see on your screens is the iranian foreign minister. lots of news coming your way. melissa francis is going to have it all. "money" starts now. melissa: thank you. we're right on top of it. marathon negotiations, double overtime talks. looks like we have a nuclear deal with iran. we're still expecting to hear from president obama any moment here. we'll bring you those remarks live just as soon as they happen. homegrown terror. two women with ties to isis have been arrested. they were allegedly planning to detonate a bomb here in new york. unprecedented action in california with 98% of the state suffering from some level of crowd the governor is now demanding mandatory water cutbacks. it is not just california's problem. but first, we have breaking news on the nuclear talks in iran. a preliminary deal is on the table. world leaders reaching solutions on key parameters. president obama is expected to make a statement just about 15 minutes from now. let's bring in today's panel. fox business's own charlie gasparino david asman.

alongwith julian meltier, from "national review." thanks for joining us. julian what is your reaction? >> i'm very disappointed this iran deal. we've negotiated from a position of weakness when we should be negotiating from a position of strength. we'll probably end upscaling back sanctions. i think this is huge win for iran and very bad thing for stability in the middle east. >> they suggested we are giving up sanctions. so essentially we're giving up our leverage with a country and a leadership that we know lies about what they do. now, granted they're going to be inspectors on iranian soil. but they have figured out ways to bury this stuff and do all kinds of stuff with inspectors looking around before. this is what happened. you don't want to do that with a party you don't trust. >> i'm not as negative. i don't trust the iranians but i don't trust the russians, i don't trust anybody else we ever cut a deal with. i think, what you guys are overlooking is that there are

even conservatives who look at iran as a possible maybe not ally but someone that, country that will become more secular in the future. melissa: state sponsor of terror. >> in the future. that wants to join the world community. >> who says that charlie? who says that. >> henry kissinger. i will cite you that book. >> that is what the white house said. >> that is what henry kissinger said. >> the white house -- >> is henry kissinger a problem? >> you bring up a great point, within the white house i'm told by some people that have sources there that they use a code called the kissinger code. they want to do, this white house wants to do with iran what kissinger and nixon did with china. they want to bring iran in from the cold. i think it is a very bad analogy. melissa: hang on. give people a couple of details. we can go back to fighting about them. this is some of the headlines we've seen come out so far. iran's president saying there is a solution on key pa tram terse of the deal.

they will start drafting in order to finish by june 30th. germany's foreign ministry saying there is agreement on framework for first two years. current enrichment levels must be stopped. iran commits up to 25 years of constraints and controls on their nuclear program. in the first 10 years of the accord 95% of enriched rue uranium stockpile must be diluted. here i think is the important part. this is coming out of german's foreign ministry. iran nuclear program will be under unprecedented international monitoring. i want to he no what that means. >> let's be clear here. i do not support this. i have a problem with obama administration. on foreign policy matters they have been wrong a lot say dumb things isis being jv team. when nixon engaged in the shank my commune cay in 1970. there were beginnings of diplomatic relations between china and u.s., china just, left

the cultural revolution where they killed millions of people. >> understood. >> where they promised to wipe out the united states. yet, nixon, now president obama is not richard nixon but -- >> want to know the difference, charlie? the big difference, what we tried in iran china was not hegemonic power not the way that iran is right now. in yemen. in all over the middle east in south america. china was not pushing with its terrorist arm all over the world. >> are you telling me -- melissa: hang on. >> iran and terrorism. >> forget about terrorism. >> how can i forget about terrorism? melissa: one at a time. >> fomenting revolution around the world in '60s and '70s. >> here is the difference. if we want to -- melissa: let julian speak. >> talk about difference between negotiating with china and iran that was collective security. that was henry kissinger's fundamental principle. were iran we don't have shared interests in a lot of respects. we don't have allies with the

same idea what is going on with the world order. in china -- melissa: hang on. hang on one second. i think another big problem we have with this, as i read through the headlines of things in theory agreeing to they sound great but agreed to things in the past. we have no idea whether they have complied with them. >> that's right. melissa: because when you talk to the international atomic energy agency they're not allowed to go inside to make these inspections. these things would be nice if they actually did it. we don't know. >> do we have 100% certitude when we cut all arms deals with russians over years? we had deal after deal. >> charlie, we're burying lead here. you don't trust everything the obama administration foreign policy neither does congress. remember congress has, the republicans have control of both the house and senate. the senate is now going to have to deal with this issue because some of these sanctions were by executive order. some of them were by the u.s. senate. so the senate will have to

