'Meet the Press' transcript for June 21, 2009

MR. GREGORY:  But does the United States have a unique role to play here in continuing to support this freedom movement, as you call it, in Iran; an obligation to support the protestors, to really give them moral support at the very least?

MR. NETANYAHU:  I think it's clear that the United States, the people of the United States, the president of the United States, free people everywhere, decent people everywhere are amazed at the, at the, at the desire of the people there to--and their willingness to stand up for their rights.  I cannot, as I said, tell you what is going to happen.  I'll tell you what I would do, what we all would do in the face of demonstrations.  There is--as we speak, David, there's a demonstration right now outside my window, outside my office.  Well, democracies act differently.  They don't send armed agents of the regime to brutally mow down the demonstrators.  I'll tell you what I did. I called in these demonstrators, they happen to be representatives of a non-Jewish minority in Israel, the Druze community, they have certain, certain protests about the financing of their municipalities.  I called their leaders in.

MR. GREGORY:  Hm.

MR. NETANYAHU:  I talked to them.  I said, "How can I help you?" That's what democratic leaders do, that's what democratic countries do.

MR. GREGORY:  Let me, let...

MR. NETANYAHU:  We've had thousands, hundreds of thousands demonstrate in Israel right and left, but that's how we behave, that's how you behave, and I have no doubt that everyone in the world is sympathetic to the desire of the Iranian people for freedom.

MR. GREGORY:  Let me ask you about the nature of the Iranian threat.  Mohamed ElBaradei, who, as you know, runs the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in an interview with the BBC on Wednesday the following:  "The ultimate aim of Iran," he said, "as I understand it, is they want to be recognized as a major power in the Middle East.  [Increasing their nuclear capability] is to them the road to get that recognition, to get that power and prestige.  It is also an insurance policy against what they have heard in the past about regime change." My question, Prime Minister, what does all that's happening on the streets of Iran do, in your estimation, to the nature of the threat from Iran? Is this a game changer in some way?

MR. NETANYAHU:  First of all, I, I don't subscribe to the view that Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons is a status symbol.  It's not.  These are people who are sending thousands and thousands of missiles to their terrorist proxies Hezbollah and Hamas with the specific instruction to bomb civilians in Israel. They're supporting terrorists in the world.  This is not a status symbol.  To have such a regime acquire nuclear weapons is to risk the fact that they might give it to terrorists or give terrorists a nuclear umbrella.  That is a departure in the security of the Middle East and the world, certainly in the security of my country, and so I wouldn't treat the subject so lightly.  Would a regime change be a game changer?  A policy change would be a game changer.

MR. GREGORY:  Right.

MR. NETANYAHU:  I suppose that goes along with--it's not just personnel that is, that is involved here.

MR. GREGORY:  But what--but we may not have regime change here.

MR. NETANYAHU:  It's policy.

MR. GREGORY:  You may not have regime change if--even if there's not, is everything that's happened on the street, does it make Iran more or less likely to engage with the West over its nuclear program?

MR. NETANYAHU:  I don't know.  I think it's too early to say what'll transpire both in Iran and is--and on the international scene.  As I said, I think something fundamental is taking place here.  But I did speak to President Obama about the question of engagement before this happened, and he made it clear that engagement is not an end in itself, it's a means to an end. And the end has to be to prevent this regime from developing nuclear weapons capability, and he said he'd leave all options on the table.  And I'd say if it was right before these demonstrations, well, it's doubly right now.

MR. GREGORY:  Prime Minister, there's always been debate about whether, when it comes to the threat of a nuclear Iran, whether there's a Washington clock and a Jerusalem clock.  And let me show you a book by David Sanger of The New York Times that he wrote called "The Inheritance:  The World Obama Confronts and the Challenges to American Power." And in the course of his reporting for that book, he wrote this about Israel's plans:  "Early in 2008, the Israeli government signaled that it might be preparing to take matters into its own hands." This is about Iran.  "In a series of meetings, Israeli officials asked Washington for a new generation of powerful bunker-busters, far more capable of blowing up a deep underground plant than anything in Israel's arsenal of conventional weapons.  They asked for refueling equipment that would allow their aircraft to reach Iran and return to Israel.  And they asked for the right to fly over Iraq." My question, if there is not tangible progress toward defanging Iran as a potential nuclear power by the end of the year, do you, as a leader of Israel, go back to that planning that Israel had under way in 2008 against Iran?

