Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

President Obama and PM Cameron Continue News Conference

Aired January 16, 2015 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And they would be able to maintain that the reason that they ended negotiations was because the United States was operating in bad faith and blew up the deal. And there would be some sympathy to that view around the world, which means that the sanctions that we have in place now would potentially fray because imposing these sanctions are a hardship on a number of countries around the world. They would love to be able to buy Iranian oil.

And the reason that they've hung in there, despite it being against their economic interests, is because we have shown that we are credibly trying to solve this problem and avert some sort of military showdown.

And that context, there is no good argument for us to try to undercut, undermine the negotiations until they've played themselves out.

Now, if Iran ends up ultimately not being able to say yes, if they cannot provide us the kind of assurances that would lead myself and David Cameron and others to conclude that they are not obtaining a nuclear weapon, then we're going to have to explore other options. And I will be the first one to come to Congress and say we need to tighten the screws.

And by the way, that's not the only options that are going to be available. I've consistently said we leave all options on the table. But Congress should be aware that if this diplomatic solution fails, then the risks and likelihood that this ends up being at some point a military confrontation is heightened, and Congress will have to own that as well.

And that will have to be debated by the American people. And we may not be able to rebuild the kind of coalition we need in that context if the world believes that we were not serious about negotiations. So, I take this very seriously.

And I don't question the good faith of some folks who think this might be helpful. But it's my team that's at the table. We are steeped in this stuff day in, day out. We don't make these judgments blindly. We have been working on this for five, six, seven years. We consult closely with allies like the United Kingdom in making these assessments.

And I am asking Congress to hold off because our negotiators, our partners, those who are most intimately involved in this, assess that it will jeopardize the possibility of resolving a -- providing a diplomatic solution to one of the most difficult and long-lasting national security problems that we've faced in a very long time.

And -- and Congress needs to show patience. So I, with respect to the veto, I said to my Democratic Caucus colleagues yesterday that I will veto a bill that comes to my desk. And I will make this argument to the American people as to why I'm doing so. And I respectfully request them to hold off for a few months to see if we have the possibility of solving a big problem without resorting potentially to war.

And I think that's worth -- worth doing. We'll see if -- how persuasive I am, but if I'm not persuading Congress, I promise you, I'm going to be taking my case to the American people on this.

DAVID CAMERON, U.K. PRIME MINISTER: I think the big picture is very clear. The sanctions that America and the European Union put in place have had an effect. That has led to pressure. That pressure has led to talks. And those talks at least have a prospect of success. And I would argue with the president, you know, how much better is that than the other potential outcomes. And that is what we should be focusing on.

But to answer you very directly, yes, I have contacted a couple of senators this morning and I may speak to one or two more this afternoon, not in any way as British prime minister to tell the American Senate what it should or shouldn't do. That wouldn't be right. But simply to make the point as a country that stands alongside America in these vital negotiations that it's the opinion of the United Kingdom that further sanctions or further threat of sanctions at this point won't actually help to bring the talks to a successful conclusion, and they could fracture the international unity that there's been which has been so valuable in presenting a united front to Iran.

And I say this as someone who played quite, I think, a strong role in getting Europe to sign up to the very tough sanctions, including oil sanctions, in the first place. And I would just simply make this point, that those sanctions have had an effect.

And to those who said if you do an interim deal, if you even start discussing with the Iranians any of these things, the sanctions will fall apart, the pressure will dissipate, no one will be able to stick at it, that has demonstrably been shown not to be true.

So, the pressure is still there. And, as the president says, if the Iranians say no and there is no deal, then, by all means, let's sit down and work out what extra sanctions to put in place. Because we are absolutely united in a simple thought, which is a deal that takes Iran away from a nuclear weapon is better than either Iran having a nuclear weapon or military action to prevent it.

In the end, it comes down to that simple choice. And so, would I do what I can to help as one of the countries negotiating, sure, I will.

QUESTION: Do you think the odds are less than 50-50 (inaudible)?

CAMERON: I'm a -- it's, I think the way the president put it, I wouldn't disagree with. It's very hard to know what the Iranian thinking is about this. I'm the first British prime minister in 35 years I think to meet with an Iranian president, and it's very hard to know what their thinking is.

But there is a very clear offer there, which is to take Iran away from a nuclear weapon and to conclude an agreement with them which would be mutually beneficial. That's what should happen.

I think we got a question from Nick Robinson at the BBC.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) Nick Robinson, BBC News.

Prime Minister, with extra security being put in place today for the Jewish community and also for police officers, would people be right to conclude that the threat of an attack on the streets of Britain is now all but imminent?

