Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, good very early morning to all of you. It's been a long day and a
long night, and I'm delighted to be here to share some thoughts with you about the recent
negotiations. I particularly want to thank the Swiss Government. I want to thank the
United Nations. It's been a (inaudible) and we're honored to be here, even at this very
early hour of the morning. I particularly want to thank my colleagues from the United
Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia, China, and especially Lady Cathy Ashton, who is not only
a good friend but a persistent and dogged negotiator and somebody who's been staying
at this for a long period of time. And we're very grateful for her stewardship of these
negotiations.
And if I can take a moment, I really want to thank the team from the United States.
There have been a great many people involved in this effort for a long period of time now,
both here in Switzerland with us now, but also back in the United States, and they know
who they are. But I will single out our Under Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who has
been a dogged, unbelievably patient hand and a skillful hand, and she has helped through
long and arduous months - years of stewardship of our part of this within the P5+1, and I'm
very grateful to her for those long efforts and all of her team.
At the United Nations General Assembly in September, President Obama asked me and our
team to work with our partners in order to pursue a negotiated settlement or solution
with respect to the international community's concerns about Iran's nuclear program. Last
month, the P5+1 entered into a more accelerated negotiation after a number of years of meetings
in various parts of the world and efforts to engage Iran in serious negotiations. The
purpose of this is very simple: to require Iran to prove the peaceful nature of its nuclear
program and to ensure that it cannot acquire a nuclear weapon. And the reason for this
is very clear. The United Nations Security Council found that they were not in compliance
with the NPT or other IAEA and other standards. And obviously, activities such as a secret,
multi-centrifuge mountain hideaway, which was being used for enrichment, raised many
people's questions, which is why ultimately sanctions were put in place.
Today, we are taking a serious step toward answering all of those important questions
that have been raised through the United Nations Security Council, through the IAEA, and by
individual countries. And we are taking those steps with an agreement that impedes the progress
in a very dramatic way of Iran's principal enrichment facilities and parts of its program,
and ensures they cannot advance in a way that will threaten our friends in the region, threaten
other countries, threaten the world. The fact is that if this step - first step - leads
to what is our ultimate goal, which is a comprehensive agreement that will make the world safer.
This first step, I want to emphasize, actually rolls back the program from where it is today,
enlarges the breakout time, which would not have occurred unless this agreement existed.
It will make our partners in the region safer. It will make our ally Israel safer. This has
been a difficult and a prolonged process. It's been difficult for us, and it's been
difficult for our allies, and it's obviously been difficult for the Government of Iran.
The next phase, let me be clear, will be even more difficult, and we need to be honest about
it. But it will also be even more consequential.
And while we obviously have profound differences with Iran yet to be resolved, the fact is
that this agreement could not have been reached without the decision of the Iranian Government
to come to the table and negotiate. And I want to say tonight that Foreign Minister
Zarif worked hard, deliberated hard, and we are obviously, we believe, better that the
decision was made to come here than not to, and to work hard to reach an agreement. And
we thank the Foreign Minister for those efforts.
Together now, we need to set about the critical task of proving to the world what Iran has
said many times - that its program is in fact peaceful. Now, with this first step, we have
created the time and the space in order to be able to pursue a comprehensive agreement
that would finish the work that President Obama began on the very first day in office,
and that is to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. President Obama worked intensively
and his Administration worked intensively before I even came in; when I was in the Congress
and voted for sanctions, the President worked in order to put in place a significant sanctions
regime, an unprecedented regime. And he worked with countries around the world in order to
ensure broad participation and support for these sanctions. That has been essential to
the success of these sanctions. And we believe that it is the sanctions that have brought
us to this negotiation and ultimately to the more significant negotiation to follow for
a comprehensive agreement.
Make no mistakes, and I ask you, don't interpret that the sanctions were an end unto themselves.
They weren't. The goal of the sanctions was always to have a negotiation. And that is
precisely what is now taking place, and that negotiation's goal is to secure a strong and
verifiable agreement that guarantees the peacefulness of Iran's nuclear program. For more than 40
years, the international community has been united in its willingness to negotiate in
good faith. And we have been particularly crystal clear that we will do whatever is
necessary in order to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon. We have also said that we
prefer a peaceful solution, a peaceful path for Iran to respond to the international community's
concerns. And as a result of those efforts, we took the first step today to move down
that path.
The measures that we have committed to will remain in place for six months, and they will
address the most urgent concerns about Iran's nuclear program. Since there have been many
premature and even misleading reports, I want to clearly outline what this first step entails.
