on elements as well as those of as he can at her munoz. while neither were a part of the negotiations, you have both recently traveled to the middle east to speak with your counterparts. on a range of issues including how iran may use sanctions, expand its support to terrorist proxies, and invest more heavily in its military. these are serious concerns and ones which i share. our partners this israel see iran as an ongoing threat. while prime minister netenyahu is unlikely to ever endorse this deal it is incumbent on the united states to deepen our cooperation with israel and better understand the concerns of the israelis. it's also critical that our partners and allies know the

united states will not abandon the region in the wake of this agreement. the may 2015 joint statement following the u.s. and gulf cooperation council meetings at camp david provided a road map. it also makes clear the department of defense will be at the forefront of these efforts. critics of the agreement point to flaws related to iran's ballistic missile capability. the camp david joint statement outlines our commitment to the gcc and improving inner operability in defense. the joint statement indicates we will be increasing our training and exercise arrangements with gcc operations developments.

these are important efforts that i look forward to today. these negotiations focus on denies iran a pathway to a nuclear weapon. as it as repeated demonstrated a force that supports terror and seeks to impose its will throughout the middle east. a nuclear iran would likely fuel a nuclear arms race. none of us will support iran in terror. the history of arms control makes this point, the united states strategic arms treaties didn't require the soviet union to disavow

communism, but the deals were still very useful they capped and later reversed the nuclear arms race they provided a cooling off of a distress and hatred at a time when no other issue could have done so. i look forward to this discussion and provide long-term warning of violation so that an appropriate response can take place. thank you. >> thank the witnesses for being here today, and secretary carter could we begin with you. >> yes, mr. chairman. thank you, and with your leave, i think that you preferred and that's fine with us if only i and general dempsey make opening statements. >> i hope that's agreement to the other witnesses. >> it is. thank you, mr. chairman. thank all of the members of the committee for giving me the

opportunity to testify this morning on our defense strategy toward this critical region. in the wake as the -- as senator reid noted of my travels to the region last week the chairman and also of course very importantly two weeks after the conclusion of the joint comprehensive plan of action. i'm pleased to be joined by my fellow cabinet members who can talk in detail about that agreement reached in vienna. that deal is an important step. one brought about by the leadership of president obama, the persistent diplomacy of secretaries kerry, muniz and others. it's a good deal because it prevents iran from getting a nuclear weapon in a comprehensive and verifiable way. once implemented it will

therefore remove a critical element of risk and uncertainty. one element of risk and uncertainty, but a critical element of risk and uncertainty from the region. for those reasons and those my colleagues have provided in testimony before other commitment fees. i urge you to support it. i also urge you to support the defense strategy in the middle east i will describe including and especially by supporting a stable and reformed defense budget to implement it. the successful negotiation of this deal is one part of our broader foreign and defense policy. as the most influential power in the world, we have responsibilities all over the globe. the middle east remains important to america's national interests, and the department of defense is committed to con fronting the two principal

security challenges iran and isil. the strategic approach to protecting our interests and confronting those challenges will remain unchanged. we will continue to maintain a strong military costure to deter aggression, to bolster the security of our friends and allies in the region especially israel. to check iran's malign influence. and to degrade and ultimately defeat isil. we're also continuing to advance our military capabilities that provide all options as the president as directed should iran walk away from its commitments under this deal. last week i was in the middle east and i had the opportunity to visit with some of our men and women in uniform who were carrying out this strategy. i know how much all of you care for them and like me you are proud of their work. i will tell you this morning what i told them we're

continuing full speed ahead, standing with our friends, standing up to isil and standing against iran's malign activity. on isil as i testified earlier this month, we have the right strategy in place to achieve isil's lasting defeat. but we continue to strengthen execution. today in iraq and other places we're working with parreder ins on the ground to enable capable and motivated ground forces to win back iraq's sovereignty and peace on its own territory. i saw several parts of that effort last week and spoke with some of our partners on the ground. we're headed in the right direction in this effort we have made some progress but we need to make more. on iran this new deal when implemented will place significant limitations on iran

that will effectively cut off itself pathways to the fissile material for a nuclear bomb. but it's also important to note that it places no limitations -- let me repeat that -- no limitations on what the department of defense can and will do to pursue our defense strategy in the region. it places no limits on our forces our partnerships and alliances, our intensive and ongoing security cooperation, or on our development and fielding of new military capabilities. capabilities we will continue to advance. if iran were to commit aggression, our robust force posture ensures we can rapidly in insure insurege our force into the region. iran support the assad regime in

syria, backs hezbollah in lebanon, whose fighting positions i observed firsthand last week. and is contributing to disorder in yemen. and iran still directs hostility and violence to our closest ally in the region israel. in the face of that malign activity we will continue to meet our commitments to our friends and allies in the region especially israel and continue to build on and enhance our cooperation in meaningful ways. i knead clear last week in israel jordan saudi arabia and iraq. and we will continue to maintain our robust force posture, which includes tens of thousands of american personal and our most sophisticated ground maritime