And Mr. President, you've spoken of the threat posed by fighters coming back from Syria. Do you ever worry that this is a legacy of the decision of the United States and the United Kingdom to, in effect, stand on the sidelines during Syria's bloody civil war?

And if I may, briefly, if you'll forgive me, on the economy, you said you agree. Is he right? Is it time to stick to the plan?

CAMERON: Well, first of all, look, we do face a very serious Islamist extremist terrorist threat in Europe, in America, across the world.

And we have to be incredibly vigilant in terms of that threat. We got to strengthen our police and security. We got to make sure we do everything we can to keep our country safe, and that involves an incredibly, you know, long-term, patient, disciplined approach. There is no single, simple thing that needs to be done.

That means closing down the ungoverned spaces that the terrorists operate in. It means working against ISIL in Iraq and Syria. It means countering this poisonous, fanatical death cult of a narrative that is perverting the religion of Islam. It means working together with our oldest and best partners so that we share intelligence and security and we try and prevent terrorist atrocities from taking place.

It means all of these things, and it is going to be a long, patient and hard struggle.

I'm quite convinced we will come through it and we will overcome it, because in the end, the values that we hold to, of freedom, of democracy, of having open and tolerant societies, these are the strongest values there can be. And in the end, we will come through.

But like some of the challenges our countries have faced together in the past, it will take great discipline, great patience, great -- hard work.

You asked specifically the question about imminence, we have a system in the United Kingdom where threat levels are set by the Joint Terrorism Assessment Center; they're not set by politicians. They've judged that the threat we face is severe. That means in their words that an attack is highly likely.

If ever there is an imminent threat of attack, it goes to the next level up, which is critical, but it's their decision, not mine. My responsibility is to make sure we marshal everything we have as a country in order to defeat this threat.

QUESTION: On the Jewish community?

CAMERON: On the Jewish community, I think it's good that the metropolitan police have announced that they will be stepping up patrols. I met with the Jewish Leadership Council earlier this week. We already provide through their security organization, the Community Security Trust, we already provide government money to help protect Jewish schools. But I think this is -- we have to recognize in fighting terrorism, as we've found in Britain before, you cannot simply rely on policing and security, this is a job for everyone. This is a role that we're all going to have to play in the vigilance and in making sure that we keep our communities safe.

OBAMA: With respect to Syria and the connection to foreign fighters, there is no doubt that in the chaos and the vacuum that's been created in big chunks of Syria, that that's given an opportunity for foreign fighters to both come in and come back out.

And I chaired a U.N. Security Council meeting and we are now busy working with our partners to implement a series of actions to identify who may be traveling to Syria in order to get trained, to fight, or to hatch -- hatch plots that would be activated upon return to their home countries.

So, it's a very serious problem. The notion that this is occurring because the United States or Great Britain or other countries stood on the sidelines, I think, is -- first of all, mischaracterizes our position. We haven't been standing on the sidelines. It's true we did not invade Syria.

If the assertion is that had we invaded Syria, we would be less prone to terrorist attacks, you know, I'll leave it to you to play out that scenario and whether that sounds accurate. We've been very active in trying to resolve a tragic situation in Syria diplomatically, through humanitarian efforts, through the removal of chemical weapons from Syria that, you know, had been so deadly.

And now, as ISIL has moved forward, we've been very active in degrading their capabilities inside of Syria, even as we're working with partners to make sure that the foreign fighter situation is resolved.

But I think David's point is -- is the key one. This -- this phenomenon of violent extremism, the ideology, the networks, the capacity to recruit young people, this has metastasized and it is widespread, and it has penetrated communities around the world.

I do not consider it an existential threat. As David said, this is one that we will solve. We are stronger. We are representing values that the vast majority of Muslims believe in -- in tolerance and in working together to build, rather than to destroy.

And so, you know, this is a problem that causes great heartache and tragedy and destruction, but it is one that ultimately we're going to defeat. But we can't just defeat it through weapons. One of the things that we spoke about is how do we lift up those voices that represent the vast majority of the Muslim world, so that that counter- narrative against this nihilism is put out there as aggressively and as nimbly as the messages coming out from these -- these fanatics.

How do we make sure that we are working with local communities and faith leaders and families, whether in a neighborhood in London or a neighborhood in Detroit, Michigan, so that we are, you know, we are inoculating ourselves against this kind of -- this kind of ideology? And that's going to be slow, plodding, systematic work, but it's work that I'm confident we're going to be able to accomplish, particularly when we've got strong partners like the United Kingdom doing it.

(CROSSTALK)

OBAMA: On the economy, I would note that Great Britain and the United States are two economies that are standing out at a time when a lot of other countries are having problems. So we must be doing something right.