First, it locks the most critical components of a nuclear program into place and impedes
progress in those critical components in a way that actually rolls back the stockpile
of enriched uranium and widens the length of time possible for breakout. That makes
people safer. With daily access - we will gain daily access to key facilities. And that
will enable us to determine more quickly and with greater certainty than ever before that
Iran is complying. Here's how we do that: Iran has agreed to suspend all enrichment
of uranium above 5 percent. Iran has agreed to dilute or convert its entire stockpile
of 20 percent enriched uranium.
So let me make clear what that means. That means that whereas Iran today has about 200
kilograms of 20 percent enriched uranium, they could readily be enriched towards a nuclear
weapon. In six months, Iran will have zero - zero. Iran will not increase its stockpile
of 3.5 percent lower-enriched uranium over the next six months, and it will not construct
additional enrichment facilities. Iran will not manufacture centrifuges beyond those that
are broken and must be replaced. Very importantly, Iran will not commission or fuel the Arak
reactor - Arak, A-r-a-k, reactor - an unfinished facility, that if it became operational would
provide Iran with an alternative plutonium path to a nuclear weapon.
And to ensure that these commitments are met, Iran has agreed to submit its program to unprecedented
monitoring. For the international community, this first step will provide the most far-reaching
insight and view of Iran's nuclear program that the international community has ever
had. This first step - let me be clear. This first step does not say that Iran has a right
to enrichment. No matter what interpretive comments are made, it is not in this document.
There is no right to enrich within the four corners of the NPT. And this document does
not do that. Rather, the scope and role of Iran's enrichment, as is set forth in the
language within this document, says that Iran's peaceful nuclear program is subject to a negotiation
and to mutual agreement. And it can only be by mutual agreement that enrichment might
or might not be able to be decided on in the course of negotiations.
So what is on the other side of the ledger here? Again, there have been a number of premature
reports and reactions, so I want to be clear about what this step provides, this first
step, and what it doesn't provide. In return for the significant steps that Iran will take
that I just listed - and there are more, incidentally, than I just listed; those are the principal
- the international community will provide Iran with relief that is limited and, perhaps
most importantly, reversible. The main elements of this relief would hold Iran's oil sales
steady and permit it to repatriate $4.2 billion from those sales. And that would otherwise
be destined for an overseas account restricted by our sanctions. In addition, we will suspend
certain sanctions on imports of gold and precious metals, Iran's auto sector, and Iran's petrochemical
exports, potentially - potentially - providing Iran with about $1.5 billion in additional
export revenues.
For the benefit of the Iranian people, we will also facilitate humanitarian transactions
that are already allowed by U.S. law. No U.S. law will be changed. Nothing will have to
be different. In fact, the sanctions laws specifically exempt humanitarian assistance.
So this channel will not provide Iran any new source of funds, but we will help them
in order to try to provide the people of Iran with additional assistance. It simply improves
access to goods that were never intended to be denied to the Iranian people.
Now, I want to emphasize the core sanctions architecture that President Obama, together
with allies and friends around the world, have put together, that core architecture
remains firmly in place through these six months, including with respect to oil and
financial services. To put this number in perspective, during this six-month phase,
the oil sanctions that will remain in place will continue to cause over 25 billion in
lost revenues to Iran, or over $4 billion a month. That is compared to what Iran earned
before this took effect - the sanctions. And while Iran will get access to the 4.2 billion
that I talked about of the restricted oil revenues, 14 to 16 billion of its sales during
this period will be locked up and out of reach.
Together with our partners, we are committed to maintaining our commitment to vigorously
enforcing the vast majority of the sanctions that are currently in place. Again, let me
repeat: This is only the first step. But it is a first step that guarantees while you
take the second step and move towards a comprehensive agreement, Iran's fundamentals of its program
are not able to progress - Fordow, Natanz, Arak, and other centrifuge and other things
that matter. So that is a critical first step.
And I will say to all of you that as we conclude this first round of negotiation, with the
beginning of the possibility of a much broader accomplishment down the road, it is our responsibility
to be as firmly committed to diplomacy and as relentless in our resolve over the years
as we have been to bring the concerted pressure that brought us to this moment. For the Iranian
Government, it's their responsibility to recognize that this first phase is a very simple test.
Many times, Iran, I think you heard the Foreign Minister here tonight reiterate, that they
have a peaceful program and that's their only intention. Folks, it is not hard to prove
peaceful intent if that's what you want to do. We are anxious to try to make certain
that this deal ultimately will do exactly that - prove it.
And I will just say finally, I know that there are those who will assert that this deal is
imperfect. Well, they too bear a responsibility, and that is to tell people what the better
alternative is. Some might say we should simply continue to increase pressure - just turn
up the screws, continue to put sanctions on, and somehow that's going to push Iran towards
capitulation or collapse. Not by any interpretation that we have from all the experts and all
of the input that we have, and from all of the countries - the P5+1 - that took place
in this today, none of them believe that would be the outcome.