air, and ballistic defense aspects. our friends understand that we have an enduring commitment to deterrence and to regional security. i'm proud to say that our defense partnerships in the region have never been stronger and i made clear and as we agreed at camp david, we're committed to making them even stronger and more capable against a range of threats. the united states will maintain its ironclad commitment to israel's qualitative military edge or qme. we will keep providing israel with advanced capabilities. for example, next year israel will be our first and only friend in the region flying the f-35 joint strike fighter. we continue to work with israel on ballistic missile defense systems. in fact three of them the iron dome david sling, and the arrow

system for missiles progressively increasing range and we're working multi-laterally and bilaterally to improve the capable of our gulf partners also. at the gcc summit in may, and last week with saudi leaders, i stressed a number of areas that will be critical to enable gulf players to play a stronger regional role. including maritime forces ground forces including especially special operationings, air and ballistic defense forces and cyber protection. we also conduct over 50 military exercises a year with our partners and we have offered sophisticated defense equipment, including the thad system and

long-range defense to some of our gulf partners. this is a good deal because it removes a continued source of threat and uncertainty, by preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon. it's a deal that takes no option away from a future president. this is an important achievement. meanwhile the united states the department of defense, and the men and women of the finest fighting force the world has ever known, with your support, will continue to be committed to the defense of america's interest friends and allies to counter isil and iran's malign influence, and to uphold the president's commitment that iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon should it walk away from this deal. >> thank you mr. secretary. general dempsey. >> thank you chairman ranking member reid and the members to

providing the opportunity to discuss this. as i have stated previously, i was consulted on the military implications during the course of the negotiations and provided my best military advise appropriately. the deal addresses one critical and the most dangerous point of friction with the iranian regime. but there are at least five other malign activities which give us and our regional partners concern. these run a gambit of issues. the deal does not alleviate our concerns in those five areas. it does not change the military options at our disposal and in our ongoing efforts, we will continue to engage our partners

in the region to reassure them and to address these areas. ultimately time and iranian behavior will determine if the nuclear agreement is effective and sustainable. i will continue to provide my best military advice and military options. with that i stand subject to your questions. >> i mentioned to my colleagues we have a vote on right now, and usually we bounce back -- >> you are watching live coverage here on al jazeera america. the senate armed services committee grilling obama cabinet members about the iran nuclear deal. thus far the focus has been on the broader military implications of this deal. we'll have much more on the other side of this break.

the only way to get better is to challenge yourself, and that's what we're doing at xfinity. we are challenging ourselves to improve every aspect of your experience. and this includes our commitment to being on time. every time. that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20. it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around.

welcome back. senator mccain just announced they are taking a ten-minute break to vote on another piece of legislation, so in the meantime i want to go to libby casey, covering the hearing live on capitol hill. good morning, so this is the third big congressional hearing in a week. this one is different, there is more of a focus on the broader issues of military implications what mccain called the geopolitical challenges that iran prevents. what else are you hearing are concerns regarding this deal at this point? >> well you are absolutely right, stephanie, and senator mccain said what will stop iran is military development, not a

document. sort of dismissing this agreement and saying we need a strong robust military and one that is not afraid to act. he is very critical of this agreement, and we're hearing a lot about military might and potential dangers that they see in this deal. before we got the details of the deal some of the people you're hearing testify today, general dempsey and also ash carter the defense secretary voiced some concerns. and it's a bit unusual for them to voice concerns publicly. they voiced concerns about the potential of limiting the arms embargo against iran. it's something that iran was pushing for, and something that russia and china were pushing for. the u.s. is very wary of that.

the arms embargo was not lifted it stays in place for five years, and the ban on intercontinental ballistic missiles stays in place for eight years. that is not enough for some on this panel, but it is far more than was predicted, stephanie. >> and yet it will eventually be lifted under this deal and the main concern is these missiles could feasibly reach the united states. senator mccain says the deal will scale back strife in the region. >> what is more troubling are the broader military implications of this agreement. iran is not just an arm's control challenge, it is a geopolitical challenge. for years many of us have urged the administration to adopt a broader strategy to counter iran's malign activities in the

middle east unfortunately that has not happened. instead we have watched with alarm as iran's military and intelligence operatives have stepped up their destabilizing activities and increased their influence and control. >> so the defense secretary did say this is a good deal. it prevents iran from getting a nuclear weapon. but his testimony largely focused on these issues that john mccain raises about sort of general deterrence of iran's other activities it's malign activities quote unquote in the region. >> that's right. this hearing is focused on defense generally. the nuclear agreement will take center stage, but secretary carter saying that it is important that the u.s. continues to have a strong military posture. he emphasized bolstering

friendships, especially with israel. and this is really significant, stephanie, secretary kerry basically said that should iran walk away from its commitments, all options are on the table, and the u.s. does have using military force as an option. because this is his realm. but it is something that has been danced around a little bit. because the u.s. doesn't want to start instantly creating red lines. but he is telling this panel that military options are certainly on the table, even as he is supporting the administration and saying this is a good deal. >> just a reminder to viewers, the reason why we're covering this is because congress is in that 60-day review period. you and i have been talking about how in previous hearings there have been a lot of lawmakers that have not staked