approve of those sanctions that the senate had passed in the past. that's when harry reid controlled the senate. now it is mitch mcconnell. will be a very different situation. melissa: think the other situation that we have here is we have a president is looking for a legacy. this definitely he something he wants to make a name on. >> absolutely. melissa: if it happens, turns out not a great deal down the line -- >> they all have legacies. melissa: absolutely, without question. i at this at this point the clock is very much ticking. if you look at most recent "fox news poll," president obama on iran right now, americans polled, only 33% approve the work that he is doing. 58% disapprove. these numbers have turned into a more negative direction for him. i think americans are concerned about this, especially relationship with isis and everything else. >> why he won't be able to avoid the united states senate. they're going to have to look at this agreement somehow. there are some executive order sanctions that the president could remove on his own but there are other sanctions put on by the u.s. congress that they

will not be able to get through mitch mcconnell unless he is certain this deal is better than it seems to be right now. i agree with charlie, we don't know all the details. melissa: i love your spirited conversation but let's bring in peter barnes. he is at the white house. we're waiting for president to make his remarks what i can only anticipate will be a big victory lap, peter. >> melissa the president will speak in the rose garden in a few minutes. we're still listen to iranian foreign minister. he just said i think a very insightful thing at top of the comments. quote, we're still sometime away from reaching where we want to be. he is right about that. this next round of negotiations are going to be the toughest pieces of a deal. they're going to get very technical allowable activities, for iran, whether, what kind of research and development they continue to do. what kind of centrifuges it can keep and operate. how it will, change some of these facilities.

it says, he said we're not closing any of our facilities. how these inspections will work. then of course most critically how sanctions will be peeled away. between now and june 30th a lot more of the hardest work to do. melissa: peter i have a question for you because i'm trying to sort through the headlines as they're coming out and understand the time table table in what sanctions are lifted now in terms of -- we don't know, right? >> nothing until after june 30th. they have to work out all the details of the inspections and everything else. so the technical part of this agreement still has to be negotiated. assuming that gets done and europeans would drop all of their sanctions right away, the united states would phase out its sanctions over time, along on a timetable set by u.n. weapons inspectors, on the compliance by the iranians to, however this technical agreement is worked out. so the terms of that. melissa: peter, i was getting

direction in my ear when you were talking there. you said eu would not lift their sanctions until the june 30th deadline? >> they don't have a final deal here. what they're saying we have a framework to now finish up the final deal. so, i mean unless the europeans are, i don't know, i might be wrong but what i heard to me sounded like, all of this is contingent on getting a why would the europeans take the pressure off today? that would be foolish. melissa: would truly be foolish. doesn't mean that it wouldn't happen. i'm interested in these details about will an inspection take place. not just a framework being done by june 30th. we need to see somebody actually be allowed to go in and see what's going on. for decades the international atomic energy agency have not felt like they had any visibility. let me ask the panel. don't move, peter. >> rolling out frameworks, the white house particularly, this should be, this is scary they

this to be fait accompli. that's what they're doing. they're basically telling the public this thing is done deal. get used to it. we'll debate it. fox news will debate it. but it will happen. that es when you do when frameworks happen. >> this administration pushes executive action as as far as it will go. should the senate be asked or required to sign off any agreement made by senate approval in the past, the president might jump the gun and go over their heads. melissa: let me give you a few more details right now. u.s. fact sheet on iran. the deal says iran will have from 19000 centrifuges installed today to 6104 installed under a future accord. also saying that iran has agreed to not enrich uranium over 3.67% for at least 15 years. again a lot of details worth nothing unless they're verified. >> i think it is extraordinarily

difficult to enforce this. you see this with north korea in particular. i think iran will likely end up playing same game. we scale back a little bit. we concede and they do whatever they want. if you're developing a nuclear program you benefit from delay. you benefit from strung out diplomacy from this. >> do what they want? >> yeah they will. >> correspondent they do it anyway? take a shot. melissa: they will and they did. >> why not take a shot? melissa: because sanctions. they become the quick heavyweight in region. only thing they are missing right now they are not an economic powerhouse. that's what they're missing. if we lift sanctions and iran and dell and ge in, all of a sudden iran is without question the defacto hegemony in the region. >> that is a great point. there are other people and players we have to watch very carefully right now. leading among them are saudi arabiaians. saudi arabiaians used be other than israel our strongest ally in the middle east they are

