joined now by my colleague, william brangham, who reported earlier this year from iran, and by david sanger of the new york times. he's in vienna covering the talks and joins us now via skype. >> thanks hari. david thanks for joining us. the president this morning said there are still some significant gaps in the negotiations. what can we likely expect in the next day as the negotiations wrap up? >> well i think you can expect that these negotiations are not going to wrap up. that what's going to happen here is that you'll get an extension that may well be wrapped in some kind of description of the progress they've made so far. you know william, they have very extensive drafts and annexes of an agreement but they don't have political decisions from the supreme leader in iran or from president obama on some majors issues of dispute including how many centrifuges iran could be left with, the fuel stock piles, which one would be sent to russia and the questions of sanctions. and all of these require decisions that nobody's been willing to make even though this negotiation has been going on for

this panel includes two journalists -- on my left, david sanger of "the new york times," and a nationalavid was a public policy scholar. he more recently wrote "the way of the knife." not long ago, a meeting on iran's nuclear challenges would have focused on the possibility of u.s. airstrikes on iran. now nuclear diplomacy is playing out against the backdrops of u.s. airstrikes against isis, in tacit alignment with iran. negotiators just meant in oman to narrow the gap between the two sides. before hand, president obama wrote to the supreme leader, urging him not to miss a historic opportunity. so what are the prospects for a nuclear deal? the division of labor on this panel is that i will frame the nuclear issue within the broader context of u.s.-iranian relations. david sager will follow with a more detailed assessment of the nuclear diplomacy. mark zandi will conclude to assess how the tumultuous regional developments, particularly the war against isis, will affect nuclear negotiations. after these initial presentations we will have an exchange among the three of us and open the floo

to get us up to speed on the latest, i'm joined by david sanger of the "new york times," who is covering talks in vienna. this morning, when i read the news, seemed both parties were sort of leading the negotiating -- leaving the negotiating table and now you're telling us they met twiessments what happened? >> well, it's been a day of high drama. it's not been clear that it's been a day of much progress. much of this right now may have been last 72 hours brinksmanship. the word this morning was that, after one more meeting, the iranian negotiate was going to fly back to tehran, presumably, hhari, to get instructioned abot last-minute concessions. we heard the secretary of state was not going to wait for his iranian counterpart to return. by the end of the evening, they were both staying. we can't tell if it was because of progress or if there was no reason to go back and propose anything to iran's supreme leader. >> sreenivasan: let's talk about what they're talking about. the deadline less than 72 hours away. how big is the gap in what both sides want? >> the gap in what they want is p

for more, we want to bring in "the new york times" chief washington correspondent david sanger. nice to see you in person. >> good to be with you. >> first on the release of these american prisoners from north korea, if we can very quickly, you sort of noted the difference in approach the president's taking, writing a long letter to the ayatollah al khomeini. just last week we learned about that. now he sent james clapper. he's not sending a diplomat to north korea. >> he sure wasn't. since the alternative might have been dennis rodman. >> rodman's claiming some credit here, right? >> of course, of course. look, james clapper, who's the director of national intelligence, did a great tactical move here. he went in. he presented this letter. apparently there was no quid pro quo. he emerged with these two americans. and they're back home. and as the president said, that's a good news story. but strategically, there was nothing in this to show any kind of opening to north korea. and it's interesting that kim jong- jong-un, the north korean leader, unpredictable, missing for the past

on my left, david sanger. a national security coral responsible kent r dent for the new york times. david was a public policy scholar at the center when he wrote his book, the inheritance, the world obama con fronts and the challenge to power. mark misetti more recently wrote the war at the ends of the earth. >> not long ago, a meeting on iran's nuclear challenge would have focused on the possibility with the focus on iran. now, nuclear policy is playing against the backdrops against isis and alignmented with iran. with the november 24th negotiating deadline i told him urging him not to miss a historic opportunity. so what are the prospects from the nuclear deal. the division is i'll frame the nuclear issue within the broader context. david sanger will follow with a more details assessment and the perm nant members of the security council plus germany. and then mark misetti will conclude by widening the october with multity-rejal developments will affect the nuclear negotiations. >> the iran trade-off between transparency. iran would maintain a limited nuclear program in return for t

let me turn to david sanger, who will provide more details of the negotiation. >> thank you. i think michael would have been extremely pleased to see this room completely jammed in a session that is much more about him than about anything we can say. i was lucky enough to be working on finishing up the inheritance here when michael first joined as a fellow. at the end of the day, he would come by, my office or his office, and his endless curiosity for how all this would play out -- his love of the wonderfully ambiguous nature of dealing with the iranians, the questions of whether or not the specifics of the deal led to a much greater olitical reconciliation, a subject that my colleague will take up in a moment, really fascinated him. but he was also wonderfully competitive, in that way that someone who has been a reporter all his life can be. when i reported in the book i wrote after i had done the inheritance that the united states had been involved in a lengthy cyber sabotage effort against the iranian nuclear program, one that was really the first use of a cyber weapon by

david sanger from the "new york times."alks are likely to resume. until they resume, what is being done to hold iran accountable? they come through the main sitesdaly in some cases. this is the sdrim agreement and it does not in the end drinking or shorten the amount of time to produce one full war for nuclear fuel. it doesn't work over the long-term, but for six or seven months, you would have to say that the united states and the europeans were in better shape than a year ago. >> let's talk about this. you quoted prime minister netanyahu in a piece he wrote saying no deal is better than a bad deal. the right deal is needed to dismantle iran's capacity to make atomic bombs. this result is better, a lot better. what is it that israel would hope for right now? what they will settle for and what they hope for. they are two different things. iran won't give up the capacity. can they have a narrative and a victory and the right to enrich and as soon as an agreement is done with, they could enrich and fall. the three dig issues

with that, let me turn to david sanger. who will provide more detailed assessment of the negotiations themselves. >> i think michael would be pleased to see this room completely jammed in a session that while we're here to speak to you is really much more about him than anything we can say. finishing up the inheritance here when michael first joined as a fellow and you know, at the end of the day, he would come by either my office or his office and his endless curiosity for for how this would play out, his love of the wonderfully ambiguous nature of dealing with the iranian. the questions of whether or not the specifics of the deal led to a much greater political kind of reconciliation, a subject that my great colleague, mark, will take up in a moment. he was also wonderfully into the weeds. and wonderfully competitive in that way that somebody's who's been a reporter all his life can be. when i r reported in the book after i wrote after i had done the inter hans than the united states had been involved in a lengthy cyber s