MR. NETANYAHU:  I can't confirm those assertions.  I can say that Israel shares with the United States and with many, many countries--let me tell you, David, I think we shared with just about all the governments in the Middle East, I've talked to many of the leading European heads of governments and many others; we all don't want to see this regime acquire nuclear weapons, this regime that supports terrorists and calls for the annihilation of Israel and for the domination of the Middle East and beyond.  I think this would be something that would endanger the peace of the world, not just the--my own country's security and the stability of the Middle East.  It would spawn, for one thing, a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.  Everybody understands that.  So the Middle East could become a nuclear tinderbox.

MR. GREGORY:  Mm-hmm.

MR. NETANYAHU:  And that is something that is very--a very, very grave development.

MR. GREGORY:  And there...

MR. NETANYAHU:  I think stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons capability is not merely an interest of Israel.  As I think the current, recent events--the current events now demonstrate, this is something of deep interest for all people who want peace and seek peace throughout the world.

MR. GREGORY:  If the international community proves unable to stop Iran, is it your view that Israel will have to?

MR. NETANYAHU:  It's my view that there's an American commitment to make sure that that doesn't happen, and I think I'd leave it at that.

MR. GREGORY:  Right.  But there is a precedent here.  Israel, in 1981, took out a nuclear reactor in Iraq.  Israel, in 2007, took out a nuclear reactor in Syria.  There is precedent and a proclivity for Israel to take unilateral action if it deems it necessary for its security.  That could be the case with regard to Iran, no?

MR. NETANYAHU:  Well, I don't think I have to add to anything that I've said. We're--the Jewish people have been one of the oldest nations in the world. We've been around for 3500 years.  We are threatened as no other people has been threatened.  We've suffered pogroms, exiles, massacres and the greatest massacre of them all, the Holocaust.  So obviously, Israel always reserves the right to defend itself.

MR. GREGORY:  You have said--you said it to Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic magazine, talking about Iran, that it was a messianic and apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs.  The Obama administration argues that for the past eight years under President Bush there has been a hard line, calling it part of the axis of evil, and where has that hard line gotten America?  Only emboldening Iran over that period of time.  Is your hard line--is the U.S. hard line over the past eight years the wrong strategy to get Iran to change its behavior?

MR. NETANYAHU:  I think that the, the president spoke to me quite explicitly about the great threat that Iran's development of nuclear weapons capability poses to the United States.  I saw, in fact, a continuity, in that sense, of an assessment of the threat.  But of course, as you say, the clock is ticking. The Iranian nuclear program is advancing.  And so the, the problem that now faces the entire world is to, is to ask themselves a simple question:  Can we allow this brutal regime that sees no inhibitions in how it treats its own citizens and its purported enemies abroad, can we allow such a regime to acquire nuclear weapons?  And the answer that we hear from far and wide is no.

MR. GREGORY:  Prime Minister, just about 20 seconds here before you go. There is concern within the Obama administration that as a political matter it may be difficult for you to survive and pursue peace with the Palestinians. Do you share that concern?

MR. NETANYAHU:  Absolutely not.  I, I gave a speech in which I gave out the winning formula for peace, which is a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes Israel as the state of the Jewish people.  And these two elements of recognition of Israel as a state of the Jewish people and a demilitarized Palestinian state I think is something that all people who want peace should unite around.  And I have to tell you, since giving that speech I've been delighted and heartened by the fantastic support across the Israeli political spectrum, really cutting across the political parties and political views. And I think that's very important, because people understand it's inherently fear.  What I'm suggesting is that if we're asked to recognize the Palestinian state as the nation-state of the Palestinian people, then the Palestinians should recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, who've been deprived of a land of their own and of security for so long.

MR. GREGORY:  All right.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, thanks so much for your time this morning.

MR. NETANYAHU:  Thank you.

MR. GREGORY:  Up next, balancing the foreign threats with the growing debate at home over healthcare, spending and the economy.  Joining me, former senators Sam Nunn and Fred Thompson, only here on MEET THE PRESS.

(Announcements)

MR. GREGORY:  Former senators Sam Nunn and Fred Thompson weigh in on Iran, North Korea, plus healthcare reform and the deficit after this brief commercial break.

(Announcements)

MR. GREGORY:  We're back now, joined by former senators Fred Thompson and Sam Nunn.