shaky alal -- alley. excuse me charlie. one of the things they have may have done is obtain a nuclear weapon. they don't have to manufacture it. they could get it from pakistan because they paid for it. >> ge, mcdonald's will open up, dell will open up tomorrow based on just, it is not going to happen that way. there will have to be proof. dell, ge, don't want to start dealing with a regime that will nationalize whatever facilities they have. melissa: according to "wall street journal" they have reached out and looking for local dealers and sites and location for apple stores. >> i think they get them. melissa: they're fleshing it out. the moment sanctions are, hang on. the moment sanctions are lifted they can move in. it is potentially good for the people except for that they are still hanging people who are homosexuals. >> look at impact on domestic politics. that is that if we want iran to become friendlier power there

are people in iran very dissatisfied with the current regime. they are putting pressure on regime. >> these are people we left hanging when the riots occurred in 2009. >> china is still murdering dissidents. >> absolutely. >> china has a gulag in china where dissidents get thrown in many years and no one ever hears from them again. we're doing business with some very, very bad people. we always have. >> i think sanctions are reinforcing discontent, putting the regime in difficult position. >> really? >> i think by relieving them we're sanctioning the regime. >> one thing to charlie's point, i think is important to keep in mind. the iranian people are the no iranian government. >> right. >> iranian government argued at a lot of people 50% of the population, even less than that. the iranians have long history of being incredible entrepreneurs. all kinds of unbelievable entrepreneurs. if they get back to that that would be great but i don't think the deal will do it. melissa: i want to continue

conversation but i have to remind out viewers what is going on. a framework has been put in place for a deal, drafting will start immediately to be finished by june this. this agreement on framework for final nuclear agreement between the west u.s. and iran. president obama is getting ready to come out. we expect him to take the mic at 2:15 in the rose garden. we'll take that live as soon as it happens. we have a few of details. we have been discussing them rather heatedly here. >> think about what capitalism did to china. >> agreed. >> compare china to 1970 minutes after the cultural revolution where mao tse-tung basically killed 100 million people compare it today. still totalitarian state. >> mao tse-tung, last breaths new leadership came in. they were very pro dunk show ping, very -- xipin-g.

melissa: hang on. >> jihadist message they have to a state of war with saudi arabia. talking about the government, not the people. the government. melissa: go ahead. >> change something. >> that i agree with you. >> why are you against this deal? >> because this deal is with the government. it allows them to build a nuclear weapon. >> possibly. >> we'll see. melissa: go ahead. >> motivation is potentially violent. >> it was not being run by ayatollahs. >> by communist revolutionariesries who were great guys. hated religion. hanging christians. it was bad stuff. >> i think the main objection that i have to the deal i think a lot of people have we're agreeing to concessions. i don't know that we'll get to go in to verify what they say. that is the problem. as they're develops things. but sanctions have already been lifted and things are already in motion and how quickly you can snap back. >> he said they're not all lifted. >> they're not all lifted. >> we're weakening our

negotiating hand. we had the potential to come at this with strong, we forced around at table. why are we backing off? why are we giving them advances to exercise their authority? >> if they give us the stiff arm, the heisman on this thing we can always say we tried, that's it. i think it is worth trying. >> then what? melissa: we go back to where we were. >> we go back to where we were. it is worth trying. it is an interesting thing. >> sanctions went in they were still pretty awful. they were still pretty awful, before the sanctions went in. there is no reason to believe they will be better without sanctions. melissa: hang on. hang on. >> very secular. melissa: let me lay out risk to you. we have alienated allies in the region. >> what allies? >> israel and saudi arabia. >> that's a bad thing. melissa: sitting down with. >> iran and making a deal. we potentially set off a nuclear arms race in the middle east. talking about freeing up sanctions on iran, you see all their neighbors getting together, you know what?

