Remarks at the Religious Action Center of Reform
Remarks at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism Biennial Leadership Policy Conference
Remarks
Wendy R. Sherman
Under
Secretary for Political Affairs
Doubletree
Hotel
Arlington, VA
April 27,
2015
________________________________________
UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: Good morning.
AUDIENCE: Good morning.
UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: That’s nice. (Laughter.) It’s – I’m really very happy to be here today among so many friends.
Thank you Rabbi Stone, Warren, for that wonderful introduction. As most people say, you should stop now. Our families have grown up together at Temple Emanuel from births to Bat Mitzvah’s, weddings, and funerals. Our daughters used to sneak out of Hebrew class and hide in the rabbi’s study. (Laughter.) We’ve watched our daughters grow into young professionals who share our social conscience and who have blessed us, or soon will bless us with grandchildren. We have also been blessed by your leadership, Warren, particularly in making us all think about the planet, about the sanctity of our environment, and the need to urgently address climate change. Rabbi Stone is a leader for all of us in that.
I also want to thank the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. You do such critical work on issues that are really at the heart and soul of what binds us all together. It’s fitting that your conference this year is focused on equality and civil rights – ongoing struggles our nation continues to grapple with, even in 2015, as we’ve seen too often over the past year, and in my home city of Baltimore.
I know last night you honored Rabbi David Saperstein. And I want to thank you for sharing his leadership, intellect, moral conscience, and skill with us at the State Department and with the entire world now as our ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom. We are thrilled to have David at State, but we realize that our gain is your loss. Fortunately, the Reform movement, with leaders like Rabbi Rick Jacobs and David’s replacement at the RAC, Rabbi Jonah Pesner, the movement continues to be led by visionary, passionate, and committed leaders.
I want to take a moment and discuss the relationship between social conscience, social action, civil rights, and religion in quite a personal way. As I grew up, my family attended Baltimore Hebrew Congregation in Baltimore. Rabbi Morris Lieberman led that congregation for many years. One night he gave a stirring sermon on civil rights and was a leader with Parren Mitchell and others to desegregate Baltimore’s restaurants. My father, who led a residential real estate firm, went to see Rabbi Lieberman after the sermon to ask what he could do to help. Rabbi Lieberman said he could advertise open housing, something that had never been done before in highly segregated Baltimore. My father responded that doing so would be economic suicide. Lieberman responded, “You asked and I told you.” (Laughter.)
Well, my father talked with my mother and they decided to do just what Rabbi Lieberman had suggested, even knowing they would pay, and our family would pay, a high cost. So I grew up going to civil rights marches, and having people call our house and threaten to bomb it. And indeed, my parents faced an economic cost in spite of the fact that my father, at the Orioles front office request, found Frank Robinson a house in what had been an all-white neighborhood. When asked why Robinson wanted to live there, my father, who went house to house to ensure owners would not flee, simply said, “Like you, he wants good schools for his kids and a safe neighborhood.”
So social action has been a way of life, a gift from my parents. And social action means not being afraid, or if you are, to move ahead anyway, if it’s the right thing to do. So this morning, I’m here to talk about what President Obama, Secretary Kerry, myself, and so many others are doing to make the world safer, even when it’s hard.
This is a very significant time for all of us to be coming together. Just a few days ago, we celebrated Israel’s Independence Day, an occasion where we remember the truly heroic and historic efforts that led, finally, to the creation of a Jewish state. I hope you all had the opportunity to hear the powerful words spoken by Vice President Joe Biden at the celebration here in Washington, where he said: “We are like family – sometimes we drive each other crazy, but we love each other and we protect each other.” I know we all feel the same way.
I also, as Warren said, just returned from Vienna, where we had the latest round of negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program. And I’m heading up to New York this afternoon, before flying to India, to join Secretary Kerry for more meetings with Foreign Minister Zarif and his Iranian colleagues on this very important issue. We will be working nonstop between now and the end of June to see if we can resolve this most pressing national security challenge peacefully, which will make Israel, the region, the United States, and, indeed, the world safer. (Applause.)