Instead, we believe that while we are engaged in that effort, Iran's program would actually
march forward. It would gain. And while it gains, it would become more dangerous in the
region and countries like Israel and the Emirates, other people in the region who are threatened,
would in fact be more threatened.
So we believe that you would wind up with an Iran with bigger stockpiles, with more
advanced centrifuges and more progress at pursuing a plutonium track. And President
Obama believes that doesn't benefit anybody.
In 1973 - 19 - excuse me, in 2003, when the Iranians made an offer to the former Administration
with respect to their nuclear program, there were 164 centrifuges. That offer was not taken.
Subsequently, sanctions came in, and today there are 19,000 centrifuges and growing.
So people have a responsibility to make a judgment about this choice. And I am comfortable,
as is President Obama, that we have made the right choice for how you proceed to get a
complete agreement.
Moreover, making sanctions the sum total of our policy will not strengthen the international
coalition that we have built in order to bring Iran to the negotiating table. Instead, it
would actually weaken that coalition, and many people believe that to merely continue
at a time where Iran says, "We're prepared to negotiate," would in fact break up the
current sanctions regime. Others argue for military action as a first resort. Well, President
Obama and I do not share a belief that war is a permanent solution, and it should never
be the first option. Instead, that particular option involves enormous risks in many different
ways, and as President Obama has often said, while that option remains available to us
- and the President will not take it off the table - he believes that that can only be
entertained after we have made every effort to resolve the dispute through diplomacy,
barring some immediate emergency that requires a different response.
So I close by saying to all of you that the singular objective that brought us to Geneva
remains our singular objective as we leave Geneva, and that is to ensure that Iran does
not acquire a nuclear weapon. In that singular object, we are resolute. Foreign Minister
Zarif emphasized that they don't intent to do this, and the Supreme Leader has indicated
there is a fatwa, which forbids them to do this. We want to see the process put in place
by which all of that is proven, not through words but with actions. And we are prepared
to work in good faith, with mutual respect, to work in a way as we did in the last days
- cordially, with an atmosphere that was respectful, even as it was tough, as we move towards the
process of making certain that this threat will be eliminated. In that singular object,
we are absolutely resolute, and in that mission, we are absolutely committed, and in that endeavor,
we will do everything in our power to be able to succeed.
On that note, I'm happy to answer a couple of questions.
MODERATOR: The first question will be from Anne Gearan of The Washington Post.
SECRETARY KERRY: Anne, hi.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, you started with your - about (inaudible) who want this on
Iran, and you're opposed for what it will do on a sort of a technical level. I would
hope that you might just take a moment and reflect on what this agreement may mean or
signify longer term or in a larger sense. And this is - you just came through several
months that represent the first time that a diplomatic level from the United States
and one from Iran sat together and talked about anything, much less something of this
moment. What is your view and what is your hope for the next steps as far as the U.S.
relationship with Iran will be?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I - the - obviously it is not insignificant, nor does it just fly be me, nor the President, who
took great risks in committing on this and making certain that we would proceed forward
with this endeavor. It's no small thing, I think, that since 1979, for about 34 years,
Iran and the United States have not been able to talk to each other. And there's been enormous
buildup of suspicion and an enormous buildup of animosity, and there have been moments
here and there where there might have been some kind of minor assistance one way or the
other. For instance, when we went into Afghanistan in 2001, there actually was some assistance
back home (inaudible) from Iran. So there have been these moments.
But I think by and large, it is fair to say that Iran's choices have created a very significant
barrier, and huge security concerns for our friends in the region, for Israel, for Gulf
states and others, and obviously they have made certain choices that are deeply, profoundly
unsettling in terms of stability in the region and the possibility of anything except our
focus on (inaudible). It's too early for us to talk about other things. It's just not
right. Obviously, one would hope that Iran will make choices that it will rejoin the
community of nations in full. The first step is to resolve the nuclear issue, and it shouldn't
be hard if you are in fact absolutely determined to make good on the promise that this is a
peaceful program.
So our hope is that the (inaudible) engagement and the resolution of its differences with
respect to the UN and the international community can indeed lead to what the Foreign Minister
and President Rouhani have talked about, which is a new relationship with the West and with
its neighbors. But nobody that I know of is going to accept the words at face value. It
is going to be proven by the choices Iran makes, by the actions that it takes. We are
open. President Obama has made clear that he is prepared to put in motion the steps
that can improve those attributes, to put these words to the test. And that's exactly
what we're doing now with this first step. And we look forward to, hopefully in a short
span of time, being able to put together a comprehensive agreement that will provide
the guarantees necessary to our friends in the region.