we'll develop our own weapons. whether saudi arabia. >> egypt included. >> nixon cut a teal with china basically at odds with russia. developed a friendship with brezhnev. >> china had a nuclear weapon already. >> they had lots of nuclear weapons. that is called diplomacy. it is messy and it happens. >> i think the obama administration track record on diplomacy is shoddy. i don't have a lot of faith they're doing well. what we're seeing with negotiating process -- melissa: let's bring in peter barnes sitting at white house where we're waiting for the president to come out. he was supposed to come out at 2:15. he is couple minutes behind. >> what a big surprise. melissa: not a surprise there. peter barnes. >> i want to clarify when sanctions get lifted. we have a fact sheet from the white house on this. basis the e.u. and u.n. security council sanctions would be lifted once iran has taken all of its nuclear related steps. this is according to the white house fact sheet. again, the u.s. however would

only would phase out its sanctions, over a period of 10 years as iran complies with the terms of this final agreement. if that is reached by june 30th melissa. melissa: so, sanctions would be lifted once iran has taken their nuclear-related steps? i wonder what that means? >> after june 30th, assuming there is an agreement june 30th, iran would have to start to implement provisions converting some of its facilities. giving up two-thirds of its enis at this fuelings. limiting enrichment and other once the steps are verified. it could take time. they have to go in with inspectors and look at all the facilities and make sure the centrifuges are moved. all that other stuff. then and only then it appears the e.u. would lift its sanctions along with the u.n. and the u.s. would continue its

sanctions but phase them out over time as long as iran was compliant, according to the inspectors, that as long as inspectors could confirm continue to confirm that iran is in compliance. >> okay. melissa: if that is the deal that is the deal they signed, that is ideal. >> if, actually this does give us continued leverage. the question is how much the devil is in the details. this is the white house fact sheet. we will see once the senate and other people go over the details that might not happen until june. >> i would remind my conservative friends, i consider myself a conservative -- >> i don't mind taking that charge. >> capital done great things around the world open up societies that were despotic. >> of course it is. >> i'm no fan of ayatollahs, but the cultural revolution killed 50 to 100 million people. years later, minutes later, nixon was cutting deals with chinese economists. melissa: we want to bring in

other people to react to this. steve yates former advisor to vice president dick cheney. and chris harmer institute of study of war. thanks for joining us. chris your reaction? >> first i point out technical detail the fact that the centrifuges were reduced 19,000 to 6100. if you own 6100 shares of berkshire hathaway have very valuable stock. only thing that happens they will get rid of old centrifuges, and bring in new centrifuges. only thing that matters is through-put ratio. this is ridiculous deal we will allow the islamic republic of iran to enrich uranium. we legitimatized their nuclear program. melissa: stephen yates. >> all agreements stand or fall on verification. almost all of them fail on verification. earlier comment referenced experience with north korea which is extremely instructive,

we concluded an agreement. there were verification steps and they developed alternative path to nuclear weapons anyway which exceedingly high probability with iran. it also does nothing to address iran destablizing neighbors sponsoring terrorism calling for elimination of israel, death to america et cetera. we still have a middle east on fire. technical agreement that probably has a maybe, 5% chance of implementation. melissa: chris harmer, i'm really interested in what you had to say because are you trying to say the amount which they have agreed to unravel their nuclear program still leaves them with enough power to have a bomb? >> yeah absolutely it does. that 6100 centrifuges they are acknowledging they will v that is 6100 centrifuges they will allow inspects of. doesn't go into account for all centrifuges they have hidden. amount of nuclear program they have dispersed inside of mountains. they have a massive nuclear industrial complex.

there is no way we'll get verification of this agreement. melissa: what have we agreed they can keep? this 6104 installed and you know that they won't enrich uranium over 3.67% for at least 15 years. you're saying that is not a great deal? those are not they could still go ahead have a bomb with that or they have other stuff hidden? >> you have to have a baseline of enriched-uranium to create a bomb. we're going to give them enough enriched-uranium or allow them to keep enough enriched-uranium to have what we call breakout scenario. more enriched-uranium they have quicker they can break out to have a bomb very quickly. we're legitimizing nuclear program. we're providing them a baseline from when i which they get a nuclear weapon. melissa: hang on a second, charlie. stephen yates i'm not a nuclear physicist. do you agree with what chris said? >> i do agree. it leaves them with breakout

capability. what do we do when verification breaks down? they can very, very quickly do back into production. there is no possible way to verify where things are that we don't know. >> i'm not an expert nuclear physicist either, based on my reading, threshold to build a bomb is not that great. the amount of uranium. my view is, on this thing i could be wrong, is that this is the obama administration at least trying to establish some sort of rapport with iranians to bring them possibly, because this is a country in many ways is very secular into the 21st century. >> what charlie is saying the line that you hear from the white house. that is the legacy they want to leave themselves with. they will do for iran what kissinger and nixon did for china. the problem is, john kerry charlie -- is not henry kissinger. melissa: waiting for president to come out a minute. we're waiting for secretary of state john kerry john kerry.

