[...]

... we spent considerable time discussing Iran.  I updated our Gulf partners on the negotiations towards a comprehensive deal to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.  And I’m pleased that here at Camp David we agree that a comprehensive, verifiable solution that fully addresses the regional and international concerns about Iran’s nuclear program is in the security interests of the international community -- including our GCC partners.
 
Of course, whether we reach a nuclear deal or not with Iran, we’re still going to face a range of threats across the region, including its destabilizing activities, as well as the threat from terrorist groups.  So we’re going to work together to address these threats.  And much of the enhanced security cooperation that I’ve outlined will allow us to do precisely that.

But I want to be very clear.  The purpose of security cooperation is not to perpetuate any long-term confrontation with Iran or even to marginalize Iran.  None of our nations have an interest in an open-ended conflict with Iran.  We welcome an Iran that plays a responsible role in the region -- one that takes concrete, practical steps to build trust and resolve its differences with its neighbors by peaceful means, and abides by international rules and norms.

As I’ve said before, ending the tensions in the region and resolving its devastating conflicts will require a broader dialogue -- one that includes Iran and its GCC neighbors.  And so a key purpose of bolstering the capacity of our GCC partners is to ensure that our partners can deal with Iran politically, diplomatically, from a position of confidence and strength.

And finally, while this summit was focused on security cooperation, events in the Middle East since the beginning of the Arab Spring are a reminder that true and lasting security includes governance that serves all citizens and respects universal human rights.  So, in the Middle East, as we do around the world, the United States will continue to speak out on behalf of inclusive governance, representative institutions, strong civil societies and human rights, and we will work to expand the educational and economic opportunities that allow people -- especially young people -- to fulfill their potential.

So, again, I want to thank all of our GCC partners for making this summit a success.  I believe that the Camp David commitments I’ve described today can mark the beginning of a new era of cooperation between our countries -- a closer, stronger partnership that advances our mutual security for decades to come.

So, with that, I'm going to take some questions.  And I will start with Julie Pace because I promised her in the Oval Office that I'd call on her.

Q :   Thank you very much.  You mentioned in your statement the broad support from the GCC for stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.  Did you get any specific commitments from the Gulf leaders for the framework that you reached a few months ago, and at least a commitment to not publicly oppose a deal if you're able to reach that?

And on the Gulf’s main concern, Iran’s destabilizing activity in the region, how can you really assure them that Iran would not continue that activity if they had an influx of money from sanctions relief when they’re already accused of doing so now with a weaker economy?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  We didn’t have a document that we presented to them to sign on the bottom line, will you approve of this nuclear framework deal, because the deal is not completed.  And in the same way that I wouldn't ask the United States Senate, or the American people to sign off on something before they’ve actually seen the details of it, and given that I'm not going to sign off on any deal until I've seen the details of it, I wouldn't expect them to either.

What I did hear from our GCC partners was their agreement that if we can get a comprehensive, verifiable deal that cuts off the pathways to a nuclear weapon, that that would be in their interests and the interests of the region, as well as the world’s community.

And so the question is then going to be, is Iran prepared to do what’s required for the international community to feel confidence that, in fact, it's not developing a nuclear weapon, and have we set up the kinds of inspection regimes that allow such confidence to be maintained, not just next year or five years from now, but out into the future?

So what we did was we had Secretary Kerry, Secretary Ernie Moniz -- who obviously was involved in the negotiations, as well -- to walk through why it was that we were confident that if the framework agreement we've arrived at were to be solidified, that, in fact, we could verify that they did not have a nuclear weapon. And that was important to them and I think gave them additional confidence.

There was a concern -- a concern that I share -- that even if we deal effectively with the nuclear issue that we will still have a problem with some of Iran’s destabilizing activities.  And a number of them did express the concern that with additional resources through the reduction in sanctions, that was it possible that Iran would siphon off a lot of these resources into more destabilizing activity.

Secretary Jack Lew was there to explain that, first of all, there would be no sanctions relief until we could confirm that Iran had actually carried out its obligations under any nuclear deal.  Secondly, we gave them our best analysis of the enormous needs that Iran has internally and the commitment that Iran has made to its people in terms of shoring up its economy and improving economic growth.

And as I pointed out, most of the destabilizing activity that Iran engages in is low-tech, low-cost activity.  And so part of my emphasis to them was that if we are focusing more effectively on the things we need to do -- to shore up defenses, improve intelligence, improve the capacity for maritime monitoring of what’s taking place in the Gulf -- if we are working in concert to address the terrorist activity and countering terrorist messages that are coming not just from state sponsors like Iran, but, more broadly, from organizations like ISIL, then we're going to be able to fortify ourselves and deal with many of these challenges much more effectively, and we can do so from a position of strength and confidence.

So it's not to deny the concerns that were there about what happens when sanctions are reduced, but it was to emphasize that what matters more is the things that we can do now to ensure that some of this destabilizing activity is no longer taking place.

And, of course, when you look at a place like Yemen, the issue there is that the state itself was crumbling, and that if we can do a better job in places like Syria, Yemen, Libya, in building up functioning political structures, then it's less likely that anybody, including Iran, can exploit some of the divisions that exist there.

[...]