Let me be crystal clear to Israel, to our other friends in the region, to any neighbor
who feels threatened, that the next step requires proof certain of a failsafe set of steps which
eliminate the current prospect of a breakout and the creation of a nuclear weapon. That
will require dismantling certain things. It will require stopping certain kinds of activities.
It will require some fundamental choices, and we're prepared to work with Iran in order
to put in place a protocol that achieves those ends.
So I think this is potentially a significant moment, but I'm not going to stand here in
some triumphal moment and suggest to you that this is an end unto itself. It is not. It
is a step towards the much more significant goal and the much harder to achieve goal of
having a program that is absolutely failsafe provable to be only possible to be peaceful.
And that's what we have to work for now.
MODERATOR: The last question will be from Nicole Gaouette of Bloomberg News.
QUESTION: Hi, Mr. Secretary. Congratulations to you and your team. I'm wondering (inaudible)
and how you answer the criticism from Israel that by easing sanctions, you have less leverage
over Iran, say, than you did yesterday. They're (inaudible) reach that settlement. I also
just wondered if you have a brief comment about more sanctions being in place. That's
been true for a long time, and for a long time (inaudible) Congress.
SECRETARY KERRY: (Inaudible.)
QUESTION: (Inaudible) by the Congress and designed to give new sanctions. And in my
email feed, there are already statements from Republican senators saying it's not good enough.
The - my understanding is that this deal --
SECRETARY KERRY: Gee, you mean members of the other party (inaudible). (Laughter.)
QUESTION: (Inaudible.) My understanding is that you - the P5+1 are pledging not to increase
nuclear-review sanctions for the next six months if Iran complies? How can you assure
that you can get the majority in the Congress (inaudible)?
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, those are two very good questions. Let me answer both of them
very directly. First of all, with respect to Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu, Prime
Minister Netanyahu is a friend of mine, a man I have great respect for and I've worked
with very closely, particularly right now, on the Middle East peace process. I talk to
him several times a week. I've talked to him as recently as the last days about this very
issue, on several occasions. And the fact that we might disagree about a tactic does
not mean there is a sliver of daylight between us with respect to our strategy. The tactic
is whether or not you increase sanctions or take advantage of this moment to pull the
progress and guarantee you have insight into their program while you keep the pressure
on. And it's a difference of judgment. It would be nice, but there is no difference
whatsoever between the United States and Israel and what the end goal must be here. We cannot
have an Iran that is going to threaten its neighbors, and that has a nuclear weapon.
From the day President Obama came into office, he made it clear that a centerpiece of his
policy is that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.
Now, Iran says it doesn't want a nuclear weapon, it is going after a nuclear weapon. Therefore,
it ought to be really easy to do the things that other nations do who enrich, and prove
that their program is peaceful. So that's what we're looking for. We're looking for
it in absolute sync with our friends in Israel. And I have said frequently, no deal is better
than a bad deal. We are not going to strike, ultimately, a bad deal. And you have to be
able to prove that this program is peaceful. That means you're going to have to look at
putting on the grave uranium and what happens to it. You're going to have to have limitations
on certain components. You're going to have to have limitations on the type of facilities.
Arak, a heavy-water plutonium facilities, has no business within the framework of a
peaceful program. We've been very clear about that.
So there are many things. I'm not going to go through them all right now, but it is crystal
clear that Israel and the United States have the same goal, the same strategic interest,
and we will stand with Israel with respect to this policy and the other allies in the
region who are equally concerned about what Iran might or might not choose to do.
Now, with respect to the second part of your question, the Congress, look, I have great
confidence in my colleagues in the Congress. I think they are going to look at this very
carefully, and they should. And I look forward to going up on the Hill. I look forward to
engaging with my former colleagues, explaining what we've done, why we can keep the - and
working together with Congress in order to achieve the goal that Congress embraced when
they put these sanctions in place in the first place. Congress sought to have negotiations.
Now ultimately, if somehow we wind up (inaudible) and Congress - midterm election obviously
- the President obviously has a possibility of a veto. There have been. But I don't think
it should come to that. We don't want it to come to that. I don't if it will come to that.
I believe Congress will see the wisdom of pursuing this for the very specific purposes
that I've articulated with very straight delineation of exactly how we're going to achieve our
goals. And it was really a cooperative effort. And we will brief Congress readily. We will
work for Congress in a very cooperative way. And I think Congress will be a very important
partner in helping us put this to the test over the course of the next six months.
MODERATOR: That's it, everyone.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you all very much. Appreciate it.