I know that in the Jewish community here in America, a community I’m proud to be part of, there’s been a lot of discussion during the past few weeks about our relationship with Israel, and Prime Minister Netanyahu in particular, and a lot of interest and concern about our efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Given the importance of these issues, I’m going to spend just a few minutes talking to you about them today, and then I’d be happy to take your questions.
Every time I hear President Obama talk about issues that matter to American Jews, and some of you have heard directly, I’m always struck about how personally he feels about those issues and how personally he feels about his connection to the Jewish people and to Israel. This deep-seated feeling is what drives his unwavering commitment to Israel’s security and his desire to ensure Israel’s future as a democratic and Jewish state.
It’s also what drives this Administration’s approach to the Iran nuclear threat. We understand that Israel is in a tough neighborhood. That’s why we have given Israel more security assistance than any other Administration in history. (Applause.) And that’s why we’re doing everything we can to ensure that that neighborhood doesn’t become even tougher with a nuclear-armed Iran. We believe that the parameters, announced two weeks ago in Lausanne, offer the best chance at preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and just as importantly, that the alternatives fall far short of what we’ll have if we’re able to turn the political framework into a comprehensive agreement.
Without such an agreement, Iran’s breakout time to get enough nuclear material for a weapon is two or three months – what it is right now. With this agreement it will be one year, up to six times as long as it is now, for at least 10 years. Without this agreement, Iran would expand its enrichment program to 100,000 centrifuges in the next few years. With this agreement, we will have limited Iran to operating about 5,000 centrifuges for at least the next decade. Without this agreement, Iran could produce two weapons’ worth of weapons-grade plutonium every single year. With this agreement, Iran is going to have zero weapons-grade plutonium, and not just for 10 years, but for the lifetime of the reactor.
Without this agreement, Iran would be able to expand its stockpile of currently 10 tons of enriched uranium. With this agreement, that stockpile will be reduced by 98 percent to only three kilograms[1] of a working stockpile. And without this agreement, the international community through the International Atomic Energy Agency would only have its pre-joint plan of action – the first step – insight and inspection into Iran’s declared nuclear program and no ability to look for undeclared nuclear activities.
But with this agreement, we will have the most extensive system of monitoring and verification we have ever negotiated for any country anywhere in the world. We will have eyes into every part of Iran’s nuclear program from cradle to grave. And if we detect Iran is trying to break its commitments or violating the agreement, we will have every single option on the table to respond to them that we have today. So when you look at the comparison between the agreement we are negotiating and the chance that we would succeed, the better course of action is abundantly clear.
Now, I know that the Iranian nuclear issue is at the forefront of the Jewish community’s concerns, but I also know that there are other important concerns as well. First, as you know, we have always had Israel’s back in the international arena, and we have repeatedly stood up against efforts to delegitimize Israel or single Israel out unfairly, even when it meant standing alone. That has been the case and will continue to be the case.
As we’ve said, it’s true that Prime Minister Netanyahu raised questions about his government’s commitment to a two-state solution in comments he made right before and right after the Israeli election. Now he’s working to form a government, as we speak, with a deadline approaching and I certainly don’t and won’t want to get ahead of that process. We will be watching very closely to see what happens after a new government is formed on this issue of working towards two states living side by side in peace and security. (Applause.)
If the new Israeli government is seen as stepping back from its commitment to a two-state solution, something that all of you and a vast majority of American Jews supports, that makes our job in the international arena a lot tougher. Because our ability to push back on efforts to internationalize efforts to address Israeli-Palestinian issues has depended on our insistence that the best course in achieving a two-solution is through direct negotiation between the parties.
The Administration is also absolutely committed to doing all that we can to combat rising anti-Semitism – including by supporting our European allies’ efforts, where we’ve tragically seen this hatred rear its ugly head too often in the past year.
We helped to plan the historic UN General Assembly session on anti-Semitism, at which scores of countries from throughout the world stood up to condemn anti-Semitism. And we will continue to make crystal clear that anti-Semitism has absolutely no place in legitimate policy differences over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Finally, when I look at all the great work that the Reform Movement is doing on a wide range of social issues here in the United States, it underscores for me how Jewish values and American values – we have a cell phone interruption. That’s okay; we all go through it. Finally, when I look at all the great – I’m just glad it wasn’t mine – (laughter) – finally, when I look at all the great work in the Reform Movement is doing on a wide range of social issues here in the United States, it underscores for me how Jewish values and American values are inextricably connected. Jewish values are American values.
