going on and what is usual. things we do normally i things that are out of the ordinary, active statement itself. as john bolton said, i don't think u.s. is looking for war or the iranians looking for war. the challenge we are facing is because we have no challenge -- channels of mitigation between u.s. and tejano. -- tehran. heading find ourselves into confrontation because of miscalculation. host: there have been some reports that iran is moving ballistic missiles around the region. have you seen any evidence of this? guest: iran has a very broad network of terrorist groups that they support throughout the region. they support them by giving them weapons, typically by training them and helping equip them. it is not unusual. i have not personally seen evidence of this but it is not

unusual for that to happen. host: since the nuclear deal was signed in 2015, has there been any evidence that iran has not been in compliance with the deal they signed? guest: the deal was signed in 2015, it started to be enforced in 2016, one year later. the international atomic energy agency, the u.n. body that verifies these types of agreements and verifies'various countries nuclear programs has come out and verified that iran is implementing its nuclear provisions under the nuclear deal. obviously, things may change very soon. run's president said if i the socket -- iran to socket -- iran does not get what it is looking for, it might violate

part of the deal. host: starting today, iran does not produce heavy water limited. the e.u. will face iran's further actions if they cannot fulfill obligations within the next 60 days and secure iran's interests. guest: the broader statement he made was actually 30 minutes. the tweet does not capture all the nuance. the statement says iran is europeans,ays to the chinese and russians who are our partners, who are still of lamenting the deal after the u.s. withdrawal. the idea is to give some sort of window to the rest of the parties to continue the implementation of the deal, give some type of economic benefit to deal largelyed the for sanctions relief. it is -- they are flexing their

muscles a little bit. they are sending strong signals. it is a response to domestic pressure that has been mounting. speaking to a member of the rand corporation. if you want to join this conversation, we are opening up our phone line steel. if you are a democrat, call (202) 748-8000. if you are a republican, want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. independents, your phone line is (202) 748-8002. we are always reading social media. what is the current status of iran's nuclear capability? guest: we have a very clear picture of their activities. currently being

observed by their national atomic energy agency, which keeps reporting frequently sang what is going on and how they are implementing the deal. largelyram right now is verified by the international atomic energy see agency. host: eric is calling from compton, california on the democratic lane. good morning. caller: good morning. could you please explain to america that based upon the u.n. treaty that there is no nuclear weapons allowed south of the 33rd degree parallel line. i ran is a country that sits south of the 33rd degree parallel line. they have already sworn it would not make a nuclear weapon. sits above the 33rd

degree parallel line. they have every right to make nuclear weapons. we are to the world why being misled, misinformed, not just by donald trump but the media. there are no nuclear weapons allowed south of the 33rd degree parallel line. it is misinformation to try to make a war. guest: the nuclear nonproliferation treaty you are discussing does indeed bar most countries in the world from acquiring a nuclear weapon. north korea was a party to the agreement before. it would through from the agreement and is no longer bound by it. the effort to bring north korea -- north korea's nuclear program under check are different than iran's. it is a member of it and it is not meant to be banned from

having nuclear weapons under the treaty. part of the reason we have had these tensions with iran and why there are negotiations to begin , is in fact because i ran was piloting some of the terms and some of the obligations it has under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. it was undertaking activities it was not supposed to under the treaty. the negotiations were meant to bring iran into compliance with its international obligations. peter from talk to florida on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. -- i wish weguest could get some people who are saying this is just insane,

starting another war with iran. we tore up the agreement. if this is about nukes, can your guest tell us why do -- israel gets 200 nuclear warheads and nobody else in the middle east does. i am so tired as an american citizen. we took out iraq overlies and now we tear iran iran up in agreement with and we are moving aircraft carriers and and we are ready to start another war. who does this benefit? iran is not a threat to us. we are setting up these sanctions, just like with venezuela. blockade, youaval do a banking blockade to where they can't do business. our foreign policy is turning into insanity. guest: there is a lot to unpack care. i want to start with israel. israel is reason why not brought into the conversation about nuclear

weapons, it is a legal one. it is about the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. israel is not a party. israel does not have to adhere to a no nuclear weapon deal like iran is spread the second thing you point out and you are right you highlighted is iran is not just a nuclear threat to the united states, it has a number of other activities that challenge the u.s. you are right to point out that iran is not annexed essential threat against the u.s., like a country like china could be. they have a weak military that has been depleted over the last 40 years print they largely undertake activities that are supporting various groups across the region to make up for their lack of conventional capabilities.

