Secretary of State John Kerry argued that having "anytime, anywhere" access to all of Iran's nuclear sites was "not on the table"
JOHN DICKERSON, FACE THE NATION: Secretary Moniz, one of the real opponents of this deal, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said of the 24-day waiting period on inspections, he said, you wouldn't tell a drug dealer, give them 24-day notice. They would just flush the drugs down the toilet.
Does he have a point?
ERNEST MONIZ, U.S. ENERGY SECRETARY: I don't think that's really an option here with nuclear materials.
The first point is that, under IAEA engagements, they have no time frame for resolving issues when going to undeclared sites. So, first of all, getting a defined time frame is very, very critical. There has to be a process to go through with the P5-plus-one to force -- in case of a dispute, to force inspection.
Iran otherwise is in breach. Now, 24 days, we feel very confident in the capability of IAEA with environmental sampling to detect any nuclear activity very, very long after it has occurred.
DICKERSON: What happened, Mr. Secretary, with anytime, anywhere?
SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN KERRY: Never -- this is a term that honestly I never heard in the four years that we were negotiating. It was not on the table.
There's no such thing in arms control as anytime, anywhere. There isn't any nation in the world, none, that has an anytime, anywhere. And the truth is, what we always were negotiating was an end to the interminable delays that people had previously.
What Ernie just said is that the IAEA has no way to end it. We negotiated a way to end it. We have a finite time period. That's never happened before. And we have one nation's ability to take this to the Security Council to enforce it. That is unique. And we think it was a huge accomplishment to be able to get this finite period.
DICKERSON: Just to check the record here, Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser, said in April you will have anywhere, anytime, 24-7 access.
KERRY: Well, we do, but -- we have access to Fordow, access to Natanz, access to these places.
I don't know if he was referring everywhere, but an access resolution of an IAEA challenge for a suspected facility that's undeclared, this is a breakthrough agreement which has a finite period that our intel community, and our scientists -- and here is one of the foremost nuclear scientists in the country telling us that that is -- there is no way for them to hide that material or do away in 24 days.
MONIZ: If I could just jump and clarify that again, that, in IAEA world, it is very important to distinguish declared and undeclared sites.
Declared, we have 24-hour access. Undeclared, we have this process, anywhere, I might add.
DICKERSON: We will have to move on there.
Secretary Kerry, you're allowing as a part of this deal a terrorist nation to get both conventional arms and ballistic missiles. Why is that a good idea and why is that a part of this?
KERRY: Actually, we're not.
There is a limit on their ability to do so. Under the arms embargo, arms control, there will be limit of five years, and under the missile, in eight years, and the reason that we're only able to limit them to the five and eight, which is quite extraordinary that we got that, was that three of the nations negotiating thought they shouldn't have any and were ready to hold out to do that.
And we said under no circumstances. We have to have those. And they add on to additional mechanisms that we have to hold them accountable on arms and missiles. We have the missile control technology regime. We have other missile restraints on them. We also have other U.N. resolutions that prevent them from moving arms to the Houthi, prevents them from moving arms to the Shia, prevents them from -- to the Shia militia in Iraq, prevents them from moving arms to Hezbollah.
So, we have an ability way beyond, nothing to do with this agreement, to continue to enforce those issues.