Just look at the issues you all are focused on here today – equality, civil rights, social justice. Without these things in our society, all of us are less free and less secure.
The Jewish community, through the Federations, does critical work to support vulnerable populations. All of you have been on the forefront of efforts to expand civil rights. And you have been among the strongest voices in support of immigration reform, affordable health care, and other key Administration priorities.
I could go on, but I want to have time to take your questions, and here’s the key point: Our shared values have provided a basis for partnership on critical domestic and foreign policy priorities over the past six-plus years, and they will continue to do so for the remainder of President Obama’s second term. We intend to use every single day of the rest of this Administration to work to make our country and the world a better and safer place, even when it’s hard to do. At the State Department, that means working as hard as we possibly can to achieve a good agreement with Iran that provides us and the world with the assurances that Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon.
With that, I’m happy to take your questions. (Applause.)
MODERATOR: We have staff positioned throughout the room, so you can keep your seats. Just raise your hand and I will be happy to call on you.
Rabbi Limmer. Someone will come to you with a mike.
QUESTION: Under Secretary, I want to thank you for sharing (inaudible). I found your articulation --
PARTICIPANT: A little bit louder, Rabbi.
QUESTION: I found your articulation of what we gained with this deal and what would happen were this deal not in place to be exactly what I have been looking for to articulate. My question is –
MODERATOR: Sorry, Rabbi Limmer, can you keep the mike? It’s for the webstream. Thank you.
Q Remarks at the Religious Action
Center of Reform Judaism Biennial Leadership Policy
Conference Remarks ________________________________________ UNDER
SECRETARY SHERMAN: Good
morning. AUDIENCE: Good
morning. UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN:
That’s nice. (Laughter.) It’s – I’m really very
happy to be here today among so many friends. Thank you
Rabbi Stone, Warren, for that wonderful introduction. As
most people say, you should stop now. Our families have
grown up together at Temple Emanuel from births to Bat
Mitzvah’s, weddings, and funerals. Our daughters used to
sneak out of Hebrew class and hide in the rabbi’s study.
(Laughter.) We’ve watched our daughters grow into young
professionals who share our social conscience and who have
blessed us, or soon will bless us with grandchildren. We
have also been blessed by your leadership, Warren,
particularly in making us all think about the planet, about
the sanctity of our environment, and the need to urgently
address climate change. Rabbi Stone is a leader for all of
us in that. I also want to thank the Religious Action
Center of Reform Judaism. You do such critical work on
issues that are really at the heart and soul of what binds
us all together. It’s fitting that your conference this
year is focused on equality and civil rights – ongoing
struggles our nation continues to grapple with, even in
2015, as we’ve seen too often over the past year, and in
my home city of Baltimore. I know last night you honored
Rabbi David Saperstein. And I want to thank you for sharing
his leadership, intellect, moral conscience, and skill with
us at the State Department and with the entire world now as
our ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom.