out their positions on this. in this particular committee of the senate there are several senators on the republican side that have very vociferously voiced their opposition to this deal. you have senator tom cotton on this committee. >> absolutely. and tom cotton made the statement that got a lot of criticism over the last week in comparing, basically this deal the white house to ponchous pilot. he is accusing the white house as making side deals with the iaea. the white house is saying they are basically standard practice but it gets a little muddy, because we did hear susan rice refer to an agreement between

iran and the iaea saying that is something separate from this process. so while the white house is saying this does not change the playing field, republicans today will certainly take the administration to task. we'll hear mostly from the defense secretary and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, but we have secretary kerry and secretary moniz who are there to answer questions. and they will likely get harsh questions. >> i just want to go back to senator john mccain who says the deal could end up backfiring on the u.s. military if iran falls back on the agreement. >> the iran agreement not only paves iran's path to a nuclear capability, it will further -- it will further iran's emergence as a dominant military power in the middle

east. the ultimate guarantee that iran will not get a nuclear weapon is not 109-page document it is any capability of the u.s. military to do what is necessary if all else fails, and yet this agreement would enable iran to construct the advanced military option. >> again, the battle lines are sort of drawn here because senator reid addressed the concerns saying a nuclear iran would be more formidable. isn't that the crux of what is being said all along. stephanie i'm just looking back at my notes from yesterday's hearing where house

members had a chance to grill the administration officials, and there was a striking back and forth between one republican congressman who said you should have gotten a lot more concessions before you made a deal. you should have made sure americans were released from prison and made sure that iran wasn't going to engage in terrorist activities before you negotiated with them. and secretary kerry said a nuclear-free iran has to come first. we're not going to get all of those concessions before we get them to the table to talk about tabling their nuclear development program. he said that's not realistic and our first priority has to be making sure iran doesn't develop a nuclear weapon. >> libby casey on capitol hill. i want to bring in our guest for your sort of take on what you

have heard from the hearings so far. what everyone seems to agree on is that iran continues to have malign interests in destabilizing the region. yet zarif said yesterday in a press conference that he does believe this is a potential for some change in iranian policy seems to sort of collide with what the supreme leader has been saying. >> definitely stephanie. we constantly have to look at iran not as a unified body but there's different portions in the u.s. administration. it's the same case in iran. what is happening in iran we're seeing a rise of the moderates within the power structure. this nuclear deal the execution of this deal the continuation of this deal will open the door for more moderation in the iranian power structure.

the supreme leader the administration they have been able to sort of swing the supreme leader a little bit to their side. the military body in iran have been fairly quiet as far as criticizing the deal too much and -- >> but don't most people think they are against the deal. that the revolutionary guard has profited from the sanctions and are therefore against it? >> i believe they are. the portions of the iranian power structures that are the least transparent -- >> the revolutionary guard. >> big portionsover the revolutionary guard have benefited economically and security and military powers from the black market and the atmosphere that the sanctions had created. so the moderates are gaining power, sort of have been able to contain the hard liners even

the portions that are against this iran deal. and if this door opens up it's not just a nuclear deal or the economy, even iran's adventures in the region i think will be more contained by the moderates. >> that is hopeful. but i have spoken to other iranians who have the same analysis that you do. i know iranian state television have carried some of these hearings live so iranians have access to seeing this process. what do you think is going through the minds of the average iranian watching this play out here? >> iranians have been getting glimpse of it but it is the first time that the iranian television -- >> state television. >> exactly. state television is showing them what is going on. i think one of the reasons is that the obama administration has taken a more respective tone

towards the iranian government. and also it is an interesting incite into what is going on on the other side of the table. i see a lot of iranians comment on how there is a mirror image between the administration and the congress. >> as you recall several months ago, an open letter was published from some of the members of congress who oppose an iranian deal. i wonder if we can call up that letter, because sitting on today's armed services committee, including some of the senators that signed this letter, tom cotton from arkansas for example, he was one of the main writers of this open letter back in march to iran warning them against reaching a deal with the u.s. it was signed by 47 republican senators. it tells the iranian leaders quote:

putting aside whether any of that is true especially because obama has threatened to veto if congress decides to disprove the deal, how was that received? do you think the ayatollah read it or cared? >> that letter was criticized by president obama and then by zarif on the other side. but the iranian power structure definitely follows what is happening in the u.s. they are getting more familiarized with how it works. i have heard both sides, and i

think it's just -- after 35 years of no diplomatic relations and a lot of unfamiliarity with both sides for both of the societies and the power structure, i think the iranian and american societies and power structures are starting to know each other better. >> there are a lot of young people in iran they are the ones that elected this president. how much hope do they have that this will mean a different iran beyond the nuclear issue? >> there's a lot of hope in iran. like you were saying there is a huge young population 70% is under 35 years old. and their hopes and dreams are not very different than the american dream. they are tired of being isolated -- >> do they hate america? >> the majority doesn't.