...

Q    Jay, I’m sure you’ve noticed this -- the Iranians seem to be calling into question the way the White House has characterized the interim nuclear deal.  In an interview with CNN, the foreign minister said, “The White House tries to portray it as basically a dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program.  That is the word they use time and again,” referring to the word “dismantle” or “dismantling.”  We’ve gone through the records and it looks like the White House has only used that word a couple of times, but I’m just curious:  What is your response to that?  Are they trying to play to a domestic political audience?  What do you think is going on?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, you answered for me.  We’ve said before that we expected the Iranian government to spin the commitments they made under the Joint Plan of Action for their domestic political purposes.  We saw that in November, we saw that earlier this month, and clearly we’re seeing it again. 

When it comes to the commitments Iran has made as part of the Joint Plan of Action and the implementation of it, we’ve always been clear that the first step will halt progress on Iran’s nuclear program and roll it back in key respects, stopping the advance of the program for the first time in nearly a decade, and introducing unprecedented transparency into Iran’s nuclear activities while we negotiate a long-term comprehensive solution.

Now, we have also been clear that as part of that comprehensive agreement, should it be reached, Iran will be required to agree to strict limits and constraints on all aspects of its nuclear program to include the dismantlement of significant portions of its nuclear infrastructure in order to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon in the future.

So I think the dismantlement aspect of this has to do with a comprehensive solution.  The agreements that Iran made as part of the Joint Plan of Action, the initial agreement with the P5-plus-1 have been clearly spelled out.  And how Iranian officials want to characterize it I think has to be viewed through the prism of the audience they’re speaking to. 

What matters to us and to our partners in the P5-plus-1, and I think to the broader international community, is what Iran actually does, and whether or not it adheres to the commitments it makes.  And there is a level of transparency and verifiability in this agreement that will allow the P5-plus-1 and the IAEA to make assessments about compliance.  And as you know, the modest changes to sanctions that have been made as part of this agreement work like a spigot -- they don't all come at once; that any violation or failure to comply by Iran could be met by a reversal of those changes. 

So this is all about what they do, not what they say.  And it is absolutely the right thing to do to test whether or not Iran is serious about coming into compliance with its international obligations, providing in a verifiable, transparent way proof that they are not pursuing a nuclear weapon, because that is in the world's benefit and in Iran's benefit, in our view.

Q    And, Jay, just to go further with that though, the foreign minister does say in the interview, “We are not dismantling any centrifuges.  We are not dismantling any equipment.”  President Rouhani said in a separate interview, “We are not going to destroy any centrifuges.”  Are they going rogue on this deal?

MR. CARNEY:  Jim, I know it's a CNN interview, and I know that's part of this.

Q    I'm sorry, what does that mean?

MR. CARNEY:  I think we've answered repeatedly that how Iranian officials characterize this for a domestic audience matters far less to us than what they are actually doing.  And the fact is the IAEA on Monday verified in a written report and subsequent briefing for P5-plus-1 technical experts that Iran has, among other things, stopped producing 20 percent-enriched uranium, has disabled the configuration of the centrifuge cascades Iran has been using to produce it, and has begun diluting its existing stockpile of 20 percent-enriched uranium.  In addition, it has not installed additional centrifuges at Natanz or Fordow.  That's all in compliance with the clearly spelled-out requirements of the agreement.  So we take what the IAEA says and assesses and verifies as our guide to whether or not Iran is doing what it said it would do.

Q    Have you given any further consideration to the idea that perhaps the White House should release the text of the deal so people can see it, read it?

MR. CARNEY:  Well I think, again, as I explained last week that we have provided that text to members of Congress and we provided a summary of that text to the public.  This is a document that the IAEA -- it’s basically guidance for the IAEA for the implementation of the Joint Plan of Action.

...

Q    Jay, back to Iran.  Another thing President Rouhani said is on -- impacts American business.  And he said in Davos that he believes because of what he -- I believe he called it "constructive engagement" with the U.S.  He invited American businesses to come in.  I know previously the administration has said Iran is still closed for business.  Can you clarify now in this six-month period -- can American businesses start talking to Iran?

MR. CARNEY:  The sanctions regime that exists has not changed.  And violation of the sanctions that remain in place will be no more acceptable or tolerated than it has in the past.  I think we have been clear that the modest sanctions relief that comes as part of the Joint Plan of Action is limited to the very specific aspects that have been detailed in the agreement.  So I think that's all there is.  And the point that we made again and again is that the sanctions structure and the regime remains in place.  We continue to enforce all aspects of it, and have demonstrated that I think in recent weeks.