We are thrilled to have David at State, but we realize that
our gain is your loss. Fortunately, the Reform movement,
with leaders like Rabbi Rick Jacobs and David’s
replacement at the RAC, Rabbi Jonah Pesner, the movement
continues to be led by visionary, passionate, and committed
leaders. I want to take a moment and discuss the
relationship between social conscience, social action, civil
rights, and religion in quite a personal way. As I grew up,
my family attended Baltimore Hebrew Congregation in
Baltimore. Rabbi Morris Lieberman led that congregation for
many years. One night he gave a stirring sermon on civil
rights and was a leader with Parren Mitchell and others to
desegregate Baltimore’s restaurants. My father, who led a
residential real estate firm, went to see Rabbi Lieberman
after the sermon to ask what he could do to help. Rabbi
Lieberman said he could advertise open housing, something
that had never been done before in highly segregated
Baltimore. My father responded that doing so would be
economic suicide. Lieberman responded, “You asked and I
told you.” (Laughter.) Well, my father talked with my
mother and they decided to do just what Rabbi Lieberman had
suggested, even knowing they would pay, and our family would
pay, a high cost. So I grew up going to civil rights
marches, and having people call our house and threaten to
bomb it. And indeed, my parents faced an economic cost in
spite of the fact that my father, at the Orioles front
office request, found Frank Robinson a house in what had
been an all-white neighborhood. When asked why Robinson
wanted to live there, my father, who went house to house to
ensure owners would not flee, simply said, “Like you, he
wants good schools for his kids and a safe
neighborhood.” So social action has been a way of life,
a gift from my parents. And social action means not being
afraid, or if you are, to move ahead anyway, if it’s the
right thing to do. So this morning, I’m here to talk about
what President Obama, Secretary Kerry, myself, and so many
others are doing to make the world safer, even when it’s
hard. This is a very significant time for all of us to be
coming together. Just a few days ago, we celebrated
Israel’s Independence Day, an occasion where we remember
the truly heroic and historic efforts that led, finally, to
the creation of a Jewish state. I hope you all had the
opportunity to hear the powerful words spoken by Vice
President Joe Biden at the celebration here in Washington,
where he said: “We are like family – sometimes we drive
each other crazy, but we love each other and we protect each
other.” I know we all feel the same way. I also, as
Warren said, just returned from Vienna, where we had the
latest round of negotiations with Iran over its nuclear
program. And I’m heading up to New York this afternoon,
before flying to India, to join Secretary Kerry for more
meetings with Foreign Minister Zarif and his Iranian
colleagues on this very important issue. We will be working
nonstop between now and the end of June to see if we can
resolve this most pressing national security challenge
peacefully, which will make Israel, the region, the United
States, and, indeed, the world safer. (Applause.) I know
that in the Jewish community here in America, a community
I’m proud to be part of, there’s been a lot of
discussion during the past few weeks about our relationship
with Israel, and Prime Minister Netanyahu in particular, and
a lot of interest and concern about our efforts to prevent
Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Given the importance
of these issues, I’m going to spend just a few minutes
talking to you about them today, and then I’d be happy to
take your questions. Every time I hear President Obama
talk about issues that matter to American Jews, and some of
you have heard directly, I’m always struck about how
personally he feels about those issues and how personally he
feels about his connection to the Jewish people and to
Israel. This deep-seated feeling is what drives his
unwavering commitment to Israel’s security and his desire
to ensure Israel’s future as a democratic and Jewish
state. It’s also what drives this Administration’s
approach to the Iran nuclear threat. We understand that
Israel is in a tough neighborhood. That’s why we have
given Israel more security assistance than any other
Administration in history. (Applause.) And that’s why
we’re doing everything we can to ensure that that
neighborhood doesn’t become even tougher with a
nuclear-armed Iran. We believe that the parameters,
announced two weeks ago in Lausanne, offer the best chance
at preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and just
as importantly, that the alternatives fall far short of what
we’ll have if we’re able to turn the political framework
into a comprehensive agreement. Without such an agreement,
Iran’s breakout time to get enough nuclear material for a
weapon is two or three months – what it is right now. With
this agreement it will be one year, up to six times as long
as it is now, for at least 10 years. Without this agreement,
Iran would expand its enrichment program to 100,000
centrifuges in the next few years. With this agreement, we
will have limited Iran to operating about 5,000 centrifuges
for at least the next decade. Without this agreement, Iran
could produce two weapons’ worth of weapons-grade
plutonium every single year. With this agreement, Iran is
going to have zero weapons-grade plutonium, and not just for
10 years, but for the lifetime of the reactor. Without
this agreement, Iran would be able to expand its stockpile
of currently 10 tons of enriched uranium. With this
agreement, that stockpile will be reduced by 98 percent to
only three kilograms[1] of a working stockpile. And without
this agreement, the international community through the
International Atomic Energy Agency would only have its
pre-joint plan of action – the first step – insight and
inspection into Iran’s declared nuclear program and no
ability to look for undeclared nuclear activities. But
with this agreement, we will have the most extensive system
of monitoring and verification we have ever negotiated for
any country anywhere in the world. We will have eyes into
every part of Iran’s nuclear program from cradle to grave.
