Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Live Coverage Barack Obama's News Conference At Summit of the Americas In Panama; Cuban President Raul Castro Apologizes To Barack Obama; Aired 6-7 ET
Aired April 11, 2015 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:00:48] POPPY HARLOW, CNN HOST: Six o'clock Eastern. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York.
This is our special live coverage as we await the president. President Obama expected to hold a news conference any moment as he prepares to leave the summit of the Americas in Panama on a very historic day for this country. It has already been full of historic firsts as the U.S. and Cuba move to bury the cold war hatchet pap.
A short time ago the two presidents sat down for an informal 12 minute, one-on-one discussion. This was Raul Castro's first appearance at the summit of Americas. He used his time at this occasion to lecture many countries and their leaders of a long list of grievances that Cuba has with the United States. Among them, he said the U.S. holds on to that naval base in Guantanamo Bay without any legal right. He also said 77 percent of the Cuban population grew up under the economic hardships of the U.S.-imposed embargo on goods and trade. And he referred back to the failed CIA policy at the bay of pigs in April 1961. He called the people involved bandits.
But after that, this is what has everyone talking, Castro turned and apologized to President Obama for the heated rhetoric saying he doesn't hold Obama personally responsible for what ten U.S. presidents before him did.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The point is the United States will not be imprisoned by the past. We're looking to the future. And the policies that improve lives of the Cuban people and advance the interests of cooperation in the hemisphere. Now, this shift in U.S. policy represents a turning point for our entire region.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: Jim Acosta, senior White House correspondent, is there in Panama. He is in the room where they are going to have that press conference with the president. He joins me now on the phone.
Jim, what has stood out to you most today?
JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (via phone): I think it's set up really nicely, Poppy. I mean, this is history in the making, what we're watching, the cold war that's existed between the United States and Cuba that really lasted beyond the cold war that existed between the U.S. and the Soviet Union is essentially coming to an end.
I think you saw that in that meeting today between President Obama and Raul Castro. It got down right warm at times as you mentioned throughout this the day, the president of Cuba saying he admires President Obama, that he considers him to be an honest man, that he's read President Obama's autobiography. He says he wants to finish reading that. He hasn't read all of them, but that he's started skimming those books.
And so I think that was very surprising. I do want to tell you, though, Poppy, that in addition to the comments we heard from President Obama and Raul Castro before their meeting outside of the summit today, we do have some information as to what was discussed behind closed doors.
According to a senior administration official, the president Raul Castro talked for about an hour. They discussed a range of issue, obviously noted the complex history that exists between these two nations and how they're going to try to resolve these issues. One of the issues, this designation of Cuba being on the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Cuba wants to be off of that list. And they've almost basically stated that that is a prerequisite of opening the embassies in Washington and Havana. That did come up during the conversation between President Obama and Raul Castro.
One thing we should point out, during I guess a briefing that was given by reporters to the administration official, it was indicated to reporters that the president is nearing a decision on this issue and so some of the interagency reviews that have taken place after the state department recommendation, that has apparently come to an end and the president is close to a decision.
Both men in this meeting, Poppy, also talked about reopening these embassies. They both essentially pledged that they would like to do that as quickly as possible. But they have to work through a lot of these thorny issues. One issue the president raised is that he is going to insist that U.S. diplomats have sort of free rein when they're in Cuba, which is if you're not aware of this, I've been down to Cuba, you know, Americans obviously don't have free rein when it comes to travel across Cuba and certainly not U.S. diplomats.
And so that is an issue that has to be resolved before they really, you know, reopen these embassies and have them up and running, you know, at 100 percent capacity. So a lot of issues to work through between these two leaders, but this was a very, very historic and significant first step in what appears to be warming of relations between what were once cold war adversaries, Poppy.
[18:05:27] HARLOW: Certainly the president, though, noting today, Jim, as you know, that he said there are still going to be, quote, "deep and significant differences between our two governments." Jim Acosta, stand by. Let me bring in Rosa Flores, who also joins us
in Panama, also with me in New York, presidential historian Julian Zelizer and also CNN political commentator, strategist and formerly with the CIA, Buck Sexton.
To you, Professor Zelizer, as we await remarks from the president, give us the sense of the challenges here. This is a president who some point to this is legacy building. And this is the president who we've seen open up talks and relations with Iran, with Burma, with Cuba. What are the challenges that he faces in doing this?
JULIAN ZELIZER, PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Well, he faces the challenges of what the outcome is. So obviously the breakthrough is just the first stem and the initial agreement or opening of discussions is good. But it doesn't deal with some of the concerns that have emerged about how far Cuba will move in terms of its internal policy where we won't see the actual effect for the U.S. for several years to come.
