decision on what to do with the nuclear deal. i am sure he will do the right thing for the united states, the right thing for israel, the right thing for the peace of the world. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> in about 20 minutes or so, we'll hear from the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. it's law day and he's expected to review the justice of the justice department. live coverage from washington starts at about 2:00 p.m. eastern. morning onthis washington journal, a conversation about the iran nuclear deal and some of the other following -- foreign policy and national security issues facing the trump administration. s is danielle pletka from american enterprise institute. she served as a foreign and -- good morning. guest: good morning. host: how should president trump

proceed on the iran nuclear deal? guest: the president has -- up to now been reasonably cautious. you have to distinguish between what donald trump tweets and what donald trump does. is hollow thene floors of the deal. he has brought our european allies to the notion the deal needs fixing, either additions or amendments. the question is what happens on may 12? point for iran' s sanctions. if the in or out? host: if he decides not to do anything, does that mean the deal is done when it comes to the united states' perspective? guest: the matter what happens, we are doing something. or dol either do waivers not do the waivers. united states would no longer be

in compliance with its obligation. such a thing as leaving the deal. it is not a treaty. it is an executive deal. it has not been ratified by the senate. if we say we are no longer in it, it does not mean it falls apart. russia, over to europe, china, and iran. host: when it comes to revamping or rethinking these ideas, the israeli ambassador to the united nations, his thoughts on what should be done. inspectorsrnational should be granted access to nuclear sites. second, oversight is needed. third, iran must -- are those good elements or it should there be more? guest: those are good elements.

there are probably some additional things we would like. absolutely, inspections are the most important. fail toot of people understand is the inspection system under the jcpoa, iran deal, is not as comprehensive as the name of the deal would indicate. i picked out a quote, which i highlighted in an op-ed i read last year, it cannot there a fight activities -- an organization cannot verify activities. to verify.e iea you do not want to take their word for it. more snap inspections, our ability to go into certain areas where we know there is international agreement the iranians have been working on military aspects of their

program. we have not been in those places. when i say we, i do not mean america. i mean the international community, the iea. host: we are continuing our discussion with danielle pletka. if you have questions,democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to tweak your thoughts or questions, you can at @cspanwj. for other countries aside from the united states, what is their role? what do you see them serving? guest: the french and british and germans are key. the chinese and russians are not likely to go with too many changes, given their posture internationally. the chinese, maybe. the russians decided their next great adventure, other than -- is the middle east.

they will not be playing ball with us. they are partnering with the iranians in syria. they will not push back on the iranian nuclear program. it means the europeans. they will need to be with us in tightening the standards. they need to be with us in looking at eliminating the -- in the iran deal. host: can you elaborate? lasts for seven ,o eight years, then 10 years it is staggered. at a certain moment, all the fictions are off on iran's nuclear activities. obama, who was a proponent of the deal, had suggested at that point, we will need to look at what is going on. unfortunately, kicking the can

down the road is great in a democracy. it is a problem for the american people and our national security. host: what level of sway did you take away from the israeli prime minister's presentation on this? guest: i wanted to get excited about it. his address in english, going to be great. it feell flat to me. it probably does not contain a treasure trove of information, i'm sure it does. theamin netanyahu said iranians were engaged in developing five nuclear weapons. it was something they did not admit to. on the other hand, the responsibility of the , jcpoa,ional community this is why we do the deal. a thing that should be concerning for people is the

--nians told us they everything. they are not. proponents.ping key they have been keeping it in reserve. it means they had every intention of returning or availing themselves to the option of returning and sells to a robust nuclear weapons program. for us, we walkway, they are right there. host: you can ask our guest questions on @cspanwj. on the phone, democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. minnesota is where we will start on the democrat line. this is murray for danielle pletka. go ahead -- is maire for danielle pletka. go ahead. caller: i am interested in what the president said the other day. he said he would be better if we

did not have to deal with iran. it would help us with north korea. it seems disturbing to me. the deal has already been made. as far as the deal with north korea, i think china should be getting the credit. china is the one negotiating with north korea. i am sorry, but i cannot give -- everythingthis going with the negotiations. i'm interested in how the president thinks in going away withthe iran deal helping north korea with their negotiations. thank you. and itgood question shines a problem donald trump has. it is better if we did not have the deal with iran. there are arguments to be made about it. part of the problem is the

deal is you can have your cake and eat it, too. it says you do not have to completely abolish your nuclear weapons program. it is not speak to iran's other activities -- terrorism, human rights violations, oppressions of its own people, and it's concerning ballistic missile program. the message it sends to broke state is you can file in the terms of your international obligations under the treaty -- under a treaty and we will give you money, a loosey-goosey deal in which you may or may not abide by. can be out yes, it from under. then, you can do whatever you want. -- international community it can be a cycle. it is the challenge. that is what the president means when he says that. you can push back reasonably.

there are reasonable push back arguments. the issueer hand, with the north koreans is troubling. part of the problem with donald hisp is that he causes adversaries and own party to not be able to see straight. there is not any doubt, as the south koreans said, donald trump deserves credit for getting the north koreans to the table. not because he said he would be willing to meet with kim jong-un when asked, but they view him as an unpredictable character. it makes it important for them to try to get something out of it. does china deserve some credit? think north korea would have come to the table about the chinese. we could say the chinese are without credit.