it is important to put it all in perspective. i don't think the u.s. is necessarily looking to enter a conflict. musclesnt we flex our in the region is to try to avoid it. it is important to be clear about the fact things i can escalate quickly. you have two countries that operate in such close proximity to each other in so many places in the region. host: president trump on thursday was asked what iran did that caused him to send aircraft carriers to the region. information that you do not want to know about. they were very threatening. we have to have great security for this country and for a lot of other places.

hopefully that will not happen. we have one of the most powerful ships in the world that is loaded up and we don't want to have to do anything. i would like to see iran call me. host: it is not just the abraham lincoln carrier group going over a story in usas today the talks about another group. the pentagon announced a marine transport ship and a patriot tosile battery will be added counter middle east threats. marines will head to the region, along with a patriot missile battery. patriot missile's can shoot down cruise missiles. acting defense secretary approved the ship to fulfill a request from u.s. central command to counter what the military has said were credible threats from iran.

earlier this week, the pentagon announced the aircraft carrier uss abraham lincoln would arrive in the region sooner than originally planned, along with b-52 bombers. iran has said it will start complying with some parts of the nuclear deal. what is going to happen over the next few days? what is going on? guest: both sides are trying to send signals to each other. whatever threats they see from the other party is not going to -- they are going to meet the threats they see from the other party. arethe u.s., the threats mostly clients that iran has in the region. perceivedit is the buildup of military power in it. what is going to happen in the next few weeks, there are several things. there is one issue on the

nuclear front, which remains to be seen whether or not iran takes action as it has said to test the limits of the nuclear deal. are looking to talk to the europeans to reach a settlement on how to facilitate trade on some goods with europe. in the next 60 days, we may go back to continuing the implementation of the nuclear deal like nothing had happened. if that did not happen, we may start to see violations, which would trigger actions from the international community. the persian gulf region, i think both parties are trying to avoid an all-out conflict, but it is really difficult when you have this level of activity and to countries that are largely not talking to each other. host: the administration announced more sanctions on iran. it is also the policy of the

u.s. to deny the iranian government revenue, including revenue derived from the export of products from iran and steel, aluminum, and copper that may be used to provide funding or support for the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, and regional expansion. what effect have sanctions had on iran so far, and what additional effect will these new sanctions have if any? guest: for the long time, but we have tried to do is make sanctions as targeted as possible so we are not affecting the life of ordinary people when we impose them. that is not always been the case in the past year. the administration has focused manyunting pressure on as sanctions as possible on iran. that it is is affecting not just the regime, and we can talk about whether or

not it is changing their behavior, i am not convinced it is so far, but it is affecting the lives of ordinary people. that cancerding patients don't have the treatment they need because it is expensive, it is not being brought in. the prices have skyrocketed. people are having a hard time making and sneak. that is challenging for the u.s. because in the long run, this is not the best way to work with the arena and people. -- iranian people. host: let's talk to vincent from oklahoma. caller: hello. i have a few muslim friends that go to the mosque. there is a group in iran that will get rid of the tensions.

host: what was your question? i think we lost vincent. let's go to jeff from washington, d.c. caller: good morning. is about all this the propagatingd cnn about something that is not even in reality? there is a buildup. you see world leaders, you see the u.n. involved. activitysudden we see iran,pes moving towards which there is nothing there. after netanyahu was elected, you see all this activity building within a day

or two. then you have someone sitting in c-span that is propagating. the united states is not going to do anything. iran is not going to do anything. peopleare doing -- the oh, are like -- sitting, this is diplomacy. we want somebody to tell us that this is strange that there is nothing going on. all of a sudden because iran says they will not negotiate with the administration. for the president to say i want somebody to pick up and call me? is this diplomacy? how are we dealing with this kind of behavior? host: is there any possibility of a high-level meeting between president trump and the leader of iran?

guest: that is a great question. i don't see it happening any time in the next couple of years. i think the iranians are essentially waiting to see what happens in november 2020 and make a decision then. that is part of why they announced they are going to get the europeans sometime. that is giving them some local capital at home to wait out the trump administration. what was seen this past week from the administration was a clear signal that he wants to negotiate. pompeo tweeted yesterday two tweets or the day before where he first said we will meet iran's activities with force, and essentially deterring the iranians. said weame time he also

are willing to negotiate. comments earlier same thing. for the first time in a long time, we are here to negotiate. i don't think there is any appetite for it. the iranians said if they were to negotiate, it would have to be within the nuclear deal. the u.s. is not going back into a nuclear deal. the fact that we are starting with some signals that the u.s. is willing to negotiate is a good start. host: what does the iranian government think it can gain with a change in administration? you said they are waiting for the 2020 election. guest: a number of democrats have said they would rejoin the nuclear deal if iran continues to comply with it over the next two years. essentially what the iranians are waiting for is to see if there will be a change in whether ation or democratic president would reenter a nuclear deal.