And he's going to face political blowback immediately. There's no question that he and the Democrats are going to take some heat including from some Democrats, about what he's done. But that's the risk with diplomacy. We must remember Ronald Reagan in 1987 was taking heat from conservatives for dealing with the soviet union. And that became his greatest legacy.
HARLOW: Buck sexton, we saw Jeb Bush tweet about this today, saying what Obama meets with Castro but refuses to meet with Netanyahu. Why legitimize a cruel dictator of a repressive le re jet stream? What is your view of this move by the president?
BUCK SEXTON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, it fits in to a larger narrative. And that is that the president has a certain affinity and a certain propensity to coddle tyrants. I mean, this has been the case in a number of places around the world, most notably recently with the Iran regime where he has seem to have taken a concede whatever we have to do to get a framework for a later agreement that may or may not be signed --
HARLOW: Did not make every concession.
SEXTON: The U.S. got almost nothing in the Iran done. We can talk about the Iran deal, too, but I want to focus on the Cuban deal for now because we'll go off the rails a little bit. With Cuba, what did we get? Absolutely nothing. They released somebody who was never supposed to be in prison in the first place, had done nothing wrong. And they almost allowed to die in prison. This is supposed to be a concession from this regime?
When you look at the oppression that is happening right now in Venezuela, for example. Rather than looking for a photo-op and shaking hands with the mafia state dictators of Cuba, maybe President Obama could point out that Venezuela has now said that they will use lethal force against protest protesters because that country is essentially crumbling before our very eyes, which is the largest oil reserves in the world, by the way and a very close ally of this regime that we are now going to be very friendly with for what reason. What have we gotten in this exchange other than undermining decades of policy meant to get concessions from the Cuban regime?
HARLOW: So others would point out, and Julian, I want you to address this, that the 50 years of economic sanctions, et cetera, have not worked. And they would also say don't you want Cuba on your side rather than teaming up with Venezuela. Julian, to you, the benefits?
ZELIZER: Right. So the argument is the embargo has been used and it hasn't worked, isolating Cuba has been done and it doesn't work. This is an argument we've heard since the '90s already. And that's where the supporters for some alternative emerge. So the idea is you integrate the country financially and economically and it will bring more changes than an embargo will. And finally, if you open up dialogue and relations you gain more leverage ultimately.
HARLOW: Quickly, then I want to bring Rosa in to the discussion.
SEXTON: I was going to say you could be in a worst-case scenario, though, by doing this. Because as I said, there's no reason to believe Congress is going to go ahead with lifting the embargo. So you may have President Obama using what he can as the executive, open things up, some economic liberalization, obviously, opening the dialogue as well, but you also then have the Castro regime able to not have to deal with an all at once embargo, which might actually -- removal of the embargo, rather, which actually might unsettle the country. Now they get to have sort of an infusion of economic activity, they get to be legitimized in the eyes of the international community as well as the U.S., domestic political I might say. And that could be worse situation because they can maintain power while also getting the infusion of economic activity and cash they need to continue ruling with an iron fist. I don't really see what the immediate benefit is for.
HARLOW: And there are some human rights concerns that hopefully we'll hear from the president about.
SEXTON: More than concerns. There are, obviously, the human rights record is deplorable and they have not changed one inch on that issue.
HARLOW: And I want to go to Rosa Flores, who just spent a significant amount of time in Cuba in the last four months since things started changing.
I mean, Rosa, actually President Obama quite popular in the polling down among the Cuban people there. But what have they said to you over the time you've spent there recently, the Cuban people, about this?
[18:10:08] ROSA FLORES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, I've spent some time not only in Havana but in the town where Fidel Castro was born. So I've talked to people in all areas of that island, Poppy, and let me tell you something. People there love President Obama. And they are really happy about paving the road to diplomacy with the United States.
And one of the reasons why they've explained to me is because of the opening the gates of economic opportunity. And, yes, while lifting the embargo requires an action by Congress, what President Obama has been able to do is allow some economic activity from the United States.
I'll give you two quick examples. First of all, Air B&B now having more than 1,000 listings in Cuba. Now, this puts money in the pocket of the Cuban people. So Americans will be staying in the homes of Cubans. And imagine what $500 will do to a family in Cuba. That's a lot of money.
The other example, IDT has the contract for telecommunications and will be connecting the United States with Cuba. Huge, Poppy, because people will actually be able to communicate with the world. Very significant.
