Iran’s ballistic missiles not mentioned in agreement but Trump says they ‘have to have some’

[0:00] Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Kristen Welker in Washington. We begin with breaking news [0:04] with the White House publicly releasing the full text of its agreement with Iran [0:09] to halt the war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump both touted and at times seemed [0:15] to downplay the agreement during a press conference today at the G7 summit in France. [0:20] At the same time as the president was holding that news conference, a senior administration [0:24] official was reading the 14-point memorandum of understanding to reporters during a phone [0:30] briefing. So here are the main points. Point one, the termination of all military operations, [0:36] including in Lebanon, where Iran's proxy Hezbollah operates. Point two, both sides agreeing to [0:43] respect each other's sovereignty. Point three, the clock starts on 60 days of negotiations. [0:48] Point four, the U.S. ends its naval blockade of Iran's ports. Point five, Iran agrees to reopen [0:56] the Strait of Hormuz toll-free. Point six, includes $300 billion in economic relief for Iran's [1:02] reconstruction. Point seven, lays out a pathway for all types of U.S. sanctions to be lifted over [1:09] time, of course, once Iran meets certain benchmarks. And point eight, mere prior public statements by [1:16] Iran that it will not produce or develop nuclear weapons. At that press conference today, President [1:22] Trump renewed his threat to bomb Iran if it doesn't abide by the text and other unspecified [1:28] unwritten agreements. Take a look. If it doesn't get done in 60 days, that's all right. We go back to [1:34] bombing. You know, I don't want to do that because it's so good. But we might have to because we're [1:41] never going to let them have a nuclear weapon. But they've agreed not to. And you'll see that very [1:45] clearly in the agreement. And by the way, if they don't honor the agreement or some things aren't [1:51] even mentioned in the agreement, it's a memorandum of understanding. But we have an understanding of [1:55] certain things without writing it. And if they don't honor that, we'll probably go back to bombing [2:02] them until they honor it. You know, it's amazing what bombs can do. Bomb Iran if they don't comply, [2:09] but there's nothing enforceable in the deal itself. Is that correct? [2:13] It doesn't have to be. I let them know. I said, look, if you don't adhere to the agreement, [2:18] I don't want to do that. But we're going to bomb the hell out of you. And I don't think that they're [2:24] going to veer from the agreement. What else am I going to do? Am I going to say I'm going to take [2:27] you to court? Let me take you to court. Let me sue you. No, we're going to bomb the hell out of them [2:33] if they violate the agreement. I don't want them to. I want them to honor the agreement. [2:37] Is there any safeguard in this deal to prevent Iran from charging what they say could be fees [2:44] after the 60 day extension? The thing that's going to stop them from doing that, because you can't [2:49] cover everything in a document, is common sense. They don't want to get bombed. They don't want to [2:54] get hit. Notably, not in the agreement is anything about addressing Iran's ballistic missile threat. [3:00] Now, remember, President Trump said at the start of the war that that issue was a major reason the [3:05] U.S. began combat operations in the first place. Take a look at that. The United States military is [3:12] undertaking a massive and ongoing operation to prevent this very wicked, radical dictatorship [3:18] from threatening America and our core national security interests. We are going to destroy [3:26] their missiles and raise their missile industry to the ground. It's a stark contrast to what the [3:34] president said today, where he seemed to soften his stance on Iran's ballistic missile capabilities. [3:39] NBC's Garrett Haake pressed the president on that point. [3:44] So we'll be working on a parallel effort with the Gulf nations to address non-nuclear issues, [3:50] such as the conventional ballistic missiles, which we'll be talking about, [3:55] and support them. I mean, they have to have some because other people have some. They've got to have some. [3:59] Why is it acceptable to you now that they keep some of that capability? And Iran is... [4:04] What are they keeping? What are they keeping? They have less than other nations now. We knocked out [4:10] probably 84, 85 percent of their missiles. The rest of them are underground. They can't even get them out. [4:18] Joining me now to start us off, NBC's Gabe Gutierrez is covering the president's trip in Geneva. [4:24] NBC's Matt Bradley is in Tel Aviv. NBC's Sahil Kapoor is on Capitol Hill. And here with me on set, [4:30] NBC's Dan DeLuce and Elise Lavitt, host of the Cosmopolitics podcast. Thanks to all of you for [4:36] starting us off, Gabe. Let me start with you. The president did not reveal many new details about [4:42] this agreement, but what are you hearing from administration officials about this memorandum [4:47] of understanding? Well, Kristen, it was a remarkable series of developments this afternoon when we did [4:55] hear from those senior U.S. officials about some of the details of this memorandum of understanding. [5:00] And importantly, it was the financial aspect of this. You mentioned some of this in your [5:06] introduction. But in addition to that $300 billion reconstruction fund that is to be created [5:12] by Iran's Arab neighbors, but also to be developed by the U.S., although the administration