chris harmer, do you agree with what charlie just said. is it legacy. >> i don't care about legacy issue. i care about economics issue. iranian economy is 10 times greater than north korean economy. north koreans got nuclear weapon even under heavy sanctions. we've legitimized iranian push to get the same. this deal if goes through will pave a path to iranian nuclear weapon. problem with that, all of our alice or recent allies in the middle east will need their own nuclear weapon. neither germany or japan needed nuclear weapon because they felt secure in the american alliance. allies in the middle east no longer trust us. they understand the core nature of islamic republic of iran. we apparently do not. they will look for their own nuclear weapon because we're not longer guaranteeing it. melissa: that is a strong statement. >> i want to point out how different epthan nixon's deal with china. first of all the obama administration is looking

diplomacy is end. they want a deal to say they accomplished something diplomatically. with nixon there was legitimate end. a goal to check russia. china and united states at the time shared that interest. i would have a very difficult time pointing to a shared interest between the united states and iran. >> isis is not a shared interest? >> that is a shared interest but i don't think this is necessarily about. >> does iran care about isis or care about taking over iraq? that's why they're in iraq. not because they're worried about isis because they want iraq. melissa: here is the president of the united states. >> good afternoon, everybody. today the united states, together with our allies and partners, has reached a historic understanding with iran which if fully implemented, will prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. as president and commander-in-chief i have no greater responsibility the security of the american people and i am convinced that if this

framework leads to a final comprehensive deal it will make our country, our allies, and our world safer. this has been a long time coming. the islamic republic of iran has been advancing its nuclear program for decades. by the time i took office, iran was operating thousands of centrifuges which can produce the materials for a nuclear bomb. and iran was concealing a covert nuclear facility. i made clear that we were prepared to resolve this issue diplomatically. but only if iran came to the table in a serious way. when that did not happen, we rallied the world to impose the toughest sanctions in history, sanctions which had a profound impact on the iranian economy. now, sanctions alone could not stop iran's nuclear program but they did help bring iran to the negotiating table.

because of our diplomatic efforts the world stood with us. we were joined at the negotiating table by the world's major powers, the united kingdom, france, germany, russia, and china, as well as the european union. over a year ago, we took the first step towards today's framework with a deal to stop the progress of iran's nuclear program, and roll it back in key areas. recall that at the time, skeptics argued that iran would cheat. and that we could not verify their compliance. and interim agreement would fail. instead it succeeded exactly as intended. iran met all of its obligations. it eliminated its stockpile of dangerous nuclear material. inspections of iran's program increased. and we continued negotiations to see if we could achieve a more comprehensive deal.

today, after many months of tough, principled diplomacy we have achieved the framework for that deal. and it is a good deal. a deal that meets our core objectives. this framework would cut off every pathway that iran could take to develop a nuclear weapon iran will face strict limitations on its program. iran has a%so agreed to the most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history. so this deal is not based on trust. it is based on unprecedented verification. many key details will be finalized over the next three months and nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed but here are the basic outlines of the deal that we are working to finalize.

first, iran will not be able to pursue a bomb using plutonium because it will not develop weapons-grade plutonium. the core of its reactor in iraq will be disman healthed and -- dismantled and replaced. the dispensed fuel will be shipped out of iran for the life of the reactor. iran will not build a new heavy water reactor and iran will not reprocess fuel from its existing reactors, ever. second, this deal shuts down iran's path to a bomb using enriched-uranium. iran has agreed that its installed centrifuges will be reduced by 2/3. iran will not longer enrich uranium at fordo facility. it will not enrich uranium with advanced centrifuges for at least 10 years. vast majority of iran's stockpile of enriched-uranium will be neutralized.