HARLOW: Absolutely, Rosa. Thank you for that. Stand by, Julian and Buck. Let's all standby. We are going to take a quick break. We are monitoring this. As soon as the president begins talking, we'll bring it to you live.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:15:46] HARLOW: Alright, welcome back. We are still monitoring and awaiting the press conference from President Barack Obama after his historic meeting today with Cuba president Raul Castro. We just got the two-minute warning so we'll bring that to you as soon as it happens .
As we awaited, I want Rosa Flores.
Rosa, I know there's also some breaking news out of this summit of the Americas having to do with the Brazil and the United States. What do we know?
FLORES: This is very significant, Poppy, because if you remember back in 2013 there was breaking news involving an NSA scandal with the allegations that the NSA was spying on millions of Brazilians, including the president of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff. So Dilma Rousseff, the president, decided not to go to the United States, not to -- not to visit D.C. at that point in time. She canceled that visit.
And today, just about an hour ago, there was an actual meeting between Dilma Rousseff and President Obama and they announced that she will be visiting the White House at the end of June. Very significant because she had been very vocal. She was very angry about the allegations of the NSA spying on her, specifically, and other Brazilians.
HARLOW: Also, Rosa, today it stood out to everyone the fact that Raul Castro really hammered the United States on its historical policy for the last 50 years dealing with Cuba, and then went on to apologize directly to President Obama.
FLORES: It really stood out because he was very emotional, Poppy. I mean, he can tell he started reading the script and then threw the script to the side and just started pretty much giving us an outline of American history and America's involvement in Cuba and in Latin America and how it had impacted the Cuban people and him specifically. Now, after that, he pivoted and said, I've got to say that I need to
apologize and I have apologized to President Obama because this was not his fault. This involved other presidents before him, and that President Obama was a very honest man. We have some of that sound for you. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAUL CASTRO, CUBAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Actually, I apologize to President Obama and to other people attending this conference for expressing myself like that. I have told President Obama myself that I am very emotional when I talk about the revolution. I apologized to him because President Obama had no responsibility with this. He has no responsibility with this. There were ten presidents before him. Who all of them have some kind of debt to us but President Obama.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FLORES: Now, President Castro getting a lot of support from other leaders from the western hemisphere, other presidents siding with him, saying that it was about time. And Poppy, it's important to note that some Latin-American leaders had threatened not to attend the summit of the Americas if Cuba was not invited. That of course changed in December when president Castro and President Obama announced the falling of more than 50 years of cold war rivalry and that Cuba was indeed going to attend the summit of the Americas - Poppy.
HARLOW: Rosa Flores live for us in Panama. Rosa, thank you very much.
And as we await these live remarks from President Obama, I want to show you this, a tweet just coming from Samantha Powers, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, tweeting, "first meeting today between POTUS and president Castro is key step in the engagement in support of human rights of the Cuban people."
Buck sexton, to you, you think this is a bad idea.
SEXTON: Well, I think that it helps the regime actually. I think that at this point in time, people are saying, well, it's been so long. The Castro brothers are not going to be around forever as with the other regime. Has lost its main financial sponsor recently with Venezuela, not entirely lost it but it's certainly not as powerful as it once was.
And if this was so obvious and President Obama recognizes it ass obvious, I just want to know why he waited until this point in his presidency to make this move. He could have made this move the first six months of his presidency.
[18:20:06] HARLOW: Well, would you have been OK with it then?
SEXTON: No, but the point I am trying to make here is that clearly this is a legacy building issue for the president. He has always wanted to do this, but he recognizes some of the risks inherent in doing this. And if he did this in year two, as oppose to year six going on to your seventh, then we'd be able to see the actual outcome here. And the outcome is not going to be liberalization from within Cuba. It is going to be this regime strengthened economically with an iron fist continuing to hold that at the throats of the Cuban people. We all want normalization, eventually. We all want Cuba to be a better, happier, more liberal place. I don't think this necessarily achieves that goal.
HARLOW: So Julian, to Buck's point, I mean, you have big human rights issues here, and you've got significant differences the president calling them deep and significant differences between the two governments. How does he most effectively walk that line?
ZELIZER: You have to remember that's true of many allies who were engaged with at that point. This is not unique to Cuba. So he is walking the line at this point rhetorically, making a commitment to keep pressing on human rights issues as we deal with other allies and other countries we are engaged with at this point while trying to normalize relations. And this is about follow through both from him and from the administration that continues. This is not different, though, than any other diplomatic moment we've had even with countries such as China, and that's the risk and that's the bet he's taking.
But this isn't simply about Cuba. I think what the other stories are saying, this is about the region and this is an effort to engage more deeply with the other countries in the region and move the a different direction.
HARLOW: You write about - and Buck, I'll have you jump in just a minute, but you, Julian, you write about presidents and their history and their legacy. Is this legacy building for the president and if it is, as Buck points out, is there anything wrong with that?