as much people may dislike or disagreement or object to donald trump, he deserves some credit for it. host: elaine, independent line, hello. caller: hello. i read the agreement when it first came out. if i recall, there was a part that said the united states --ld not issue any sanctions additional sanctions against iran. part was weother cannot put our were shipped in a particular area of ac -- of a sea south of them. -- let's say they do something horrendous, like bomb israel. if we put any additional sanctions on them, the agreement goes away. is that true? guest: those are words i rarely

hear uttered. i read the jcpoa. it is a long agreement. that are very substantial -- confusing to us, even -- confusing to us, even for those of us will lived in washington for a long time. if there are additional support for terrorism, other kinds of proliferation, human rights probablys -- iran is technically in violation -- technically is an escape word -- probably in violation of its obligations under other un security council resolutions that camera at the same time as the jcpoa relative to their

ballistic missile program. it is fine. united states and the -- states is in a good place. if they bought israel, all deal -- israel, the deal is off. they would step into donald trump's hands if they do that. i do not think the iranians are stupid. i do not recall the ships in the deal. we have a robust presence in the persian gulf. host: cori on our independent line -- cory on our independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. in the weapons are second amendment for countries. only one nation has used it another, united states. for others, it is an insurance policy against aggression. that is it.

guest: i have never heard it put like that. for a lot of nations, they believe it is an insurance policy against an invasion by their neighbors or deterrence -- or a deterrence for bad guys in their neighborhood. i guess it is not a crazy way to put it. i would not have done so. [laughter] that is the problem for us. countries look at nuclear weapons programs and say to theselves, because of message the international committee has sent, it is in our interest to have these. it is in our interest to fly with international terms. one man gave him up. where is the? he is dead. the iranians kept it and they have a ton of money.

for countries like north korea, who look to the international community and past deals for signaling, we have sent a lot of bad mixed messages. what do you think is the proper application for denuclearization for the talks? guest: donald trump has come in -- has come in his mind -- i do not know what is in his mind. the president seems to think when he says denuclearization, what he means is a complete and sotal verified to north korea' weapons program. it means shutting down the reactors. it means shutting down everything else. it is not need an iran deal for north korea. it does not mean kim jong-un, your totalitarian government in

which you starve millions of people to death will be equal as long as you do not have nuclear weapons. i do not think that is what it will look like. i think you need genuine disarmament -- think he means genuine disarmament by the north koreans. koreans can live by it, then there is a deal to be had. host: from the north korean leader's perspective, what is he seeking from the u.s. in this? guest: the united states not to invade north korea. my guess is he wants more. my guess is he wants u.s. troops out of south korea. my guess is he wants to have peace with south korea that enables him to prop up his dictatorship while being able to cheat on having nuclear weapons,

so he has an insurance policy for the future. that is a line donald trump and his administration have to walk. they want to take the opportunity because crazy things have happened in history. they wanted to the opportunity, but have to make sure it is real. host: the discussion between the north and south korean leader, is this for show? -- show or substance? guest: it is for substance, but for north korea. north korea is interested in splitting off south korea from their american friends. it was the tactic with kim jong-un's father. in previous talks, this is their game. a need money. -- they need money. this is a very poor country. --re economy has stabilized their economy has stabilized. my colic has outstanding

commentary -- my colleague has outstanding commentary. they want money. they want to trade with the world. they want to buy stuff. they want to pretend to sell stuff. they want access to international banking. the best way to get them is to pull over to the guys in seoul and said we -- and say we want peace and american are saying no peace. that is their game. it is working out for them. host: edward on the republican line, go ahead. caller: hello. i would like to bring the conversation away from the hardliners in iran and israel. now, it is going to be let's bomb the iranians because they

want to do the same. my question is what about israel developing their nuclear weapons in secret? we seem to have forgotten about it. we have one people, one planet. we need to work together. guest: those are beautiful sentiments, thank you. the mostortant to note serious victims of iranian , perhaps the syrians, but the iranian people who are good people. they are oppressed beneath a system within the islamic republic they do not deserve, like, or want. iran is a police state. they just banned telegraph the app because they do not want people communicating to each other. why?

they are afraid of their people. we have a great relationship with the israeli people. one thing that has happened in this modern era is we sort out who we worry into not worry about. not worry about their nuclear weapons program. we worry less about them attacking their neighbors. we worry less about them using this as a tool to bully others. israel is in the same boat. that is why we do not talk about israel as much. when we worry about nuclear weapons, it is in the hands of that leaders, that governments. we are talking about north korea, iran, at times, iraq,

pakistan. why do not we talk about more about pakistan? that is where we found osama bin laden. we should talk more about it. host: john from virginia on the independent line, go ahead. hello? in florida onith the republican line. caller: hello. i think the credit should not go to china. , theywith kim jong-un on theirttack dog southern flank. they will never let it go. they will never let it go. they will do everything in the world they can to keep him in place because it protects their southern borders against us and south korea. iran, you will

never be able to trust them. they have been killing our troops for the past 10 years with roadside bombs. they are untestable. as soon as they get the nukes, they will do exactly what they said they will do. that is how i feel about it. i do not know how you feel about it, daniel. -- danielle. guest: on the buffer state what keeps us as we cannot trust with xi jinping -- it is something we should worry about. that is right. north korea has been a buffer state for china. it has been the buffer between the troops i talked about. if the chinese are going to support the north koreans, what

would make it worth it? at aei what scholars have written about. they write well on this. we will leave this for remarks from ron rosenstein. people comment on the role of law this afternoon. -- he will comment on the role of law in this afternoon. >> as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of law day, a day established by president dwight the as in our -- dwight d. eisenhower in 1950 eight, to mark the nation's commitment to the rule of law. we look forward to hearing from the deputy attorney general today as he discusses the rule of law, the first amendment, and the mission of the department of justice. mr. rosenstein