today estimates indicate that iran is only two or three months away from potentially act acquiring raw materials that could be used for a single nuclear bomb. under this deal, iran will not stockpile materials needed to build a weapon. even if it violated the deal for the next decade at least iran would be a minimum of a year away from acquiring enough material for a bomb. and the strict limitations on iran's stockpile will last for 15 years. third, this deal provides the best possible defense against iran's ability to pursue a nuclear weapon covertly, that is in secret. international inspectors will have unprecedented access, not only to iranian nuclear at that facilities to the entire supply chain that supports iran's nuclear program. from uranium mills to provide raw materials to centrifuge

production and storage facilities that support the program. if iran cheats, the world will know it. if we see something suspicious, we will inspect it. iran's past efforts to weaponize this program will be addressed. with this deal iran will face more inspections than any other country in the world. so this will be a long-term deal, that addresses each path to a potential iranian nuclear bomb. there will be strict limits on iran's program for a decade additional restrictions on building new facilities or stockpiling materials will last for 15 years. unprecedented transparency measures will last for 20 years or more, indeed some will be permanent. and as a member of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty iran will never be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon.

in international community will provide relief from sanctions our own sanctions and those provided by united nations security council. those will be phased as iran takes steps to adhere to the deal. in iran finalizes deal sanctions can be snapped back into place. other sanctions on iran will be support of terrorism, human rights terrorism. people, will be enforced. let me re-emphasize our work is not yet done. the deal is not been signed. between now and end of june, the negotiators will continue to work through the details of how this framework will be fully implemented and those details matter. if there is backsliding, on the part. iranians, if it the verification and inspection mechanisms don't meet the specifications of our nuclear and security experts there will be no deal.

but if we can get this done, and iran follows through on the framework that our negotiators agreed to, we will be able to resolve one of the greatest threats to our security and to do so peacefully. given the importance of this issue i have instructed my negotiators to fully believe congress and the american people on the substance of the deal. and i welcome a robust debate in the weeks and months to come. i am confident that we can show that this deal is good for the security of the united states for our allies and for the world. for the fact is we only have three options for addressing iran's nuclear program. first, we can reach a robust and verifiable deal like this one and peacefully prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. the second option is we can bomb iran's nuclear facilities thereby starting another war in

the middle east and setting back iran's program by a few years. in other words, setting it back by a fraction of the time that this deal will set it back. meanwhile, we would insure that iran would race ahead to try to build a bomb. third, we could pull out of negotiations try to get other countries to go along and continue sanctions that are currently in place or additional ones and hope for the best. knowing that every time we have done so iran as r has not capitulated but instead advanced its program, in short order the breakout timeline would be eliminated and a nuclear arms race in the region could be triggered because of that race could be triggered because of that uncertainty. in other words the third option leads us very quickly back to whether or not take military

action. iran is not going to simply dismantle its program because we commanded to do so. that is not how the world works and that is not what history shows us. even in the face of unprecedented sanctions. we the united states reject it but they consider a fair deal. suggesting that it would give us confidence of a nuclear weapon. when you hear the inevitable credit ask a simple question. do you really think that this

verifiable deal, if fully implemented is a worse option than the war on the middle east? worth what we have done with the nuclear program. i think that the answer will be clear. i have always insisted that i will do what is necessary. it offers a more comprehensive and lasting solution. it is our best option by far. iran may try to cheat on the deal in the future. it makes it far more likely that we will know about it.

we have preserved all of the options that are currently available. i want to reaffirm what i said at the beginning of my president the. this deal offers the prospects of relief. issued against the development of nuclear weapons. this framework gives iran the opportunity to verify. it demonstrates that if iran comply it can fully rejoin the community of nations. that was before iran and it would be good for the world. of course, this eula loan, even

if fully implemented will not and this trust between our two countries. we have a difficult history between us. our concerns will remain with respect to iranian behavior. it's threats against america's friends and allies. like israel. make no mistake. we will remain facial and. it is no secret that the israeli prime minister and i do not agree. if in fact prime minister is looking for the most effective for to ensure that iran does not give a nuclear weapon this is

the best option. i think that our experts can confirm that. there will be no daylight. there is no daylight when it comes to our support for israel's security. that is why i have directed my national security team. how we can further strengthen our long-term security of creation. today, i also spoke with the king of saudi arabia. i am inviting the leaders of the country to make up the golf cooperation council to meet me at kim david this spring.

