me, that suggests the criticism of the jcpoa was unfounded. but also, their expectation setting for north korea is too low. it was a very early embrace of a very bad leader. and so far, he has gotten the benefit of the engagement. he has gotten recognition that no other american president was willing to give. he is being treated as if he entered the world of nations as an equal. and so far, he has not changed any of his bad behavior. iran did not get any of that. i think there is a kind of double standard on this. i hope it is successful. believe me. the world would be a better place if north korea did not have nuclear weapons. i think the question of deferments to the republic of korea, obviously, we it when theo close nuclear program was ramping up. very important to be careful about relieving the pressure on north korea until there are demonstrable results that will lead to a better outcome than we've got right now. so far, i don't see that. daniel: we have time for two quick or one longer question and answer. yes, ma'am. lew.ank you, secre

are all outside of the scope of the jcp 08 and the european point of view is we will stick to the jcpoa and we value that agreement that was made. so yes to get into the head, i don't think i am going to go there. i think it is clear that we don't see eye to eye when it comes to that and it is also the sovereign right of the european countries to decide on their policy. >> i think obviously there is a total stalemate of abuse and that is not going to change anytime soon. so i think what we saw in munich was this sort of cementing of positions, the europeans are going to go forward with jcpoa and we will impose sanctions . that is sort of in a way the glass half-full of that is that it has sort of settled into an equilibrium. there will be these desktops will be threats to companies doing business in iran but iran is still in the deal and at the end of the day that is a positive thing that iran is in compliance with the jcpoa . as you said there are a lot of other things we need to address with iran that are pretty horrific but them not developing a nuclear weapon, that has to be good ne

the trump administration has withdrawn from agreements it jcpoa, -- does not like. what agreements can be worked out to take their place? russians said they are prepared extension, which is not a long time if the administration plans to use a new approach. vision of how to go about limiting or reducing dangerous arms? i would wager to say that the president has put this risk of proliferation as his highest american security interests. we will do everything we can to this is diminished. to sign anod agreement if the party will not comply with it. take down the not threat. is being violated, the very agreement they signed up for. they decided this was in their best interest. they have now decided this is not in their best interests. we are prepared to enter into negotiations on these complex arms issues around the world, including conversations about the renewal of other arm control agreements. make no mistake about the president's mission. it is to make sure that any agreement we enter into has america's best interest and it protects the american people and hasects a

sir mother trump -- sir, the trump administration has withdrawn from agreements it does not like, jcpoa and you have indicated your intentions. the question is, what new agreements can be worked out to take their place? the russians said they are prepared to discuss extension. the treaty expires in two years, which is not a lot of time if the administration plans to take a new approach. when will the united states be prepared to discuss the future of strategic arms control, and what is your vision of how to go about limiting the world's most dangerous arms? secretary pompeo: i would wager to say president trump but this -- has put this risk of proliferation as his highest american national security interest. we are doing everything we can to ensure the risk of proliferation in these weapons systems is diminished. it does no good to sign an agreement if a party is owing to -- is not going to comply with it. comply with it. the piece of paper is it is not being complied with does not reduce the risk. it does not take down that threat. the people around the world, the inf is being violated

what happens if the europeans and iran all leave the jcpoa?egin the enr h enrichment program? that is the biggest concern here, alex. >> it is not going to get resolved anytime soon. i want to ask about the statements the president made yesterday. first about president obama's posture toward north korea in 2016. >> i believe he would have gone to war with north korea. he told me he was close to starting a big war with north korea. >> we have ben rhodes who pushed back on twitter. how credible is trump's claim considering that obama never followed through on his red-line with syria? >> reporter: president trump was right. the tension was at an all-time high. not during obama's time. tensions were high in 2017 when ba obama took office. we saw the first missile test in february of 2017. then it moved through the summer with the icbm launch and the large nuclear test in september of 2017. trump is correct the tension was higher under president obama than right now. the difference is they escalated the most under president trump. that came, of cou

if you look at a time, you remember very well, ayman, when the jcpoa was being signed, president obamadable alliance against iran. not only amongst europeans but got russia and china onboard. nobody in iran believed in their heart of hearts he was going to attack the country, but they knew at the same time if there was an off chance an attack on iran, he would have the support of the community. that is not the case today. >> let me ask you this. our nbc correspondent richard engel interviewed zarif at security conference and in a nutshell, zarif said negotiating with america is difficult because end of the day you're not able to trust the americans to stick to the word of what they sign. my question is, does he have a point? are we at a stage where the words of american presidents and the documents they sign are worth nothing, if every president at a whim decides to change it? >> a very interesting question. the question of general credibility of the united states and how that will be affected by the president's actions is one thing. more interestingly and specifically, and the reason