And if we detect Iran is trying to break its commitments or
violating the agreement, we will have every single option on
the table to respond to them that we have today. So when you
look at the comparison between the agreement we are
negotiating and the chance that we would succeed, the better
course of action is abundantly clear. Now, I know that the
Iranian nuclear issue is at the forefront of the Jewish
community’s concerns, but I also know that there are other
important concerns as well. First, as you know, we have
always had Israel’s back in the international arena, and
we have repeatedly stood up against efforts to delegitimize
Israel or single Israel out unfairly, even when it meant
standing alone. That has been the case and will continue to
be the case. As we’ve said, it’s true that Prime
Minister Netanyahu raised questions about his government’s
commitment to a two-state solution in comments he made right
before and right after the Israeli election. Now he’s
working to form a government, as we speak, with a deadline
approaching and I certainly don’t and won’t want to get
ahead of that process. We will be watching very closely to
see what happens after a new government is formed on this
issue of working towards two states living side by side in
peace and security. (Applause.) If the new Israeli
government is seen as stepping back from its commitment to a
two-state solution, something that all of you and a vast
majority of American Jews supports, that makes our job in
the international arena a lot tougher. Because our ability
to push back on efforts to internationalize efforts to
address Israeli-Palestinian issues has depended on our
insistence that the best course in achieving a two-solution
is through direct negotiation between the parties. The
Administration is also absolutely committed to doing all
that we can to combat rising anti-Semitism – including by
supporting our European allies’ efforts, where we’ve
tragically seen this hatred rear its ugly head too often in
the past year. We helped to plan the historic UN General
Assembly session on anti-Semitism, at which scores of
countries from throughout the world stood up to condemn
anti-Semitism. And we will continue to make crystal clear
that anti-Semitism has absolutely no place in legitimate
policy differences over the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. Finally, when I look at all the great work that
the Reform Movement is doing on a wide range of social
issues here in the United States, it underscores for me how
Jewish values and American values – we have a cell phone
interruption. That’s okay; we all go through it. Finally,
when I look at all the great – I’m just glad it wasn’t
mine – (laughter) – finally, when I look at all the
great work in the Reform Movement is doing on a wide range
of social issues here in the United States, it underscores
for me how Jewish values and American values are
inextricably connected. Jewish values are American
values. Just look at the issues you all are focused on
here today – equality, civil rights, social justice.
Without these things in our society, all of us are less free
and less secure. The Jewish community, through the
Federations, does critical work to support vulnerable
populations. All of you have been on the forefront of
efforts to expand civil rights. And you have been among the
strongest voices in support of immigration reform,
affordable health care, and other key Administration
priorities. I could go on, but I want to have time to take
your questions, and here’s the key point: Our shared
values have provided a basis for partnership on critical
domestic and foreign policy priorities over the past
six-plus years, and they will continue to do so for the
remainder of President Obama’s second term. We intend to
use every single day of the rest of this Administration to
work to make our country and the world a better and safer
place, even when it’s hard to do. At the State Department,
that means working as hard as we possibly can to achieve a
good agreement with Iran that provides us and the world with
the assurances that Iran will not obtain a nuclear
weapon. With that, I’m happy to take your questions.
(Applause.) MODERATOR: We have staff
positioned throughout the room, so you can keep your seats.
Just raise your hand and I will be happy to call on
you. Rabbi Limmer. Someone will come to you with a
mike. QUESTION: Under Secretary, I want
to thank you for sharing (inaudible). I found your
articulation -- PARTICIPANT: A little bit
louder, Rabbi. QUESTION: I found your
articulation of what we gained with this deal and what would
happen were this deal not in place to be exactly what I have
been looking for to articulate. My question is
– MODERATOR: Sorry, Rabbi Limmer, can
you keep the mike? It’s for the webstream. Thank
you. QUESTION: Oh, it’s for the
webstream. Sorry. I have two mikes. (Laughter.) Never do
this to a rabbi. (Laughter.) My brief question is really a
request: If you could possibly make – share with us that
brilliant articulation of what we gain with this deal and
what would happen were this deal not in place. I, for one,
would like to bring it back to my congregation. Thank you.
(Applause.) UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: I
think the remarks will be available online, and it’s being
streamed as well. You’ll be able to find it, I think, on
the State Department website eventually.
