robert malley: sure. i think it is clear from the obama administration that defense of israel and i know john expressed controversial view. i think it is worth articulating and hearing it, but let's take your question at its face. it is true, israel feels iran is a threat to their security. the question is and this is a question that i think president obama tried to answer, is israel more secure with iran moving toward a nuclear bomb or one that is not? that is a conversation, so many conversations about, i get your concerns, let's agree if we have a deal that at a minimum for the next 10 to 15 years, ensure iran can't move toward a nuclear bomb without us knowing right away and we will stop it. that is better than the alternative, that is on that point. on partian. not only did we know about it, that was a sticking point to make sure the iaea would have access so they could find issues past military dimension of the iran program would be addressed. it was addressed, we were able to move forward with the

robert malley: not only did we not deal with them, we did it during the deal. there were two summits president obama held with gcc colleagues, with the council, go back and look at how much was discussed in term was countering iran, whether cyber, ballistic missiles, whether in the gulf, so -- question: iran, though -- robert malley: i'll get to that in a second. we were trying to make sure our allies would be comforted, they were worried about the deal. we didn't wait for that. talking about iran and other issues, it is a long story. some argue why didn't you put it on the table during the talks? the talks would still be ongoing and we would not have addressed all the issues because some of them go to the heart of iran's regime and security doctrine, it will be very tough. it is also not clear to me if -- were here, he would probably disagree, i don't think iran is ready for that kind of discussion. as trita said, first we want to see if this works, we don't trust americans, if is works, maybe we can have other conversations. secretary kerry tried many times t

so to make even more sense of this i'm joined by robert malley, senior adviser to the white house on the iran deal negotiations. the vice president of policy for the international crisis group and haggar, former spokesperson for the u.s. mission to the united nations, and a former spokesperson for terrorism and financial intelligence at the treasury department. thanks to you both for being here. haggar, start with you. i just said a lot of things and want your evaluation. is that roughly what we're looking at here? >> yes. actually a great summary. i thought it was really comprehensive. on the north korea question, sanctions make it harder, costlier and originalier for these entities to 2kwe678 the nuclear weapons. i don't want to underestimate the effect it has. >> got it. what do you think happens next? as kelly o'donnell said it's a middle ground between recertifying the agreement as the president has to do on a regular basis, and ripping up the agreement, or saying that the u.s. wants no further part of it. what does this actually mean, this middle ground? >> well, it's a middle