ZELIZER: Well, there's nothing wrong with that. Everything a president does is thinking about history. I don't think he waited because of that. I think there were many other issues on the table from Iraq to the economy early in his presidency that this wasn't front and center. And I actually don't think this will be the main issue we look back on with the administration. I say that for proponents and opponents of the administration. I think there's actually other bigger foreign policy and domestic questions that will loom much larger.
HARLOW: Buck.
SEXTON: China is not Cuba, which is an obvious thing to say, but I think it's important here. I mean, Cuba is in our backyard, very it is very close to us. We have this long history of the Cuban regime's intransigence and also just being difficult around the world. Essentially, if you're an enemy of the United States for as long as the Castros have been in power, you've been able to count on the Cuban regime to be your friend, to be your ally and to give you even safe harbor of different points.
So there's that long history that exists here. And the fact that we feel like at this point with the administration that we have to meet them all the way -- they're giving nothing here. They have made no changes into their laws about politics, their laws about their ability to crack down, it's not even a law, it is just essentially authoritarianism, they're giving us nothing here. We're making all these concessions from the president's point of view and for what?
HARLOW: Well, having more of a friend in Cuba isn't beneficial?
SEXTON: I don't think we are going to have a friend in Cuba. I think that it doesn't really takes into account the nature of people that we're dealing with here. I mean, the Castro brothers have continued on without giving an inch, without actually changing their positions on the issues that work - we keep talking about. Everyone says liberalization for this island. We should have better economic ties on.
Everyone wants that. The problem is you have an evil regime. I mean, if we took this approach to North Korea, why do we've haven't sanctions? Our problem is just with the North Korean regime, it is not with the North Korean people. But they're living in where is essentially a giant prison camp.
We hope that with that pressure on overtime, you can actually get the regime to change its behavior. That is why sanctions exist. That is why embargoes exist. There has been no change in behavior whatsoever and the focus on this and not crackdown in Venezuela and not the oppression of the Venezuelan people by the president at the summit of the Americas shows you that he's most concerned with this issue of Cuba as a legacy project for his administration. And by the time we realize what's actually happened we'll have some other president to be criticizing.
HARLOW: Julian, to you, obviously, there are a lot of people that are going to like this and a lot of people that aren't going to like this. We have heard from Jeb Bush tweeting about it today saying, you know, why is he legitimizing the dictator of a repressive regime, we have big presidential announcements coming up. How much does this factor into 2016?
ZELIZER: Well, it will matter in that presidential candidates now have to react to it. Again, I don't think on the forefront this is a main issue including for the next election, but certainly Republicans as we hear now on the right will attack the Democrats, will attack Hillary Clinton for being associated with an administration that does this that deals with dictators, that is weak on defense. On its own, it's not enough to move the electorate. But it will play into that narrative which we hear.
[18:24:44] HARLOW: And we'll hear I'm sure from Marco Rubio about it, expected to announce his candidacy on Monday.
Guys, stay with me. Rosa, stay with me. We are going to take a quick break. Still monitor this as we await President Obama's remarks after that meeting with Cuban president Raul Castro. Back in a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:26:21] HARLOW: Let's listen to President Obama speaking after his meeting with President Raul Castro.
OBAMA: (INAUDIBLE) Given its strategic location, a place where cultures, commerce in our hemisphere have long intersected, and Panama has often called the crossroads of the world. With panama's leadership, our nations will come together to focus on the world, on the future, and on what we can build for the one billion people in this country.
This has been my third summit of the Americas and my eighth visit to Latin America. My trip reflects as I mentioned earlier a new era of U.S. engagement in the region. Over the past few days we've advanced our engagement across the board. In keeping with the inter-American democratic charter we continue to stand up strongly for democracy and human rights.
This was the first summit of the Americas to include a formal role for a civil society. As I said at yesterday's forum, the United States will continue to deepen our support for civil society groups across the Americas and around the world. I'm pleased that there was widespread agreement among the nations here that civil society groups have a permanent role in future summits. And the United States will support this work through the new innovation center creating groups across Latin America.
How to promote greater opportunity for the Cuban people was also a major focus of my meeting with president Castro. The first between leaders of our two nations in more than half a century. I told president Castro in private what I've said in public, that our governments will continue to have our differences and the United States will continue to stand firmly for universal values and human rights, at the same time we agree that we can continue to take steps forward that advance our mutual interests, will continue to work toward re-establishing diplomatic relations, reopening embassies in Havana and Washington and encouraging greater contacts, commerce, and exchanges between your citizens. I'm optimistic we'll continue to make progress and that this can indeed be a turning point not just between the United States and Cuba but for greater cooperation among countries across the region.