policy specifically on abandoning the jcpoa nuclear deal.that nuclear deal remains the best way to containing iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. so it's quite an uphill task really for vice president mike pence who will be making his centerpiece speak in 20 minutes from now. he gave us a prelude of that last night during the dinner that opened this conference saying he wanted to see a new alignment against iran. certainly he has a lot of supporters here, especially israel' prime minister benjamin netanyahu, but as you point out convincing those eu nations will be much more difficult. >> thank you so much for that. >>> let's bring in "washington post" congressional reporter karen dimersian. let's pick up there with the reporting about what mike pence is expected to say in about 20 minutes. with the context of john bolton national security adviser on the 40-year anniversary of the iranian revolution reacted to some taunts from iran. listen. >> for all your boasts, for all your threats to the life of the american president, you are responsible f

you have europe on the other side, that is actually doing everything in their power to maintain the jcpoat trump got out of. because they view that as in their economic and security interests. they are not very happy at all about the pressure we are trying to put on them. that's why some of our allies didn't even show up to this event. or, they sent some lower-level diplomatic personnel to send a message. >> harris: i'm always curious how much gets done. i know they like to release and agreement or an accord -- not an accord, but some sort of communiquÉ out of these things. last month, the u.s. until chief contradicted the president's claim that iran is trying to make a nuclear weapon. here is the director of national intel, dan coats. >> while we do not believe iran is currently undertaking activities we judge necessary to produce a nuclear device, irani and officials have publicly threatened to push the boundaries of jcpoa restrictions if iran does not give the tangible financial benefits it expected from the deal. >> harris: whenever we see the sort of disconnect, i always wonder if on

spoke last night at this very conference was that iran has actually become more aggressive since the jcpoa was signed, not less. the united states reimposed sanctions that should never have been lifted in the first place and we've launched a new campaign to prevent the regime in financing its trademark terror and destruction around the world. since then, the u.a.e. has anceled imports of iranian products. they are working to stop iran's ill list mir time activities in the region. countries across the globe are working toward cutting iranian oil imports to zero. sadly, some of our leading european partners have not been nearly as cooperative. in fact, they've led the effort to create mechanisms to break up our sanctions. just two weeks ago, germany, france, and the united kingdom announced the creation of a special financing mechanism design t.d. oversee a mirror impassenger -- image transaction that would replace sanctionable international payments between e.u. businesses and iran. they call this scheme a special purpose vehicle. we call it an effort to break american sanctions against ira

when you got out of the abm treaty, the imf treaty, the jcpoa with south korea, all that makes these issues might for difficult and raises the bar for creating trust. they have to be convinced enough that we we're going to live upo our word for the going to give away something that can't be replaced. and i think their interests are such that have to go down this path but those kinds of things make it a lot more difficult. the one thing in algae probably is the same is that it took about two years to get the jcpoa, and certainly that timeframe is very consistent with what we can give you on a good case but it will not be fast. i think we haven't herself any services by that. >> north korea has a lot more leverage that iran does in many ways. number one, it has nuclear weapons. this is not a potential program. they have them. we are asking them to give up what they have already gotten which, in fact,, we don't know the exact capabilities. we make presumptions biting deal with this company before it's not too so they don't have a least some capacity to deliver them. probably not to the

it took about two years to get that jcpoa, and certainly that timeframe is very consistent with what we can give you on a good case but it will not be , fast. i think that we have not done by yourself -- ourselves in a services by that. >> north korea has a lot more leverage that iran does in many ways. number one, it has nuclear weapons. this is not a potential program. so we're asking them to give up what they have already gotten. foolish to assume that they cannot deliver them. , but tot to the u.s. south korea. perhaps tokyo. that gives him some leverage. the mere fact the seoul is 35 miles from the border, they have them built in they have , scheduled that could hit seoul. even before nuclear weapons they had a retaliatory capacity that iran does not have. iran doesn't have a significant, more special forces, the revolution regard and upset as opposed to a more effective conventional force. the potential place to hit would be israel and israel would slaughter them. israel itself has its nuclear capacity. so i think in dealing with the , north we have to take that leverage into a