if president trump is reelected, they have to think about whether or not they want to negotiate because four more years of economic challenges and sanctions may not be tenable. pete froms talk to phoenix, arizona on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i believe the u.s. has lost its moral conscience. the u.s. is already at war with iran. they are not allowing iran to sell any of its oil anywhere in the europeans are afraid to do nothing. this is what you call total war. a war directed against people. they are going to start the people in tehran. absolutely despicable. total war in yemen.

saudi arabia trying to keep the people from getting food. thousands of children are dying every day. the country is on the verge of starvation. the president is going to veto it. iran and its allies have been attacked by u.s. allies since it's inception. we backstabbed saddam hussein in iraq and started a war. lebanon in 1982. the plo off of its borders. once they did that come the u.s. got in there. iran gave support to lebanon.

[indiscernible] netanyahu even got voted out of office for it. host: respond to some of what he said. guest: i think it is true some of the u.s. interventions in the region, starting with afghanistan in 2001 and iraq in 2003 have very much helped iran. steps secretary pompeo was laying out in the segments we have heard are actually largely for the opportunities they got after 9/11 with the u.s. invasion of afghanistan and iraq are at we have to be careful when we think about military intervention in the region. it has typically not turned out to well for the u.s. to say the least. in some ways it has been very counterproductive. let's talk to chris from

boston, massachusetts on the democratic line. good morning. caller: you have a secretary of state who is on the record as saying that donald trump was sent like god to protect israel. the same lunatic secretary of state has also said that we are living in the end times and the rapture is due. we have a sociopathic warmongering national security advisor. we also have donald trump who gets his instructions on middle who policy from his donor, has so far donated over $25 million to donald trump. to make all those enemies of israel to weaken. that is all you need to know about the middle east. have a nice day. host: any response to any of

that? guest: i think one thing is there is a lot of tension within the administration we are saying about foreign policy in general and the middle east in particular. john bolton has a long track record of wanting more pressure, more muscles, more response to the middle east. individuals within the administration who are much more reluctant to use military force, who want to drop back and focus on some other issues. there is a lot of tension, and we are seeing that play out as we watch what is going on between the u.s. and iran. host: let's see if we can get one more caller, let's see if we can get to tom from california. caller: good morning. i think the way this stuff in the middle east is going is we should not be intervening in stuff.

we should keep a watch on guys. i really think if the united states and donald trump in particular and bolton and pompeo don't watch it, there got to get the fear of god put into them because these guys are tired of what we are doing to them. they just ought to understand things can go serious real quick. i don't think we should be doing what we are doing. that is really what i have to say about that. thank you. host: is the policy of the u.s. in iran regime change? guest: in some quarters certainly there are people who like to see the regime collapse. years, we have had a lot of challenges with the regime. i think in general nobody would be sad to see the current regime collapse. i think the big question is what comes next. if these guys go, who replaces them.

is there going to be a government we can live with that is not doing all the things we don't like about iranian policy? will there be a worse alternative? there are people in the administration and the foreign policy establishment who are seeking regime change, but there are people who would genuinely like to have negotiations and try to settle all the problems we have with their policies in a diplomatic way. host: this is washington so we have to ask the election question. playill tensions with iran in the 2020 presidential election? deal was anuclear major foreign policy issue in 2016. president trump started campaigning by talking about withdrawing from the nuclear deal. he has done exactly that. i think in 2020 we will be talking about it, if the deal steel exists -- still exists.

either about an alternative or which we should be doing. the bigger question is, does foreign policy matter for most voters when they go to the ballot box? host: we would like to thank ariane tabatabai of the rand corporation for coming in to help us figure >> we are live in bedford, new hampshire where we are waiting presidentialc candidate beto o'rourke to speak to reporters. it is scheduled to start shortly. ♪ gun buy me a flute and a

that shoots going nowhere ♪ down ingoing to fly lazy ♪ for better orit work to speak this morning and hatcher, here is more from "washington journal."

guest: to ensure that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender people have equal protections in our country and equal opportunity to have a job, rent an apartment, obtain credit, and serve on juries. host: why do you think this is needed right now? lgbtq we know that among people one in for experienced discrimination in the last year alone. that is not even over the course of a lifetime. discrimination is real and prevalent. we need to have policy solutions that are permanent and guaranteed for all americans. host: of course, this would be a national law if approved by congress and signed by president trump. are their state versions of this equality law already? guest: there are. we have 20 states plus the district of columbia that have conference of nondiscrimination laws on the bookfo