resolving the conflicts that have caused so much hardship and instability throughout the middle east. congress has, on a bipartisan basis, played a critical role in our current policies. in the coming days and weeks my administration will engage congress again. i will begin that effort by speaking with the members of the house and senate today. the issues at stake here are bigger than politics. these are matters of war and peace. they should be evaluated based on the facts. what is best for the american

people. this is not simply a deal between my administration and iran. if congress kills this deal, not based on expert analysis, then it is the united states that will be played for the failure of diplomacy. international unity will collapse. thunder can't people understand this. it is why solid majorities support a resolution to the issue. they understand the words of president kennedy who faced down the far greater threat of communism and said let us never negotiate out of fear but let us never fear to negotiate.

the american people remember that at the height of the cold war, presidents like nixon and reagan struck deals with the union. a far more dangerous adversary. despite that that adversary had the strength to do so. those agreements were not perfect. they did not and i'll threats. they made our world safer. a good deal with iran will do the same. today, i would like to express my thanks to our international partners for their steadfastness, their cooperation . i was able to speak earlier with our close allies to reaffirm that we stand shoulder to shoulder in this effort.

most of all on behalf of our nation, i want to express our thanks to john kerry and our entire negotiating team. they have worked so hard to make progress. they represent the great tradition of american diplomacy. their they are work, our work, is not yet done. success is not guaranteed. we have a historic opportunity to prevent nuclear weapons in iran and to do so peacefully. we should seize the chance. thank you. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. melissa: okay. let me boil down the two main points that he talked about air.

he reiterated again and again that this deal would cut off a path for a nuclear weapon. he also said that there will be ample and sufficient infections. that will be another. point of the faith. he mentioned he will. on the phone in a short while with benjamin netanyahu and talk to him about why this is such a big wheel. concessions offered to iran would ensure a bad deal that would endanger. this is what he said on twitter a short time ago. the president saying that he will pick up the phone and talk to him now on the heels of what he has heard is a big big three. secretary will meet any time and

speak. we have peter barnes standing by at the white house. it looks like we will probably listen in to secretary of state john kerry first. he is getting organized there at the podium. speak good evening. thank you all very much for your patience. i want to start by expressing an enormous thank you to the people and the government of switzerland for their incredible generosity. the way in which they have welcomed us is extraordinary. throughout this entire process certainly over the past week, the people of switzerland have gone above and beyond in order

to facilitate these. i do not think anyone could imagine a much more peaceful setting in order to pursue a peaceful path forward. i also want to thank the very many other nations that have provided a home to these negotiations over the past couple years. people forget that. that includes austria. incredibly generous and hosting our obligation for a long period of time. not just only hosting a number of important meetings, but also playing a critical role in getting these talks off the ground in the first place. we say thank you to turkey, russia iraq and my home country, the united states.

i, particularly, want to thank president obama. her courageous and determined in his pursuit of a diplomatic path. the day he to office, president obama has been crystal clear that a nuclear armed iran would pose a threat to our security and the security of our allies in the region. he has been just as clear that the best and most effective way to prevent that threat is through dormancy. the journey towards a diplomatic solution began years ago. i have personally been involved for about four years. others have been on this journey and some of the other members on our team were even longer than

that. announcing what's ago today we have reached a critical milestone in that quest. we are p5 + eu partners. arriving at a consensus. key parameters of an arrangement that once implemented will give the international could mean a deep confidence that iran's nuclear program is and remains peaceful. over the coming weeks with all of the conditions of 2013 joint plan of action still in effect, our experts will continue to work with to build on the parameters that we have arrived at today and finalize a

comprehensive deal by the end of june. we have said from the beginning, we will not accept just any deal. we will only accept a good deal. today, i can tell you that the political understanding with details, that we have reached a solid foundation for the good deal that we are seeking. it is the foundation for a deal that will see iran reduced its stock out of and rich uranium by 98% for 15 years. a deal with which iran will cut it and stop centrifuges by more than two thirds for 10 years. it is a deal that will increase iran's breakout time was confirmed publicly today to be two-three months.

that is the time it would take to speed up its enrichment in order to produce enough fissile 41 weapon. that will be expanded now under this deal to one year. that is, obviously as much as six times what it is today. i would like to make one more point very, very it has been misinterpreted this, it represented for much of this discussion. there will be no sunset to the deal that we are working to finalize. the parameters of this agreement will be implemented in phases. some provisions will be in place for 10 years. others will be in place for 15 years. others will be in place for 25

years. certain provisions, including many transparency measures will be in place indefinitely into the future. they will never expire. the bottom line is, under this arrangement, the international community will have confidence that the grant is exclusively peaceful providing that the provisions are adhered to. if they aren't, we have provisions that power us to do that. make certain that all pathways have been cut off. including the iranian pathway.