we have seen that bipartisanship dissipate not only since the jpa -- since the jcpoa came into the force in the aftermath of very serious credit disapproval of democratic disapproval of the manner of the withdrawal from the jcpoa and the iran nuclear agreement. congress has been largely silent on meaningful sanctions on iran other than countering an act which passed in 2017 which i will touch on at the end of my remarks, but the vote on that bill was mostly a vote about russia at the time and not about iran. one other issue -- syria. the december announcement of the withdrawal of u.s. forces from syria -- although now there seems to be some murkiness about whether it is a condition space -- has been largely unifying in the foreign policy instead of -- foreign policy establishment in washington, d.c. this is an interesting issue i am looking for an where the president and many democratic candidates actually sound very similar. why are troops there? why should u.s. forces carried a burden? we can transfer this to somebody else, etc. and finally, as both dennis and barbara touched on, conce

i want to thank jcpoa for inviting me, and for all of you for coming out and listening and participating and engaging. please fill out the notecards. ask questions. it makes us more engaging and more fulfilling. i am the program director for the matthew shepard foundation. i joined the matthew shepard foundation after i retired from the fbi. i served with the fbi for 22 years, 20 of which was focused on our civil rights program, which encompasses hate crimes and police brutality. that is where i felt i could do the best work and be the best fbi agent, to fight for the rights of people who couldn't fight for their own rights, to give people a voice, and to give people justice. i met dennis and judy shepard. shepardigning of the law at the white house almost 10 years ago. i was completely captivated by these two people who turned their grief and tragedy into a loud and pronounced and successful voice, not just for the lgbt community, but for anyone who faces racism or bigotry or discrimination. i was so honored to work with , conducting hate crime training in many different cities and stat

has been open about displaying developments with cruise missiles which again were not part of the jcpoalear agreement, it's clear that iran wants to diversify military capabilities so that they can sustain strike from enemies, they want to demonstrate that they could deter a strike as well from the united states or from israel, remember, israel has been outfront targeting iran and military in syria and i think that's something that the iranians are concerned about but most importantly of all, i think, to us it demonstrate that is iran will find money to push ahead in spite of crippling sanctions. heather: so why would they publicize all of this and why the uptick or what seems to have been uptick in publicizing developments on their part lately in terms of timing is there something significant in that? >> yeah, state-sponsored of terrorism and they're supporting militants in iran and yemen and obviously in syria and iraq and there's no question at least in my view that they really want to demonstrate that they are going to be able to counter any attacks on their interest and they have b

>> our european allies, fortunately, were in the jcpoa or the iran deal for economic benefits of goingonomic sectors. but it is just not worth it. why would you invest in the economy that sponsor terrorism and continues to proliferate weapons that imprisons women, hangs homosexuals, and why would you celebrate the 40 year anniversary of the reigning regime? kristin: yes and what you are referring to our the reports that german diplomats and berlin silver in the 40th anniversary of the islamic revolution on monday. and the u.s. ambassador to germany says no should confuse the desire to have dialogue with a celebration marking 40 is a brutality. is that appropriate? >> i was the european allies actually listen to their meaning people and how upset they are with the regime. the iranian people are not celebrating 40 years of this regime and our european allies need to listen to them. kristin: i want to turn to the news that broke this week about a former sergeant that defected to urbana 2013.she is accused of doing some really terrible things that really undermine national security here in

then the jcpoa. >> the code name for their trip is named after john mccain. our thanks to you.d on message. democratic presidential hopefuls are hitting the campaign trail across the country, trying to distinguish themselves from the growing pack. >> let's start by changing the rules in washington. i have the biggest anticorruption bill since watergate. it is time to clean up that place. >> look, they're going to be people in this democratic primary who are going to want us to fight fire with fire. and i told you as a guy who ran a fire department, it's not a good strategy. just not really a good strategy. >> it is time that we cross the river of our divides and walk oaf the sturdy bridge that is our democracy to a higher ground in our politics. >> cory booker sounding like a stand up comedian there on the trail. now to nbc'saly who is with kamala harris in south carolina. the event is just wrapping up there at the good old church. >> that's right. she just wrapped up right before you came. so she's back behind me shaking hand sz. what's interest what about we've been seeing fr

and iran went through literally years of dense technical negotiations before the jcpoa could be arranged. the idea that north korea has an extensively massively larger nuclear program than iran di would be naive >> and what did you make of the fact that president trump opened the press conference not going right to north korea, but highlighting the u.s.'s role in helping to ease tensions between india and pakistan and also around their efforts in venezuela? what do you make of the fact that he started the press conference highlighting those developments >> well, i think it's a realization on his part that there wasn't much in the way of progress to be touted. trump was very aggressive about how they afforded staff of the singapore summit with kim. not long after he got home, the fact that he sort of tried to distract and tried to talk about the u.s. role in india and pakistan which as far as anyone could tell from the outside is extremely limited, but suggests that he understands that there is not much. it might have been the right decision to iowa, but not much in achieving a measurable

point in his speech yesterday where he told the europeans it was time for them to pull out of the jcpoa, the international nuclear deal it was time for them to stop undermining u.n. sanctions, he spoke about how iran was anti-semitic. ayatollah khamenei has called for the erasing of israel. he spoke about his experience recently in warsaw, in poland, in visiting camps there, former camps there. and spoke quite passionately about the issue of anti-semitism and attaching it to iran. jabbar zarif pushed back strongly against that. >> translator: this -- including his ignorant allegation of anti-semitism against the man described as messiah for saving the jews is both ridiculous but at the same time -- >> so he is still speaking so i think we can expect to hear more from him on these issues but the debate this morning at least is a lot about syria. and, of course, mike pence spoke about that. and we heard angela merkel here questioning the u.s.' decision to pull troops out of syria. she said that that would give iran in particular and russia greater leverage in syria. >> she has spoken abou

have to prepare a plan for the north koreans, because they, like they can't negotiate, i think, a jcpoan their own. they need help from the other side. and so, it's double preparation in that sense to really be serious about this and of course, we had the complete opposite of it going in to hanoi, like i said, it works the first time when you are having the first meeting and they are just saying, four nice principals. but when you are actually, and there were expectations this time. they had to make tangible progress. >> expectations that they set. >> that they set, right, that they set and the -- and to go in to it and have nothing ready to go is inexcusable. >> getting passed the page and a half. thank you for joining me and thanks to you as well with, that will do it for me. join me saturday morning. 8:00 eastern time. and stay tuned for continuing coverage of the hsummit. >>> good morning, everyone. it's thursday, february 28th. we are picking up the breaking news coverage this morning. president trump's summit with north korea's leader kim jong-un has come to an abrupt end. no deal

. >> bret, we've made clear that our withdrawal from the jcpoa, it was a horrible drill that was not for europeans as well. we've been encouraging them to leave the deal since the very day we did. the europeans have chosen something different and we have urged them not to disrupt the sanctions regime out there. they have come up with this thing called the s vp. we are very hopeful they say what it is and no more. we them at a place where unsanctioned goods, humanitarian aid can move through. it'll have no no impact which is to deny call social to inflict terror and strategy all around the world. >> bret: would be on sanctions does a europe wants to do on iran? >> bret, they've done more than what they've done in the previous time before but we've become good discussions around the missile program and how we might deny iran the capability to develop their missiles. the germans shut down mom connected with the terror element of the iranian army. other european armies have called out the iranians for their assassination campaign that continues to take place throughout europe. these are

and iran is in compliance with the the jcpoa and apparently the president didn't like that because thatidn't comport with his world view. why this is really serious, anderson, is if we ever have a really serious international event of a magnitude, god forbid, of a 9/11 or another god forbid confrontation with the likes of russia or china, a serious one, the president and the country are going to need the intelligence community and relying exclusively on his gut poses a real threat to this country and to his presidency. >> his gut and whatever vladimir putin is whispering to him. >> exactly. >> director clapper, good to talk to you. thank you. just got this in from an official at the justice department. deputy attorney general rod rosenstein is expected to leave the justice department in mid march. the official disputed that the timing of his departure has anything to do with the latest revelations from andrew mccabe. emphasizing that the plan is always that he would help for the transition for his successor and then leave. the new deputy attorney general could be announced as early as t

announced they were pulling out of jcpoa, europe didn't really -- weren't on board they took an opposinghe united states and actually we found out recently that they've constructed ways for european companies to continue trading with iran via back door so to speak. why do you think europe is pursuing a hands off policy also when in the context of global earnings iran has a relatively short, small piece of the pie for these european companies why are they tooting this line then >> it's because they regard the nuclear agreement as being essential for global security. they feel that this is the most crucial thing they can do to make the situation not deteriorate on the security level. but, as i was saying, despite all the measures that the european countries might engage in to keep kind of the agreement going, it's the private companies themselves that are one by one starting to pull out, regardless of what the eu is doing or eu member states are doing. and i think this is ultimately going to be the trend. >> just talking about, as you said, the ambition to continue expanding politically, b