Welcome both of you back to MEET THE PRESS.

FMR. SEN. FRED THOMPSON (R-TN):  Thank you.

MR. GREGORY:  Senator Thompson, let me start with you.

SEN. THOMPSON:  Mm-hmm.

MR. GREGORY:  The scenes out of Iran are harrowing and getting worse.  Has President Obama responded the way you'd like to see him respond?

SEN. THOMPSON:  Well, he's getting closer, I'll say that.  I think he was very slow off the mark, especially considering the fact that the, the leaders of, like, France and Germany and Great Britain and most of the leaders of the Democratic Party, actually, as well as Republican, all came out with tough statements.  I think the president was a little bit too calibrated in what he said, apparently based upon the notion that he doesn't want to do anything to disrupt the--his ability to negotiate with the leadership of Iran, which I think has kind of affected his policy anyway, and becoming more so by the day. So the president is ratcheting it up now.  Unfortunately, it's been in response, I think, to a lot of criticism instead of coming from, from the heart.

MR. GREGORY:  Mm-hmm.

SEN. THOMPSON:  I think it's important that the United States is taking a strong stand for, for, for freedom, as we always have, and, and better late than never.

MR. GREGORY:  Senator Nunn, people I've spoken to in the White House say the president has a, has a passionate sense of identification with the protestors. We've seen a sense of the Senate and the House, led by Republicans, saying this is a sham election; we support the, the demonstrators, the protestors there.  And yet the president has held back.  Is that the right thing to do?

FMR. SEN. SAM NUNN (D-GA):  Well, he said that the regime has been unjust and he has condemned the repression, and he has basically expressed over and over again, including long before the election in the Cairo speech, that the people had the right to be heard and their voice should be heard.  And certainly, I don't think there's any mistake whatsoever in the Middle East or anywhere else that President Obama is basically supporting the right of the people to vote and to make their influence known and not to be repressed.

You know, Winston Churchill said a long time ago that no matter how beautiful the strategy, occasionally you have to look at the result.  The result here is that we are not the story.  We have been the great Satan over there for the last 30 years.  We're not the story.  Freedom, liberty is the story, the repression of the regime is the story.  So I think we're positioned about right.

MR. GREGORY:  And, Senator Thompson, the White House will argue, look, under President Bush for the past eight years we've had the tough talk.  We've, we've said all the things that made us feel good.  We've said they were part of the axis of evil over there.  The war in Iraq, all of these things have only made Iran stronger, not weaker.  So here you have a different approach to sort of hanging back and let things happen and, and let the weakness in the regime come to the fore.

SEN. THOMPSON:  Well, I think that we've had a mistaken policy for many years.

SEN. NUNN:  Right.

SEN. THOMPSON:  Even back before the Bush administration.  And it's been basically one that's, that's based on the concept that we can talk them into a better relationship.  And although there was some tough rhetoric during the Bush administration, toward the end of it, it was anything but that.  And I think it, I think it made us appear pretty weak as a country in relationship to them.  So I think the whole ball game has changed now.  I mean, we have perhaps hundreds of thousands of people in the street now.  We've never had that before.  We were totally caught off guard about this.  We didn't see this coming.  We had nothing to do with it.  So the, the people there in that part of the country are doing what we've been unable to do, and that is get the leadership's attention there and possibly changing the leadership of their country and the direction of their country for the better.  So we need to get together, you know, here in this country and recognize that that's the case and try to, to take advantage of it regardless of the missteps that have been made along the way.

MORE FROM MEET THE PRESS

Meet the Press Section Front

Sunday's Meet the Press guest list Nov. 22: Senate roundtable, Brinker, Snyderman Nov. 15: Clinton, Duncan, Gingrich, Sharpton Nov. 8: Casey, Barbour, Rendell, roundtable, Brokaw Nov. 1: Tim Geithner, David Plouffe, roundtable Oct. 25: Cornyn, Schumer, Burnett, Sorkin, roundtable Oct. 18: Jarrett, Dodd, Kyl, Shriver, Podesta Oct. 11: Levin, Graham, McCaffrey, Myers, roundtable Oct. 4: Ambassador Susan Rice, roundtable Sept. 27: Bill Clinton, Paterson, Kyl, Webb Meet the Press Section Front   Add Meet the Press headlines to your news reader: