CNN "The Situation Room"- Transcript: Nuclear Weapons

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Congressman, thanks very much for joining us.

It certainly sounds, at least on the surface, Iran going in, doing its own inspecting, even if the IAEA is around there, it sounds alarming, but what's your reaction?

REP. ADAM SMITH (D), WASHINGTON: Well, I don't think it is anywhere near as alarming as it's being presented.

I'm still looking at the agreement. I'm leaning in favor. But I have questions still to be answered. But, frankly, this isn't one of them. This is something that the administration actually did brief members of Congress on some time ago.

And it's a matter of taking samples. And the Iranians want to take the samples themselves while the IAEA monitors them taking those samples. That's it. I think the critics -- go ahead.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Let me just press you on that one point, Congressman. The Iranians decide where the samples should be taken from? Or can the IAEA instruct those Iranian inspectors to go and take samples from very precise locations?

SMITH: My understanding is the IAEA controls that. And this is a small part of the larger agreement in the areas that are being monitored by IAEA.

This is not -- no one says this is an active site. This is not a place where they have centrifuges. This is not a place where they're enriching uranium. All of those other sites have complete control of the IAEA all the time doing the inspections. This is a small site based on past activity, which is important, but it is not as important as going forward making sure that Iran is not doing more that is in violation of the agreement.

And, there, the IAEA has very, very intrusive inspections in place in this agreement. So I think this is a small issue that's being blown out of proportion by those who oppose the deal for a variety of reasons.

BLITZER: You say you're still undecided, you have some concerns. I want to get into that.

But, right now, this new CNN/ORC poll that just came out, we asked, should Congress approve the nuclear agreement with Iran? Forty-one percent said yes; 56 percent said no. You know there's some influential Democrats like Senator Schumer, Senator Menendez, who already said they won't support it. What's your biggest concern right now?

SMITH: I think the thing that's making me lean towards the agreement is, if you judge it on, does it stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, does it put us in the best possible position to do that, it's a very strong agreement. They're forced to dismantle all but a relatively small number of centrifuges.

They're forced to get rid of all the enriched uranium, except for a very small amount, and they're under very aggressive inspection regime for a long time and unable to build anything further for 15 years.

I think it's a very strong agreement in that regard. But, look, Iran is a country that is doing all kinds of bad things in the Middle East and elsewhere. And if you want to say, look, Iran's a bad country, we shouldn't go a deal with them, well, then you're not in favor of any deal.

But the point of this deal was to stop them from getting a nuclear weapon. That was the focus. It wasn't somehow, if we do this agreement, Iran will become a pacifist country and won't be doing all these bad -- we still have to work on those other issues. We still have to protect Israel. We still have to protect our Arab allies in the region from Iranian activity.

But if you're looking at, how do we stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, no one has really presented to this point a better approach than what is in this agreement. And that's what I'm still looking for. I'm meeting with constituents. If they have a better approach, I'm anxious to hear it. But I haven't heard it yet.

BLITZER: In our new poll, we also asked this question, Congressman. How is President Obama handling the U.S. relationship with Iran? Thirty-eight percent approve of the job he's doing, but 60 percent disapprove.

What does he need to do to convince the American public that he's on the right track here?

SMITH: I mean, that's -- I'm not sure what he needs to do to convince the American public.

But I think what he needs to do to convince Congress is keep talking about the details of this agreement. Look, I mean, it's -- again, we have a whole lot of issues with Iran that have nothing to do with their nuclear program. But if you're solely focused on the nuclear program, that's what this agreement was trying to do.

[18:15:00]

I think what he would have to convince them is he's aware that it's not just about the nuclear program, that there is much more that we need to do. We need to work with Israel, as I said. We need to work with our Arab allies to try to contain a lot of the things that Iran is doing.

I think that's the point is to make sure that we know that this is not the only problem with Iran, but it is one very big one. We do not want an Iran with a nuclear weapon. How do we stop that? This agreement does as effective a job of it as anything that has thus far been presented to me.

BLITZER: All right, Congressman, stand by. We have more to discuss, including our top story, the new escalating tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

Don't forget, North Korea does have a nuclear bomb, maybe a dozen, maybe on their way to 100.

Much more with Congressman Adam Smith when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:20:42]

BLITZER: We're back with the top Democrat in the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Adam Smith of Washington State.

Congressman, the United States, as you know, right now closely monitoring -- the tensions seemingly escalating on the Korean Peninsula along the DMZ, where the U.S. still has about 30,000 troops. These are the first clashes we have seen now in about five years between North and South Korea.

At this time, though, as you well know, North Korea does have a nuclear bomb, maybe a dozen, maybe even more. How concerned are you right now that what has happened over the past 20 years in North Korea, they went ahead and developed a nuclear bomb, even though in the '90s, during the Bill Clinton administration, they worked out a deal to kill their nuclear program? How worried are you that Iran might do the same thing?

SMITH: Iran is an entirely different country.

North Korea is the most isolated country in the world with a crazy dictator. And they don't care about their own people. They starve, literally, a million, two million a year. So there's really no comparison between North Korea and Iran.

The reason Iran is at the negotiating table is because of the sanctions and because of the impact it's having on their economy. And if Iran violates this agreement in any way, those sanctions go right back on. Iran is a country that actually does hold elections. Now, they're not free and fair in terms of who the candidates are, but they have a populace that is actively engaged in what's going on in their country, even if it is a dictatorship that is controlling that engagement.

North Korea is a very, very dangerous country precisely because they are so irrational and so unpredictable. Iran is not really an irrational actor. They are dangerous. Their ideology is dangerous. They certainly threaten Israel and they threaten us. But the thing about North Korea is they are utterly unpredictable and completely irrational and armed with nuclear weapons in a very, very dangerous part of the world.

So, I don't think there's really a comparison between North Korea and Iran, not that that's particularly reassuring, given what North Korea has been up to recently. That is cause for great national security concern for us and for that entire region.

BLITZER: We know that Russia seems to be on the verge of selling advanced S-300 air defense missile systems to Iran. The Obama administration strongly opposes that. Is there anything the U.S. can do to block a sale like this from Russia to Iran?

SMITH: You know, I don't know that there is.

And, to some degree, this points up the importance of this nuclear deal, because the ability to get this deal has hinged on the fact that Russia, along with China and the E.U., have been willing to enforce sanctions on Iran.

And, as we can see, the ability of that sanctions regime to hold on, even if we don't have an agreement limiting Iran's nuclear weapons, is not -- not something that we can count on. So if we have an agreement that's going to control Iran's nuclear program like this one does, I think we'd be wise to seize it, because Russia, China, gosh, even some in the E.U. -- remember, some of the early equipment that was sold to Iran came out of Europe -- all those countries are more willing to do business with Iran than we are.

And how long the sanctions regime holds if we reject this deal, I think, is a wide-open question.

BLITZER: Congressman Adam Smith of Washington, thanks very much for joining us.

SMITH: Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source