recent information is the iranians are considering taking steps that would lessen their adherence to jcpoa as they seek to pressure the europeans to come through with the investment and trade benefits that iran hoped to gain from the deal. >> so that's a contradiction from the president's position, and one he himself attacked the intelligence chiefs on only yesterday. today, he's telling a different story. quote, just concluded a great meeting with my intel team in the oval office who told me that what they said on tuesday at the senate hearing was mischaracterized by the media, and we are very much in agreement on iran, north korea, isis, et cetera. their testimony was distorted press. i would suggest you read the complete testimony from tuesday. a false narrative is so bad for our country. i value our intelligence community. happily, we had a very good meet, and we are all on the same page. the same page. let's hear what director coats said about north korea on tuesday. >> we currently assess that north korea will seek to retain its wmd capabilities and is unlikely to completely give up

president pence in the way he instructed the european allies to leave the iran nuclear deal, the so-called jcpoa. and, of course, this is -- this is an agreement enshrined in international law through united nations resolution. and europeans think it's working. think it's keeping iran from becoming nuclear. >> on the frostiness and the weariness, we talked to senator chris coons. he was in munich. i talked to him yesterday. he said actually they were leading the largest conk congressional delegation ever so they were trying to send a signal, from the legislative branch of the united states of government, that america was still in it with its trans-atlantic allies. did that convince people like angela merkel other others there? >> well, there was a large delegation, and former vice president joe biden spoke and said, we will be back. but the sense you have is that the united states is no longer there to defend the world's security in the same way. what was alarming is listening to the alternatives. because somebody from chinese bureau got up and talking about multilateralism, which europeans beli

at the moment europeans are trying to prop up the iran nuclear deal, the jcpoa, that the americans walkedegotiating that deal, was another absentee. we will talk to her advisor in a second. but first here is the uk's foreign ministerjeremy hunt — who was there — and spoke to the bbc‘s adam easton. a it's no secret we have a different view to president trump on the run, nuclear deal, america is our closest ally but don't always agree with them. but we also do worry about the destabilising impact of iran's activities on the rest of the middle east and so that is all we want to work closely with the us, with ourfriends in europe to make sure that we can get the best of both worlds, which is work out a way to stop these destabilising activities, but also keep iran nuclearfree. as mentioned the eu's high representative for foreign affairs and security policy federica mogherini isn't attending the warsaw event. her special advisor nathalie tocci joins us from rome. thank you very much forjoining us. i want to get onto thejc poa. what you made of those comments. coming from the president was my

director haspel, one question, is iran currently abiding by the in terms of jcpoa their nuclear activities? >> senator, i think the most recent information is the iranians are considering taking steps that would lessen their adherence to jcpoa, and seek to pressure the europeans to come through with the investment and trade benefits that iran hoped to gain from the deal. >> but since the departure from the deal, they have abided by the terms. you said they are considering, but at the current moment? >> yes, they are making preparations that would increase their ability to take a step back if they make that decision. so at the moment, currently they are in compliance, but we do see them debating within themselves as they fail to realize the economic benefits that they hoped for from the deal. >> thank you. our envoy from afghanistan has said that the basis of the talks with the taliban is they would prevent afghans of course, that was the basis of our original intervention. do we believe them and are they capable of that? did they learn something from having given safe haven to osama bin la

if you want to know about jcpoa, good or bad, and have the taste great, less filling debate, there are plenty of places you can do that. what's the final anniversary? >> who knows. >> well, let me ask you a question that's different. will there be a final anniversary? >> well, comparing it with other revolutions, revolution regimes have great deal of longevity. i mean, the french revolution was defeated by outside powers in 1815. the chinese communists are still there. the cuban communists are still there. russia is not exactly a liberal democracy. so my prediction for my own lifetime is more of the same. >> sir? >> my question -- because when you read the book of wholkhomei he never mentioned it. when this idea came to khomeini and he believes it's important to implement it because this is actually -- it's minor within the sunni or even shia. what's inspired him, actually, to create the dominance of the islamic structure. >> my impression is that it was in the book. and he does mention it. he gave 130 interviews in paris where he wasn't supposed to be interviewed. and when people aske