Second, we continued our work to create more prosperity and opportunity for our people. In our meeting yesterday, center American leaders reaffirmed their commitment to pursue is good governance and economic and security reforms need. I reiterated my commitment to work with Congress for our engagement with Central America.
Yesterday's deal between Boeing and Copa Airlines will support jobs in the United States, Panama, and across the region and I think is representative of the commercial opportunities that allow both north and southern hemispheres -- both north and south America as well as Central America to prosper if we deepen those trade ties.
I was encouraged by the support of many leaders here for the WTO trade facilitation agreement which would boost trade and for the trans- pacific partnership with its high standards for trade and strong protection for workers and the environment. Thanks to Panama's leadership, this summit included a special focus on
how countries can expand access to education. I want to thank our private sector partners who pledged to continue their support of our 100,000 strong in the Americas initiative to encourage more exchanges between our students, the nearly there are 70 million in investments that I've announced in Jamaica will expand education and training and employment programs for young people across Latin America and the Caribbean including the impoverished and marginalized communities and the young leaders of the Americas initiative that I launched will help you on entrepreneurs and civil society leaders across the entire region, access the training and the resources and connections they need to start new ventures including small businesses that create so many jobs in the region.
Finally, we took new steps to invest in clean energy and combat climate change. The new fund announced with our Caribbean and Central American partners will help mobilized private sector, investment in clean energy projects and reduce carbon emissions across the region. And our new energy task force will identify additional steps we can take together.
A number of our countries committed to doubling our share of non-hydro renewable energy by 2030, I reaffirm that through our $3 billion pledge to the green climate fund, the United States will continue to help developing nations deal with impacts of climate change. And I reiterated our commitment to ensure that all countries in the hemisphere have open access to data as we meet this challenge together.
So, continued progress on Cuba, new commitments to help lift up young people in the region, new partnerships to protect this beautiful land and our planet. As I said this morning the United States is more deeply engaged across the region than we have been in decades, and I believe the relationship between the United States and the meshes is a good as it has ever been. We're focused on the future and what we can build and achieve together. And our engagement with the countries and peoples of the Americas is going to continue throughout the remainder of my presidency.
So with that, let me take some questions. I'll start with Jim (INAUDIBLE).
[18:31:57] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Mr. President. Sir, you head back to the United States with the task of convincing the American people and Congress on two major foreign policy initiatives. The framework to a nuclear deal with Iran and likely soon a decision to remove Cuba from a list of state sponsors of terror. Recent remarks by supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini have raised doubts to some as to whether that deal with occur with Iraq. And Senator Schumer, an ally of yours, wants Congress to have the right to vote on removal of sanctions. Presidential politics are likely to play a part in this Cuba decision inevitably. So I'm wondering if it would take a lot of political capital just to get one done let alone two. Have you bitten off more than you can chew?
OBAMA: No. You may be surprised by that response, Jim. Let me take them in turn. First of all, with respect to Cuba, there is majority support of our policy in the United States and there's overwhelming support for our policy in Cuba. I think people recognize that if you keep on doing something for 50 years and it doesn't work you should try something new. And so the American people don't need to be persuaded that this is, in fact, the right thing to do.
I recognize that there are still concerns and questions that Congress may have. We have concerns and questions about specific activities that are taking place in Cuba and human rights and reform. And there were two members of the Cuban civil society that were in attendance at the meeting that I had yesterday who expressed much of what they had to go through on a day-to-day basis.
They were supportive of our policy of engagement in Cuba. And so I don't think that it's so much we have to persuade anybody. The issue of the state sponsor of terrorism list, as you know, the state department has provided recommendation. It's gone through our interagency process. I'll be honest with you, I have been on the road and I want to make sure I have a chance to read it, study it before we announce publicly what the policy outcome is going to be.
But in terms of the overall direction of Cuba policy, I think there is a strong majority both in the United States and in Cuba that says our ability to engage, to open up commerce and travel and people to people exchanges is ultimately going to be good for Cuban people.
Now, with respect to Iran, I have always been clear. We are not done yet. What we were able to obtain was a political framework between the p5+1 nations and Iran that provided unprecedented verification, what is taking place in Iran over the next two decades. That significantly cuts back on its centrifuges. It cuts off pathways for it to obtain a nuclear weapon. And that calls for in return the rolling back of sanctions in a phased way that allows us to snap back if Iran violates the agreement. That's the political framework. That was not just something that the United States and Iran agreed to but Iran agreed to a political framework with the other p5+1 nations.