If Iran reaches a comprehensive solution with the P5-plus-1, obviously part of that would be consideration of further measures to end Iran's isolation and improve their economy.  But we are a long way from that.  And we have been clear that this is going to be a difficult process.  And we are simply committed, with our P5-plus-1 partners, to testing whether or not Iran is serious about resolving this conflict with the international community.

Q    On that question, when you continue to say that on their nuclear comments that they're just making these comments for domestic political consumption, CNN is broadcast outside of Iran, right, you can confirm?

MR. CARNEY:  Yes, I've seen it here.  (Laughter.)

Q    So aren't they also sending a message to you, to the President, to the U.S.?  It's not just domestic political consumption if they're talking to a broader audience.

MR. CARNEY:  Ed, what I can tell you is that we are looking at what the Iranians are actually doing -- are they complying with the very specific commitments they made in the Joint Plan of Action.  And as I mentioned earlier to Jim, representing both CNN and CNN International here --

Q    Thank you.  (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY:  -- the fact is that on Monday, the IAEA verified in a written report and subsequent briefing for P5-plus-1 technical experts that Iran has, among other things, stopped producing 20 percent-enriched uranium; disabled the configuration of the centrifuge cascades Iran has been using to produce it; has begun diluting its existing stockpile of 20 percent-enriched uranium; and has not installed additional centrifuges at Natanz or Fordow. 

So those are the specific actions they are committed to or bound to through the agreement to take, and the IAEA is verifying that they are moving forward on that.  How the leaders characterize the agreement matters far less to us than whether or not they meet their commitments in the agreement.

Q    But David Albright, who I think you would agree is an independent expert on all of this, released a report, his think tank, just a few days ago that said specifically that Iran has to destroy 15,000 centrifuges as part of a final deal to make sure they don’t get breakout technology, make sure they don’t get nuclear weapons.  So my question is, based on President Rouhani saying we’re not going to destroy any centrifuges --

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think the quote was -- again, I don’t speak Farsi, and again it matters less to us what they say than what they do, but “we are not” is different from “we will not.”  And there is absolutely -- there is no disagreement that when it comes to --

Q    He said -- not under any -- will you destroy centrifuges?  Not under any circumstances.

MR. CARNEY:  Iran will be required, under a comprehensive solution, to agree to strict limits and constraints on all aspects of its nuclear program to include the dismantlement of significant portions of its nuclear infrastructure. 

Now, we are just at the beginning of this process.  If Iran fails to comply with the agreements it’s made or if Iran fails to reach an agreement with the P5-plus-1 on a comprehensive solution, we will be in a situation where we have to consider alternate steps to fulfill the President’s commitment that Iran cannot be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon.

The point of the negotiations is to see whether or not Iran is serious about coming into compliance and meeting its obligations with its international commitments.

Q    On that point -- for them to be serious, they would have to accept a deal that would involve the destruction of some centrifuges, correct?

MR. CARNEY:  The dismantlement of significant portions of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

Q    And by that, you mean centrifuges?

MR. CARNEY:  Again, I’m not going to parse --

Q    But this is specific centrifuges, not just broad infrastructure.

MR. CARNEY:  On centrifuges.

Q    Yes.

MR. CARNEY:  Iran does not need nearly the centrifuge capacity that it has today.  As part of the Joint Plan of Action, Iran committed to leave inoperable roughly half of installed centrifuges at Natanz, and three-quarters of installed centrifuges at Fordow, so they cannot be used to enrich Uranium.  As part of a comprehensive solution, we will require that Iran dismantle a significant amount of its nuclear infrastructure related to uranium enrichment.

Again, we are at the beginning of a six-month process.  Where we are at the end of that process and whether or not a comprehensive solution can be reached is unknown.  But it is absolutely the right thing to do, having locked in the Joint Plan of Action and commitments that Iran has made to halt and roll back aspects of its nuclear program, to test whether or not Iran is serious about reaching a comprehensive solution -- because ultimately, the surest way to make sure that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon is to have Iran’s verifiable transparent commitment not to do that.  So that’s why the United States and the P5-plus-1 is pursuing this potential diplomatic resolution to this conflict.