Thanks. MODERATOR: We’re going to go
over here. The mike is coming to you; one
moment. QUESTION: Thank you. That was a
wonderful presentation. Before the first Gulf war, President
Bush the elder had sanctions in place, and they were
working. And he ended the sanctions shortly after he said
they’re working, and we ended up in war. I’m very
concerned that we have sanctions working and that we’ll
end them too soon and we won’t get the deal and we won’t
get the enforcement and we’ll end up in war and in an even
more dangerous situation. UNDER SECRETARY
SHERMAN: Thank you. It’s a very good question.
The sanctions that we have on Iran – which are U.S.
sanctions, EU sanctions, UN Security Council sanctions –
are quite vast and quite effective. But they are not
effective at preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
Sanctions have helped to bring Iran to the negotiating
table, but just a few years ago Iran had only 164
centrifuges. As the sanctions came on and as they got more
profound, Iran went to the state where they are today, which
is to have 19,000 centrifuges, because Iran is in a
resistance economy and a resistance culture, and they
believed that if the world was going to put sanctions on
them, they were going to keep marching forward with their
program in the way that they felt they needed to. The only
thing that has stopped Iran’s program – and, in fact,
rolled it back – is what’s called the JPOA, the Joint
Plan of Action, which was the first agreement that we
reached, the first step, the interim agreement. That
agreement stopped Iran’s program where it is so that we
would have time to negotiate a comprehensive agreement, and
it got rid of its entire 20 percent stockpile of enriched
material. And that’s critical because you go from small
enrichment – 3.5 percent, 5 percent – then you go to 20
percent, and then you go to 90 percent and highly enriched
uranium, which is fissile material for a nuclear weapon. So
the only thing – the only thing – that has stopped
Iran’s nuclear program at all has been that first step
negotiated agreement to provide time and space to negotiate
a comprehensive agreement. And secondly, it’s very
important to understand that the reason we were able to keep
sanctions together was because we were committed to trying
to find a peaceful, diplomatic solution. So countries around
the world, even good allies like Japan and South Korea, were
willing to limit the amount of oil they imported from Iran
because they believed we were working towards a peaceful
solution. If they feel we aren’t working towards a
peaceful solution, they are likely to break ranks and we
won’t be able to keep the sanctions together anyway. And
then finally, many people say – and I understand the
impulse, because you get frustrated and there’s so much
going on in the region that is it not good – that people
say, “Take military action against Iran.” Actually, our
intelligence community has assessed and said publicly that
if we took military action against Iran, it would only take
away their program for maybe two years. They have mastered
the entire nuclear fuel cycle, and you can’t bomb away
knowledge. So even if we destroyed their facilities, they
could recreate it. So the really durable solution here is
getting an agreement with enough transparency, monitoring,
and verification to understand what is going on. Thank you.
(Applause.) MODERATOR: Right here in the
front. UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: Okay. And
then I have to say, after this question, one of the women in
this audience better raise your hand. (Laughter and
applause.) But don’t take it personally. I do that
everywhere. (Laughter.) QUESTION:
You’re forgiven. (Laughter.) UNDER SECRETARY
SHERMAN: Thank you. QUESTION: I
wanted to ask you: Does the Administration
-- UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: You just have
to hold it closer. Yeah. QUESTION: Does
the Administration have a plan in place to prevent the
undermining of the agreement that you’re negotiating by
the Congress? Because the Congress seems to be intent to do
it. Would you perhaps consider having President Obama oppose
the agreement, so that the Republicans could find a way to
support it? (Laughter and applause.) UNDER
SECRETARY SHERMAN: What is there to say?
