The broad goal, laid out by Congress, the Obama administration, and the U.N. Security Council, was that Iran would suspend all enrichment-related activities and not be permitted a path to ever pursue a nuclear weapons program.
I believe if Mr. Obama is reelected, and Israel somehow is unable to interdict the Iranian nation from gaining nuclear weapons themselves, this administration unfortunately, I'm afraid, will allow Iran to gain a nuclear weapon and then pursue what they believe would be the traditional policy of containment.
If the nuclear dossier is referred to the U. N. Security Council, Iran will have to resume uranium enrichment.
In addition, it is very likely that United States action in Iraq caused Iran to open its nuclear facilities for international inspection and suspend its uranium enrichment activities.
The red line must be drawn on Iran's nuclear enrichment program because these enrichment facilities are the only nuclear installations that we can definitely see and credibly target.
Iran would have become a nuclear power had President Obama not united most of the world in boycotting Iranian oil sales, which crippled Iran's economy and forced it to negotiate. Other presidents tried to stop Iran's nuclear program. They failed. Obama succeeded.
As long as Iran believes that its security will be increased by having a nuclear program, it's going to pursue its program.
After a decade in public life working to stop Iran from ever acquiring nuclear weapons, I cannot support a deal giving Iran billions of dollars in sanctions relief - in return for letting it maintain an advanced nuclear program and the infrastructure of a threshold nuclear state.
The JCPOA can perhaps delay Iran's nuclear weapons program for a few years. Conversely, it has virtually guaranteed that Iran will have the freedom to build an arsenal of nuclear weapons at the end of the commitment.
Iran is not about building nuclear weapons. We don't wanna build nuclear weapons. We don't believe that nuclear weapons bring security to anybody, certainly not to us.
The Security Council decided to deal with Iran's nuclear intentions. The international community will not be willing to tolerate an Iran with a nuclear capability and an Iran that collaborates with terrorist organizations.
The alternative, no limits on Iran's nuclear program, no inspections, an Iran that's closer to a nuclear weapon, the risk of regional nuclear arms race, and the greater risk of war - all that would endanger our [American] security.
When diplomacy has been exhausted, the Security Council must become involved. Questions about Iran's nuclear activities remain unanswered, despite repeated efforts by the IAEA.
While the United States has largely been missing in action from the diplomatic game, the European Union and Iran have been making progress at developing a formula that would lead to the suspension of Iran's nuclear enrichment program and the start of serious negotiations.
We support any deal that denies Iran nuclear weapons, that has a continuous and robust inspection mechanism and that has snap-back provisions in case Iran violates the agreement. Our concern is that Iran will use the income it receives as a result of the lifting of the nuclear sanctions in order to fund its nefarious activities in the region.
Iran's Supreme Court has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons. President [Hassan] Rouhani has indicated Iran will never develop nuclear weapons. I've made clear that we respect the right of the Iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy in the context of Iran meeting its obligations.
It should be appreciated that if the arrangement on Iran's nuclear program collapses after being so patiently negotiated, and successfully implemented since 2014 despite the intense opposition of Netanyahu's Israel and its American loyalists in Congress, it would be widely perceived around the world as a huge setback in the search for regional stability and the struggle to prevent any further spread of nuclear weapons.