we are a part hours. we have agreed that the only enrichment facility they will operate moving forward with pizza facility. even that one will undergo dramatic changes. they're infrastructure will be removed. for at least the next 15 years the stockpile will remain at 300 kilograms. it is a typical level of enrichment for civilian nuclear power. we have agreed that the facility

will hold all enrichment good all enrichment. there will not even be any material present at the site. instead, the facility will be converted into a nuclear physics and technology center. we have all agreed that iran will be designed and rebuild it heavy water reactor so that it will no longer produce anything grade plutonium. the reactor's final design. redesign. through international cooperation, it will be transformed into a react to her transferring only peaceful research in nuclear medicine.

have agreed that iran will ship all of its fuel from the iraq react to her out of the country so that the reactors lifetime. iran has agreed to refrain from building any additional heavy water tours for the next 15 years, at least. at least means still open for beyond that. we have agreed that iran will face regular and this inspections. the best possible way to detect any attempt covertly produce a weapon. regular access to the declared facilities they will also be able to monitor the facilities

themselves. they will be able to do that for at least 20 years. this critical staff will help to guard against divergence of those materials to any vocation or plant. in addition, iran has agreed to allow i 88 to investigate any suspicious site or any allegations of act two cities anywhere. these are just a few. i mean a few of the key measures that will make up an extraordinarily comprehensive monitoring when and if it is finally signed and completed over the course of the next months. we have been very clear both public and privately. a final agreement will not be

applied on promises. it will rely on proof. iran to date, has honored all of the commitments that it made under the joint plan of action that we agree to in 23rd team. i ask you to think about that against the backdrop of those that predict did it would fail. international partners will provide relief in phases from the sanctions that have impacted iran's economy. and if we find at any point that iran is not complying with this agreement, the sanctions can snap back into place. so together these parameters outline a reasonable standard that iran can readily meet, and it is the standard that iran has now agreed to meet.

throughout history diplomacy has been necessary to prevent wars and to define international boundaries to design institutions and to develop global norms. simply demanding that iran capitulate makes a nice sound bite, but it's not a policy. it is not a realistic plan. so the true measure of this understanding is not whether it meets all the desires of one side at the expense of the other the test is whether or not it will leave the world safer or more secure than it would be without disagreement. and there can be no question that the comprehensive plan that we are moving toward will more than pass that test. this isn't just my assessment. it isn't just the assessment of the united states' delegation

and our experts. it is the assessment of every one of our p5+1 partners who stood up here a little while ago in front of the flags of their nations. it is the assessment of our negotiating partners, germany the u.k. china, france and russia. and all of our experts who have analyzed every aspect of this issue also join in that assessment. from the beginning we have negotiated as a team, and we are all agreed that this is the best outcome achievable, no viable alternatives, not one, would be nearly as effective as preventing -- at preventing iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon than over a period of time than the parameters providing they get completed and are signed. our political understanding arrived at today opens the door for a long-term resolution to

the international community's concerns about iran's nuclear program. now, we have no illusions about the fact that we still have a ways to travel before we'll arrive at the destination that we seek. we still have many technical details to work out on both sides and still some other issues that we acknowledge still have to be resolved. for example the duration of the u.n. arms and ballistic missile restrictions on iran. and the precise timing of and mechanism for the conversion of the iraq reactor and fordo site. and, of course, once we're able to finalize a comprehensive deal the process of implementation then remains in front of us as well. but that's a good challenge to have frankly. throughout this negotiation we have made a diligent effort to consult with our allies our partners -- including israel and

the gulf states -- and we have vigorously reaffirmed our enduring commitment to their security. no one should mistake that. and we will continue to stand by that commitment in the years and days ahead. obviously, we remain deeply concerned about iran's destabilizing actions in the region and we remain fully committed to addressing the full slate of issues that we currently have with iran. but it is because we were so concerned about those issues and about the region's security, precisely because of that concern that we believe this deal is critical. the status quo with respect to iran's nuclear program is unacceptable, and certainly we will continue to consult closely in the days ahead with the united states congress. they and we understand that an iran that