(Laughter.) QUESTION:
(Inaudible) UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN:
Thank you. You remind me of my father. (Laughter.) We’re
working very hard with Congress. Senator Cardin, who is
obviously my senator – and I’ve known Ben most of my
life – worked very hard with Senator Corker to fashion a
piece of legislation that gave the Congress a procedural way
to look at this agreement without getting into the
substance, per se. We’re very grateful, and grateful that
Senator Corker and Senator Cardin were able to reach an
agreement. This legislation will be on the floor of the
Senate this week. There will be a lot of pretty awful
amendments, quite frankly, and we’ll see where we end
up. The President has said that if the Corker-Cardin
legislation stays where it is, he will not veto it; if it
becomes something else, then he’ll have to consider his
options. MODERATOR: We have time for one
more. UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: Okay,
ladies. Over there. Happens everywhere, I just want you to
know. And there are more women in this audience, I think,
than there are men. Yes. QUESTION:
Thank you, thank you. You spoke so beautifully about the
heritage you received from you parents. Can you maybe make
some concluding comments about where your sources of
strength and inspiration come out in the incredibly hard
work that you do? UNDER SECRETARY
SHERMAN: Thank you. You asked me that question, the
first came – the first thing that came to my mind is my
husband. My – our daughter is grown up and lives in Boston
and is a committed professional herself. She works as a
professor and as a fellow at Boston’s Immigration and
Asylum Law Clinic and she is a very committed person to
immigration reform in this country and to helping people who
don’t have a voice. And I think she has that heritage as
much from my parents as I have the heritage from my
parents. But I say my husband because he puts up with a
lot. I’m on airplanes all of the time. He is very
supportive of what we’re trying to do. And I was saying
– somebody said, “How do you do all the flying you
do?” Some people get up and go to the office. I get up and
go on an airplane. (Laughter.) And you learn this is what
you do. And I work with extraordinary Foreign Service
officers and civil servants. Andrew Stevenson is here with
me today and a couple of the – my other colleagues are
here. These folks do this for their living their entire
careers. I don’t. I’ve come in and out. I was in the
private sector for a decade. I come in and out of government
service. I think the inspiration is the people who every
single day – not just when they’re president of the
United States or secretary of state or under secretary for
political affairs – but every single day, they get up, you
don’t even know who they are. And they work to try to make
this world a safer place. They’re quite extraordinary and
I’m honored to serve with them. (Applause.) Thank you
all. Have a great day. ENDS UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: I
think the remarks will be available online, and it’s being
streamed as well. You’ll be able to find it, I think, on
the State Department website eventually.
Thanks. MODERATOR: We’re going to go
over here. The mike is coming to you; one
moment. QUESTION: Thank you. That was a
wonderful presentation. Before the first Gulf war, President
Bush the elder had sanctions in place, and they were
working. And he ended the sanctions shortly after he said
they’re working, and we ended up in war. I’m very
concerned that we have sanctions working and that we’ll
end them too soon and we won’t get the deal and we won’t
get the enforcement and we’ll end up in war and in an even
more dangerous situation. UNDER SECRETARY
SHERMAN: Thank you. It’s a very good question.
The sanctions that we have on Iran – which are U.S.
sanctions, EU sanctions, UN Security Council sanctions –
are quite vast and quite effective. But they are not
effective at preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
Sanctions have helped to bring Iran to the negotiating
table, but just a few years ago Iran had only 164
centrifuges. As the sanctions came on and as they got more
profound, Iran went to the state where they are today, which
is to have 19,000 centrifuges, because Iran is in a
resistance economy and a resistance culture, and they
believed that if the world was going to put sanctions on
them, they were going to keep marching forward with their
program in the way that they felt they needed to. The only
thing that has stopped Iran’s program – and, in fact,
rolled it back – is what’s called the JPOA, the Joint
Plan of Action, which was the first agreement that we
reached, the first step, the interim agreement. That
agreement stopped Iran’s program where it is so that we
would have time to negotiate a comprehensive agreement, and
it got rid of its entire 20 percent stockpile of enriched
material. And that’s critical because you go from small
enrichment – 3.5 percent, 5 percent – then you go to 20
percent, and then you go to 90 percent and highly enriched
uranium, which is fissile material for a nuclear weapon. So
the only thing – the only thing – that has stopped
Iran’s nuclear program at all has been that first step
negotiated agreement to provide time and space to negotiate
a comprehensive agreement. And secondly, it’s very
important to understand that the reason we were able to keep
sanctions together was because we were committed to trying
to find a peaceful, diplomatic solution. So countries around
the world, even good allies like Japan and South Korea, were
willing to limit the amount of oil they imported from Iran
because they believed we were working towards a peaceful
solution. If they feel we aren’t working towards a
peaceful solution, they are likely to break ranks and we
won’t be able to keep the sanctions together anyway. And
then finally, many people say – and I understand the
impulse, because you get frustrated and there’s so much
going on in the region that is it not good – that people
say, “Take military action against Iran.” Actually, our
intelligence community has assessed and said publicly that
if we took military action against Iran, it would only take
away their program for maybe two years. They have mastered
the entire nuclear fuel cycle, and you can’t bomb away
knowledge. So even if we destroyed their facilities, they
could recreate it. So the really durable solution here is
getting an agreement with enough transparency, monitoring,
and verification to understand what is going on. Thank you.