Now what's always been clear is that Iran has its own politics around this issue. They have their own hard-liners. They have their own countervailing impulses in terms of whether or not to go forward with something, just as we have in our country. And so, it's not surprising the Supreme leader or a whole bunch of other people are going to try to characterize the deal in a way that protects their political position.
But I know what was discussed in arriving at the political agreement. What I've always said is there's the possibility of backsliding. There's the possibility that it doesn't get memorialized in a way that satisfies us that we're able to verify that in fact Iran is not getting a nuclear weapon. And that we are preserving the capacity to snap back sanctions in the event that they are breaking any deal.
And that's why the work is going to be so important between now and the end of June to memorialize this so that we can all examine it. And we don't have to speculate on what the meaning of a deal is going to be. Either there's going to be a document that Iran agrees with the world community about and a series of actions that have to be taken, or there's not. Part of the challenge in this whole process has been opponents of basically any deal with Iran have constantly tried to characterize what the deal is without seeing it.
Now, if we are able to obtain a final deal that comports with the political agreement -- and I say "if" because that's not yet final -- then I'm absolutely positive that that is the best way to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.
And that's not my opinion. That's the opinion of people like Ernie Moniz, my secretary of energy, who is a physicist from MIT and actually knows something about this stuff. That's the opinion of a whole bunch of nuclear experts who examined the deal. Very rarely do you see a consensus -- too strong a word -- a large majority of people who are experts in the field saying this is actually a realistic, plausible, meaningful approach to cut off the pathways for Iran getting a nuclear weapon and that it is more likely to succeed not only then maintaining current sanctions or additional sanctions but more likely to succeed than if we took a military approach to solving the problem.
Again, that's not uniquely my opinion. That is talk to people who are not affiliated with the administration, some of whom were skeptical about our capacity to get a deal done and have now looked at it and said if we're able to actually get what was discussed in the political framework it's absolutely the right thing to do.
Now, there's politics and political pressure inside of the United States. We all know that. The prime minister of Israel is deeply opposed it to. I think he's made that very clear. You know, I have repeatedly asked what is the alternative that you present that you think makes it less likely for Iran to get a nuclear weapon, and I have yet to obtain a good answer on that.
And the narrow question that will be presented next week when Congress comes back is what's Congress' appropriate role in looking at a final deal. And, you know, I've talked to not only Bob Corker, but I've talked to Ben Cardin, the ranking member on the Democratic side, and I want to work with them so that Congress can look at this deal when it's done. What I'm concerned about is making sure we don't prejudge it or those who are opposed to any deal whatsoever try to use a procedural argument essentially to screw up the possibility of a deal.
Last comment I'm going to make on this, when I hear some like senator McCain recently suggest that our secretary of state, John Kerry, who served in the United States Senate, a Vietnam veteran, who's provided exemplary service to this nation, is somehow less trustworthy of the interpretation of what's in a political agreement than the supreme leader of Iran, that's an indication of the degree to which partisanship has crossed all boundaries.
We're seeing this again and again. We saw it by a letter by the 47 senators who communicate directly to the supreme leader of Iran. The person they said can't be trusted at all, warning him not to trust the United States government. We have Mitch McConnell trying to tell the world, don't have confidence in the U.S. government's abilities to fulfill any climate change pledge that we might make. And now we have a senator suggesting that our secretary of state is purposely misinterpreting the deal and given the supreme leader of Iran the benefit of the doubt in the interpretations.
You know, that's not how we're supposed to run foreign policy. Regardless of who's president or secretary of state. We can have arguments and there are legitimate arguments to be had. I understand why people might be mistrustful of Iran. I understand why people might oppose the deal, although the reason is not because this is a bad deal per se but they just don't trust any deal with Iran and may prefer to take a military approach to it.
But when you start getting to the point where you are actively communicating that the United States government and our secretary of state is somehow spinning presentations in a negotiation with a foreign power, particularly one that you say is your enemy, that's a problem. It needs to stop.
Jim Acosta. I'm sorry. Where's Jim?
[18:42:39] JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Right here.
OBAMA; There you are.
ACOSTA: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I was wondering if you were struck by Raul Castro's warm words for you today. He said he admires you, said he had read some of your autobiographies, described you as an honest man. I'm just curious what you thought about that and do you feel that Raul Castro is an honest man and can be trusted. And I would be remiss if I didn't can ask you about another secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, who is expected to announce her campaign for the presidency tomorrow. Do you foresee being involved in her campaign and do you hope that she runs on your record? Thank you very much.
OBAMA: It was a candid and fruitful conversation between me and Raul Castro. I can tell you that in the conversations I've had so far with him, two on the phone and most recently face-to-face, that we are able to speak honestly about our differences and our concerns in ways that I think offer the possibility of moving the relationship between our two countries in a different and better direction.