we're not a member of jcpoa, we support that. we are interested in maintaining the global norms. i'm sure the embassy won't like i'm saying this. i wasn't particularly in favor of japan with withdrawing from the iwc. i will say that quiet. if you don't like it, just pull out. i don't think that was right. there are political reasons for that. all the countries have those issues. putting that aside, i think we are very much interested in playing the role of -- you used the word stabilizer. the region we're living in is so dynamic and dangerous. honestly speaking, i think we are preoccupied with our region. actually, japan doing something. when there was talk about peace and security legislation in 2012 '13, there was many elements, according to the recommendation, there were lots of mentioning about japan playing a more bigger role in collective security, in u.s. operations. u.n. operations, all that. that sort of faded out. we live there a tough region. we have to take care of ourselves first. that mentality is surely there. in abstract, we're interested in becoming a country wit

you know, euepa, tpp 11, jcpoa, although we're not a member of that, we strongly support that. so we are very interested in maintaining the global norms. i'm sure the embassy won't like that i'm saying this, but i wasn't particularly in favor of japan withdrawing from the iwc. if you don't like it, just pull out. i don't think that was right. but there are some political reasons for that. and other countries have those kind of issues. but, you know, putting that aside, i think we are very much interested in playing the role of, you know -- like goto-san said, you used to work -- stabilize. but, you know, the region that we're living in is so dynamic and dangerous. honestly speaking, i think we're preoccupied with our region. actually japan doing something. so when there was a talk about peace and security legislation in 2012-'13 period, there was many elements, according to the sort of recommendation, there were lots of mentions about japan playing a more bigger role in collective security, in u.n. operations and all that. but that sort of faded out, because we live in a tough

posture, and that will be driven by the national defense strategy than the decision to depart from the jcpoa. as i look across the region, iran presents concerns to me and is one of the major destabilizing factors in the region. while the nuclear weapons program is one aspect of the threat that they presented, the facilitation of domestic missiles of other lethal materials to their proxies in yemen and in syria and in iraq, other places, i think should give us very, very significant paws. the continued efforts to exercise control over critical waterways, it should give us continued cause here. iran continues to present threats to us across the region. as we look at implementing the national defense strategy -- and i agree with the folks on the competition, my best advice -- to my chain of command, would be to ensure we retain sufficient capabilities and response capabilities to deal with the threats that remain in the centcom area of responsibility. >> thank you very much. >> on behalf of the chairman, thank you very much and thank you for being here and thank you for your service. i want to

more driven by the national defense strategy than it will be by a decision to depart from the -- the jcpoa. i would just add that as i look across the region, iran does continue to present concerns to me. it is one of the major -- it is the major destabilizing factor in the region. and so while the nuclear weapons program is one aspect of the threat that they presented, their facilitation of bliskt mitchells, unmanned aerial systems, othereth lethal materials to proxies in yemen, in syria, in iraq, other places here, i think should give us very, very significant cause. their continued efforts to exercise control over critical waterways i think should give us continued cause here. so iran continues to present threats to us across the region. and as we look at the implementing the national defense strategy -- and i agree with the focused on great power competition -- my best advice back up threw my chain of command will be to ensure that we do retain sufficient capabilities and response capabilities to deal with -- to deal with the threats that remain in the centcom area of responsibility. >

administration has withdrawn from agreements it doesn't like the jcpoa, and the inf because of russian alleged violation but the question is whether what new agreements can be worked up to take their place? the russians have said they are prepared to discuss a new start extension. the treaty expires in two years which is not a lot of time if the administration plans to take a new approach. when will the united states be prepared to discuss the future of strategic arms control, and what is your vision about how to go about a laminating and reducing the world's most dangerous arms? >> these are incredibly important questions. o say thatger t president trump has put this risk of proliferation as his highest american national security interest. we're endeavoring to do everything we can to ensure that risk of proliferation, the increase in these massively -- weapon systems is diminished. an it does no good to sign agreement if the party is not going to comply with it. a piece of paper doesn't reduce the risk. it doesn't takedown that threat. the people around the world, the inf document is

nuclear piece, you can argue yourself into saying, well, they are still inside and abiding by the jcpoa and therefore what's the problem? but iranian activity is not just in the nuclear realm, it's also the conventional side, which has been an enormous problem for our friends and allies in the region and for us. i mean, before 9/11 it was iranian-sponsored proxies who had killed more americans than any other terrorist group in the world. so, you know, i think it's a problem that we have to manage. i think one of our concerns honestly was that the strategy suggests that in order to deal with these near peer competitors that we are prepared to take more risk in the region, i think we had a little bit of difficulty ascertaining from the department spokes people who we talked to where they thought that risk was coming, whether it was in an effort to contain iran or whether it was coming in count counter isil campaign for whether it was afghanistan. there was a real lack of clarity about that that and one of the reasons as admiral roughead said our concern was you are always one mass casualt