Major Garrett?

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.

Good afternoon, Mr. Prime Minister. Good afternoon to you, sir.

Questions for all -- both of you.

I want to make sure we heard what you were trying to say. You clearly directing a message to Congress in the context of Iranian negotiations.

Were you also sending a message, both of you, to Iran that if the sanctions talks fail, that war footing is the next most likely alternative for this country and those who are allied with us in this common pursuit?

And atrocities in Paris, raids and threats either in Belgium and Netherlands, I'd like to ask you both, do you believe Europe is at a turning point now in its recognition of what its threats are and its own mobilization in terms of new laws, security footing, larger budgets?

You both talked about cyber-security. There is a crucial issue for both countries, back doors and encryption to protect people and also privacy.

I'd like your comments on that. Thank you.

OBAMA: I am not, repeat, not suggesting that we are in immediate war footing should negotiations with Iran fail.

But as David put it very simply, if, in fact, our view is that we have to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, then we have to recognize the possibility that should diplomacy fail, we have to look at other options to achieve that goal.

And if you listen sometimes to the rhetoric surrounding this issue, I think there is sometimes the view that this regime cannot be trusted, that effectively, negotiations with Iran are pointless. And since these claims are being made by individuals who see Iran as a mortal threat and want as badly as we do to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon, the question then becomes, "Well, what other alternatives exactly are available?"

That is part of what we have to consider as to why it's so important for us to pursue every possible avenue to see if we can get a deal. And it's got to be a good deal, not a bad deal.

I've already shown myself willing to walk away from a bad deal. And the P5-plus-1 walked away with us. And so nobody's interested in some, you know, document that undermines our sanctions and gives Iran the possibility of whether covertly or gradually, building up its nuclear weapons capacity. We're not going to allow that, and anything that we do, any deal that we arrive at, if we were to arrive at one, would be subject to scrutiny across the board, not just by members of Congress, but more importantly by people who actually know how the technical aspects of nuclear programs can advance and how we can effectively verify, in the most rigorous way possible, that -- that the terms of a deal are being met.

So the bottom line is this: We may not get there, but we have a chance to resolve the nuclear issue peacefully.

And I should point out also, by the way, that even if we get a nuclear deal, and we are assured that Iran doesn't possess nuclear weapons, we've still got a whole bunch of problems with Iran on state- sponsored terrorisms, their rhetoric towards Israel, their financing of Hezbollah. We've got differences with respect to Syria.

It's not as if suddenly, you know, we've got a great relationship with Iran. It solves one particular problem that is urgent. And it solves it better than the other alternatives that might present themselves.

So -- so I -- my main message to Congress at this point is just hold your fire. Nobody around the world, least of all the Iranians, doubt my ability to get some additional sanctions passed, should these negotiations fail. That's not a hard vote for me to get through Congress.

And so, the notion that we need to have additional sanctions or even the possibility of sanctions hanging over their head to force them to a better deal -- hey, I think the Iranians know that that is certainly in our back pocket if the negotiations fail.

With respect to violent extremism, my -- my impression is that Europe has consistently taken this seriously. During the course of my presidency, we have worked collaboratively and with great urgency and a recognition that not only do you have foreigners who may be trying to hatch plots in Europe, but that, given large immigrant populations, it's important to -- to reach out to and work with local communities and to have a very effective intelligence and counterterrorism cooperation between countries and between the United States and Europe.

There's no doubt that the most recent events has amplified those concerns. I think one of the things that I've learned over the last six years is that there's always more that we can do. We can always do it better. We learn from mistakes. Each incident that occurs teaches our professionals how we might be able to prevent these the next time.

And, you know, I'm confident that the very strong cooperation that already exists with Europe will get that much better in the months and years to come.

QUESTION: Do you believe that (inaudible) sensitize (inaudible) Great Britain has? (inaudible)

OBAMA: Here's -- here's where I actually think that Europe has some particular challenges. And I said this to David. The United States has one big advantage in this whole process. And it's not that our law enforcement or our intelligence services, et cetera, are so much better, although ours are very, very good, and I think Europeans would recognize that we've got capabilities others don't have.

Our biggest advantage, Major, is that our Muslim populations, they -- they feel themselves to be Americans. And there is, you know, this incredible process of immigration and assimilation that is part of our tradition that -- that is probably our greatest strength.