We have very different views of how society should be organized. And I was very direct with him that we are not going to stop talking about issues like democracy and human rights and freedom of assembly and freedom of the press, not because we think we are perfect and that every country has to mimic us exactly, but because there are a set of universal principles for which we stand. And one of the goals of my administration is to have some consistency in speaking out on behalf of those who oftentimes don't have a voice. And I think during his speech in the plenary session he was pretty clear about areas of U.S. policy he doesn't like, and I suspect he's going to continue to speak out on those.
What's been clear from this entire summit, though, is the unanimity with which regardless of their ideological predispositions, the leaders of Latin America think this is the right thing to do because what they see is the possibility of a more constructive dialogue that ultimately benefits the Cuban people and removes what too often has been a distraction or an excuse from the hemisphere acting on important challenges that we face.
So, you know, I am cautiously optimistic that over the coming months and coming years that the process that we've initiated at first announced in December reaffirmed here at the summit of the Americas, will lead to a different future for the Cuban people and a different relationship between the United States and Cuba.
With respect to Hillary Clinton, I'll make my comments very brief. She was a formidable candidate in 2008. She was a great supporter of mine in the general election. She was an outstanding secretary of state. She is my friend. I think she would be an excellent president. And I'm not on the ballot.
So, you know, I'm not going to step on her lines. When she makes a decision to announce. I'm confident that she will be very clear about her vision for the country moving forward, if she announces, and, you know, in terms of her relationship with my administration, she was focused and working on really important foreign policy initiatives and, you know, the one thing I can say is she's going to be able to handle herself very well in any conversations or debates around foreign policy. And her track record with respect to domestic policies is I think one that cares about working families. If she decides to run and makes an announcement, she's going to have some strong messages to deliver.
Jim Avila.
[18:52:23] JIM AVILA, ABC NEWS SENIOR LAW AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Thank you, Mr. President.
First of all, on Cuba, if I could, two questions. The Cuban government has frequently said that it cannot allow more political or personal freedoms or press freedoms because the United States has used both covert and otherwise actions to try to overthrow the Castros.
Does your new era, in fact, end regime change efforts by the United States and should the Cubans then respond by allowing free elections and tolerance at the SECNAV (ph) because of the change in policy?
And secondly, on the issue of Hillary Clinton, vice president Biden, of course, said the democratic race is wide open, the polls seem to say otherwise. What is your opinion on that? Is the race still wide open?
OBAMA: Not only have I run my last election, but I am not in the business of prognosticating future elections. That is your job. And there's no shortage of people who are happy to opine on that. I will not be one of them.
On Cuba, we are not in the business of regime change. We are in the business of making sure the Cuban people have freedom and the ability to participate and shape their own destiny and their own lives and supporting civil society. And there's going to be an evolution regardless of what we do inside of Cuba. Partly it's going to be generational.
You know, if you've listened to president Castro's comments earlier this morning, a lot of the points he made reference actions that took place before I was born. And part of my message here is the cold war is over. There's still a whole lot of challenges that we face and a lot of issues around the world, and we're still going to have serious issues with Cuba on not just the Cuban government's approach to its own people but also regional issues and concerns. There are going to be areas where we cooperate as well.
You know, Cuban doctors deployed during the Ebola crisis made a difference. Cuban activity in Haiti in the wake of the earthquake made a difference. So there may be areas of collaboration as well.
But what I said to president Castro is the same thing that I've said to leaders throughout the region. We have a point of view and we won't be shy about expressing it. But I'm confident that the way to lift up the values that we care about is through persuasion. And that's going to be the primary approach that we take on a whole host of these issues. Primarily because they don't implicate our national security in a direct way.
And I think that we have to be very clear, Cuba is not a threat to the United States. That doesn't mean we don't have differences with it. But on the list of threats that I'm concerned about, I think it's fair to say that between ISIL and Iran getting nuclear weapon and activities in Yemen and Libya and Boko Haram, Russian aggression in Ukraine and the impact on our allies there you know, I could go down a pretty long list, climate change, you know.
So I think our approach has to be one of trying to work with the region and other countries and be very clear about what we believe and what we stand for and what we think works and what doesn't. And so often when we insert ourselves in ways that go beyond persuasion, it's counterproductive. It backfires.
You know, that's been part of our history, which is why countries keep on trying to use us as an excuse for their own governance failures. Just take away the excuse and let's be clear that we're prepared to partner and engage with everybody to try to lift up opportunity and prosperity and security for people in the region.
Major Garrett.
MAJOR GARRETT, CBS NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon, Mr. President. Allow me, if you will, to correct -- to quote the supreme leader directly.