(Applause.) MODERATOR: Right here in the
front. UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: Okay. And
then I have to say, after this question, one of the women in
this audience better raise your hand. (Laughter and
applause.) But don’t take it personally. I do that
everywhere. (Laughter.) QUESTION:
You’re forgiven. (Laughter.) UNDER SECRETARY
SHERMAN: Thank you. QUESTION: I
wanted to ask you: Does the Administration
-- UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: You just have
to hold it closer. Yeah. QUESTION: Does
the Administration have a plan in place to prevent the
undermining of the agreement that you’re negotiating by
the Congress? Because the Congress seems to be intent to do
it. Would you perhaps consider having President Obama oppose
the agreement, so that the Republicans could find a way to
support it? (Laughter and applause.) UNDER
SECRETARY SHERMAN: What is there to say?
(Laughter.) QUESTION:
(Inaudible) UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN:
Thank you. You remind me of my father. (Laughter.) We’re
working very hard with Congress. Senator Cardin, who is
obviously my senator – and I’ve known Ben most of my
life – worked very hard with Senator Corker to fashion a
piece of legislation that gave the Congress a procedural way
to look at this agreement without getting into the
substance, per se. We’re very grateful, and grateful that
Senator Corker and Senator Cardin were able to reach an
agreement. This legislation will be on the floor of the
Senate this week. There will be a lot of pretty awful
amendments, quite frankly, and we’ll see where we end
up. The President has said that if the Corker-Cardin
legislation stays where it is, he will not veto it; if it
becomes something else, then he’ll have to consider his
options. MODERATOR: We have time for one
more. UNDER SECRETARY SHERMAN: Okay,
ladies. Over there. Happens everywhere, I just want you to
know. And there are more women in this audience, I think,
than there are men. Yes. QUESTION:
Thank you, thank you. You spoke so beautifully about the
heritage you received from you parents. Can you maybe make
some concluding comments about where your sources of
strength and inspiration come out in the incredibly hard
work that you do? UNDER SECRETARY
SHERMAN: Thank you. You asked me that question, the
first came – the first thing that came to my mind is my
husband. My – our daughter is grown up and lives in Boston
and is a committed professional herself. She works as a
professor and as a fellow at Boston’s Immigration and
Asylum Law Clinic and she is a very committed person to
immigration reform in this country and to helping people who
don’t have a voice. And I think she has that heritage as
much from my parents as I have the heritage from my
parents. But I say my husband because he puts up with a
lot. I’m on airplanes all of the time. He is very
supportive of what we’re trying to do. And I was saying
– somebody said, “How do you do all the flying you
do?” Some people get up and go to the office. I get up and
go on an airplane. (Laughter.) And you learn this is what
you do. And I work with extraordinary Foreign Service
officers and civil servants. Andrew Stevenson is here with
me today and a couple of the – my other colleagues are
here. These folks do this for their living their entire
careers. I don’t. I’ve come in and out. I was in the
private sector for a decade. I come in and out of government
service. I think the inspiration is the people who every
single day – not just when they’re president of the
United States or secretary of state or under secretary for
political affairs – but every single day, they get up, you
don’t even know who they are. And they work to try to make
this world a safer place. They’re quite extraordinary and
I’m honored to serve with them. (Applause.) Thank you
all. Have a great
day. ENDS
Wendy R. Sherman
Under
Secretary for Political Affairs
Doubletree
Hotel
Arlington, VA
April 27,
2015
o a
rabbi. (Laughter.) My brief question is really a request: If
you could possibly make – share with us that brilliant
articulation of what we gain with this deal and what would
happen were this deal not in place. I, for one, would like
to bring it back to my congregation. Thank you.
(Applause.)