that actually addresses threats from Irans Nuclear program, brings in other crucial issues or iran will back out of the agreement. But theres two objections that we hear about. Its a Multi Lateral agreement and the u. S. Cant renegotiate on its own and the u. S. Has to keep its commitments. We cant back out of this agreement. These are both false agreements. This was an agreement negotiated almost entirely between the United States and iran, mostly in secret and before the talks began. Read jays book. He writes about how western states had their arms twisted to go along with all the concessions that john kerry worked out with the iranians. These other nations are along for the ride. Concerning why the u. S. Should keep its commitments, the u. S. Does not have to keep its commitment to an agreement that is a fraud. This is a fraud. This agreement was fraudulently pushed forward. It endangers National Security. The American People have learned about one unfair concession after another. Can you imagine what the u. S. Congress would have done when it voted on this agreement in september of 2015 if they knew there was a secret deal to pay ransom to get american hostages out of iran . I know the Obama Administration said the release of the american prisoners was not related to the nuclear deal. Of course it was related. Of course there was an agreement with the iranians that they would not release those prisoners that they got sanctions relief. Its no accident that our prisoners were released on the same day that iran got the sanctions relief and we flew a plane load of cash secretly to iran. This was not disclosed while the administration was doing celebrations in january of 2015 about the january 2016 about the success of the deal. It was revealed in the wall street journal a few more either. There were many other secret concessions like this. The u. S. Does not have to stand behind a fraud. Finally, strictly enforcing. Lets strictly enforce and force iran to back out. Theres several problems with this argument. First of all, this approach legitimatizes a fraudulent agreement. We know this is a fraudulent agreement and working within this process is a mistake, but second of all, and this is a very important point, iran can advance its Nuclear Weapons program and be in full compliance with the agreement because it is learning how to enrich uranium. It will gain access to technology on building heavy water reactors. It doesnt make sense to use the strictly enforce approach. I think this is a serious mistake. There seems to be a hybrid approach that im hearing right now, well well push for full access for inspectors and dropping the sunset provisions where where aspects of the agreement are suspended. These are things being talked about so well strictly enforce and renegotiate. Im sorry, but if we stick with an agreement that lets iran enrich, we are endangering National Security and perpetuating a fraud. Thats not good enough. It stops iran from enriching and having access to technology to produce platinum and makes iran answer questions about its past Nuclear Weapons record. I think in the end the best approach would be to true i to renegotiate. I dont expect the iranians will corporate. Next, we put tough sanctions on iran to stop transfers of all nuclear and Missile Technology as well as any interaction with Financial Institutions that would aid these technologies and there should be sanctions against iran against terror. Any company that produces advanced Nuclear Technology should not be allowed to sell it to iran until iran answers for its Nuclear Program and agrees to an arrangement where we can be sure they are not producing Nuclear Weapons. I believe President Trump meant it when he said this is a terrible agreement and i expect him to keep his promise that he will either renegotiate this agreement or rip it up. I dont think there are any other options. Thank you. Our next speaker is David Albright. Hes t hes written numerous assessments on secret and Nuclear Weapons programs throughout the world. Hes published articles and numerous technical and policy ju journals and has authored four books. Hes testified numerous times on Nuclear Issues before the u. S. Congress. Hes briefed government Decision Makers and trained government officials and hes been cited in the media and appeared frequently on television and radio. David korp rated with the action team from 1992 until 1997 focusing on analysis of the iraqi documents and past procurement activities. In june 1996 he was the first nongovernmental inspector of the iraq program. He worked as a senior staff scientist at the federation of american scientists and the Research Staff for environmental studies. Thank you very much. Thanks for holding this event, jim and its an honor to be with fred and olly. Id like to bore into the weeds for lack of a better word. Fred gave an overview of the discussions that are happening within the administration an