OBAMA: Yes.
GARRETT: United States activities since the announcement of the framework has been deceptive, it is lying, it is devilish, and on two particular points he said, direct quotes, Iran's military sites cannot be inspected under the excuse of nuclear supervision, and all sanctions should be removed when the deal is signed. Is it your opinion, Mr. President, that this is pure posturing and it should be disregarded by your government and by you and your secretary of state? And if so, could you help me understand to whom the supreme leader would be posturing? Because under my limited understanding of Iran politics, that's not a job description usually applied to the supreme leader.
OBAMA: That was a well-crafted question, Major. And let me suggest that even a guy with the title supreme leader has to be concerned about his own constituencies. And the issue is not whether I have to take his word for whether that's his understanding because we've got work until the end of June to see if we've got a document that works. And if that is his understanding and his position in ways that can't be squared with our concern about being able to embark on vigorous inspections to assure that Iran isn't cheating under any program and that we don't have the capacity to snap back sanctions when we see a potential violation, then we're probably not going to get a deal. So, you know, part of the concern that I have in this debate here, major, is I don't understand why it is that everybody's working so hard to anticipate failure.
The opponents of the deal don't seem to be focused on how do we get to a good deal as much as they're focused on how can we show that it's not possible to get a good deal. And my simple point is let's wait and see what the deal is. And we'll be able to look. And if, in fact, we're not satisfied that it cuts off the pathways for Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, then we won't sign it.
If, on the other hand, it does, then I will strongly argue -- and I believe the American people will support and the international community will support that it's far preferable to the other alternatives.
Now, Major, it's not going to be perfect in the sense that, you know, if you asked Prime Minister Netanyahu or some members of the Republican caucus or even some Democrats. If you asked me would I prefer that Iran never did have, will never have even a single nut, bolt, anything related to nuclear power, don't have any nuclear scientists, don't have any capacity to develop it, that would be great. But that's not possible. That's not achievable. That's not achievable through sanctions. It's not achievable through military means.
They're going to have some form of peaceful nuclear power. And that will then pose a challenge for the international community, which is why the political agreement calls for unprecedented framework of inspections that allows us to assure that it's not being used or diverted in ways that could be weaponized. But we're going to have to see whether or not we can get a deal or not.
My only question is why do we keep on trying to short circuit the actual negotiations? Nobody's -- we're not disarming. We're not getting rid of our nuclear weapons. We're not getting rid of our Navy. We're not giving anything up. We are simply waiting to see what it is that the negotiators come up with and if, in fact, we are able to come up with something that works, then we'll know.
And, you know, with respect to the supreme leader, yes, that's a pretty important title. Seems a little more clear cut than president. On the other hand, there may be ways of structuring a final deal that satisfy their pride, their optics, their politics, but meet our core practical objectives. And that's what we've got to give the negotiators room to determine.
Last question. Karen DeYoung. Where's Karen? There she is.
KAREN DEYOUNG, ASSOCIATE EDITOR, THE WASHINGTON POST: Thank you.
Just to belabor the point on that question, Mr. President. Your people have said that the framework agreement, that what's in it stand that they are not renegotiable points although the implementation of them can be renegotiated in some way. And I wonder how within that framework that's already been agreed, how we can come up with something that satisfies the kinds of concerns that he raised. No inspection of military sites. Immediate lifting of all sanctions the day that the thing is signed.
And also on Cuba, I wanted to ask, as you discussed the state sponsor of terrorism list with president Castro, the Cubans have raised some issues about the 45-day waiting period. I wonder if that came up. I know that your government is eager, assuming that the recommendation is approved, is to remove it and is approved by you that we move ahead quickly with embassies.
Cubans have raised concerns about that 45 days and how something could go wrong in those 45 days, and it really doesn't give them access to the kinds of things they can have once -- if and when they're removed from the list.
Did that come up, and is it your belief that once they're removed from the list then there is no impediment to go ahead with opening embassies, once you approve their removal from the list.
OBAMA: OK. So I will make one last run at Iran here. There's a political framework the outlines of which were established between Iran and the p5+1. In some cases there was great specificity around, for example, the reductions that need to take place in the number of centrifuges in the times or the conversion for now into a facility that does not permit the potential production of weapons-grade uranium.
And in other cases there were -- there was language of intent, but the details matter. And how those details are interpreted are going to be subject to negotiation. So it is not accurate to suggest that and I don't think my team has ever suggested that somehow everything is all done and it is just a matter of writing it up.
[19:00:00] OBAMA: This is a situation in which we have a framework that is, if implemented, powerful, and will achieve our goal of making sure that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon.