Now, it doesn't mean that we aren't subject to the kinds of tragedies that we saw at the Boston Marathon, but that, I think, has been helpful. There are parts of Europe in which that's not the case, and that's probably the greatest danger that Europe faces, which is why as they respond as they work with us to respond to these circumstances, it's important for Europe not to simply respond with a hammer and law enforcement and military approaches to these problems, but there also has to be a recognition that the stronger the ties of a North African -- or a Frenchman of North African descent to French values, French republic, a sense of opportunity, that's going to be as important, if not more important, in over time solving this problem. And I think there's a recognition that across Europe, and it's important that we don't lose that.

The last point I'll make, and then I'll turn it over to David, is with respect to the issue of intelligence-gathering, signal intelligence encryptions. This is a challenge that we have been working on since I've been president. Obviously, it was amplified when Mr. Snowden did what he did. It's gone off the pages of -- the front pages of the news, but we haven't stopped working on it. And we've been in dialogue with companies and have systematically worked through ways in which we can meet legitimate privacy concerns, but also meet the very real concerns that David identified and my FBI Director Jim Comey identified.

Social media and the Internet is the primary way in which these terrorist organizations are communicating. Now, that's no different than anybody else, but they're good at it and when we have the ability to track that in a way that is legal, conforms with due process, rule of law, and presents oversight, then that's the capability that we have to preserve.

And the biggest damage that was done as -- as a consequence of the Snowden disclosures was, I think in some cases, a complete undermining of trust. Some would say that was justified. I would argue that -- that although there are some legitimate concerns there, overall the United States government and, from what I've seen, the British government, have operated in a scrupulous and lawful way to try to balance these security and privacy concerns.

And we can do better. And that's what we're doing. But we're still going to have to find ways to -- to make sure that if an Al Qaida affiliate is operating in Great Britain or in the United States, that we can try to prevent real tragedy. And I think the companies want to see that as well. They're patriots. They have families that they want to see protected.

We just have to work through, in many cases what are technical issues. So it's not so much that there's a difference in intent, but how to square the circle on these issues is -- is difficult. And we're working with partners like Great Britain and the United Kingdom, but we're also going to be in dialogue with the companies to try to make that -- make that work.

CAMERON: On the Iranian issue, I won't add much to what the president said.

I'll just make this point that I don't think you can characterize it as, if there's a deal, then the pressure is off Iran, and if there isn't a deal, new pressure has to be applied to Iran.

I mean, even if there is a deal, the key to that deal will be transparency and verification and making sure that the country isn't developing a nuclear weapon, and that will mean repeated pressure, even after a deal is done. I think that's very important.

And I would absolutely back up what Barack says about recognizing that in -- in so many other ways, we have some major disagreements with what the Iranians have been doing.

I mean, Britain has suffered particularly from the appalling way that our embassy and our staff were treated in that country. So, you know, we are -- we approach this a huge amount of skepticism and concern, but the goal of an Iran without a nuclear weapon makes these talks worthwhile.

On the issues, has -- your question, has -- is this is a turning point for Europe in terms of terrorism, I would argue that we turned some time ago. Maybe Britain in particular because of the appalling attacks that took place in 2005, but there have been attacks elsewhere in Europe. I mean, since I've been prime minister, there's probably been at least one major plot every year of quite a significant nature that we have managed to intercept, stop and, you know -- and prevent.

So the awareness of the scale of the challenge we face is absolutely there across government, across parliament, across the different political parties, in the police and intelligence services.

I think there is an opportunity for countries in Europe, who perhaps up to now have been less affected, to work with them and make sure that we share knowledge and skills. Because when you say, you know, have you -- the turning point is making sure your legislation is up to date, making sure your police and security services have the capabilities they need, making sure you've got programs that can channel extremists away and deradicalize them, making sure that you're better integrating your communities.

It means doing all of those things.

I very much agree with what Barack says about the importance of building strong and integrated societies. I made a speech about this in Munich a couple of years ago, saying that it had been a mistake in the past when some countries had treated different groups and different religious groups as sort of separate blocs, rather than trying to build a strong common home together.

That is what we should be doing, and that is what our policy is directed to.

And, of course, you need to have, as I believe we are, a multiracial, multiethnic society of huge opportunity, wherein one generation or two generations, you can come to our country and you can be in the cabinet, you can serve at the highest level in the armed forces, you can sit on the bench as a judge.

You know, I've got in my cabinet someone just like that, who's -- you know, who, in two generations, his family's gone from arriving in Britain to sitting at the -- that's vitally important, as is combating unemployment, combating poverty.

But here's, I think, the really determining point: You can have, tragically, people who have had all the advantages of integration, who've had all the economic opportunities that our countries can offer, who still get seduced by this poisonous, radical, death cult of a narrative.

We've seen in recent weeks people who've gone to fight in Syria and who may threaten us here, back at home, who had every opportunity and every advantage in life, in terms of integration.