insists that [5:20] no U.S. money will be used for that reconstruction fund. In addition to that, there's the issue of [5:24] sanctions relief. And immediately, some of that relief, at least waivers for Iranian oil exports, [5:32] will kick in immediately upon the signing of this memorandum of understanding. That is very [5:37] significant. It wouldn't kick in at the end of the 60-day window of future negotiations. Those [5:42] waivers of Iranian oil, which had been sanctioned, that will kick in immediately. And the senior U.S. [5:48] official on that phone call with reporters defended that, saying that, one, it would be easier to keep [5:54] track of some of the oil that Iran was selling. But also, he acknowledged that it was a concession, [6:00] in part, to keep the price of oil globally down. So that is extremely significant. And then also the [6:07] idea of the president today coming back during that press conference and saying that he seemed to be okay [6:12] with the unfreezing of Iranian funds. That is incredible to hear from the president, considering [6:18] that he has spent so much time, really, much of the last 10 years, railing against the Obama [6:24] administration for unfreezing Iranian funds as part of a previous Iran nuclear deal. So a lot of [6:31] developments here that the administration is trying to defend. And yes, we did hear that memorandum [6:38] of understanding from those senior U.S. officials, just as the president was wrapping up that news [6:42] conference, Chris. Yeah, just extraordinary timing on all of these developments, Gabe. I also want to [6:47] play an exchange at the end of the news conference when the president was asked about whether he would [6:53] stay in Europe to sign the agreement. Here's what he said. Why not stick around for the signing ceremony [7:00] with this Iran peace deal? I might. You might. Yeah, I might. But I'd rather, this is a memorandum [7:07] of understanding. It's very important, but it might not be the kind of a document that I should be [7:14] signing. There's some element to this where you send the vice president. If it works out, great, [7:22] you'll look like a genius for sending him. And if it doesn't work out, it's the vice president's fault. [7:27] I like that idea. Sure. Well, this way, if it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't [7:32] work out, I'm blaming J.D. You better be careful, J.D. He's going to turn his plane around and get the hell [7:38] out of here. Yeah, I like that idea. Seem to be joking a bit there, Gabe. But what are your [7:44] sources telling you about the reality of is the president trying to make the vice president own [7:51] this? Look, Kristen, there was certainly a lot of palace intrigue there. You'll notice the secretary [7:57] of St. Marco Rubio standing right next to the president was very careful not to have any [8:01] expression on his face right there. Look, I asked senior White House officials, you know, [8:06] whether it was the president trying to make J.D. Vance own this by, you know, having him come out to [8:11] Switzerland to sign for this formal ceremony, which, by the way, he left open the president [8:15] today that it may or may not actually happen. But from what I'm told from a senior White House [8:21] official, that the president is doing his best to sell this agreement. He has been repeatedly [8:26] on camera today through social media that he feels that he is the best messenger here and that he is [8:33] trying to sell this agreement as best he can. The president always likes to joke around in that sense. [8:38] And yes, there are a lot of questions about whether the vice president, if this doesn't work out, [8:44] could he end up being the fall guy? The president seemed to play along with that speculation, at least [8:49] today. All right. Gabe Gutierrez starting us off today. Gabe, thank you so much traveling with the [8:55] president there. Matt, I want to turn to you. Of course, the United States launched strikes along with [9:01] Israel. And so there is an important component here in terms of what Israel's reaction is to all of this. [9:08] I do want to play some of what the president said about Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu. Take a [9:13] look. We did send a copy to Israel, by the way. They've been a good partner. Again, I think they [9:21] could do better with respect to Hezbollah. I love them as a partner. They were terrific. But they could [9:28] do a much better job with Hezbollah. On that, I don't think they're doing well. Look, think of what [9:34] Israel is getting. They're not going to be nuked. It's very simple. I told Bibi, Bibi, your biggest [9:40] risk was that they drop a nuclear weapon into the middle of Israel. They'd only need one. And there [9:48] would be no more Israel. Think of it, Bibi. You got the best, the most important thing that you were [9:53] asking for is that. So I think you're happy. So what has the reaction been in Israel based on [10:01] conversations with your sources, Matt? Yeah, I mean, we haven't heard anything yet really from [10:08] the past two hours from those comments that you just played from President Trump speaking [10:12] at the G7 summit. But, you know, a lot of what the president said, except for when he said that [10:17] when he revealed that he had actually given over a copy of the MOU to the Israelis, which he hadn't [10:22] done before, amazingly. You know, a lot of what we've been hearing from the president at the G7 was [10:27] kind of repeats from what we'd heard earlier in the week. And I can tell you that the criticism [10:32] against Netanyahu here in Israel has been scathing. From all angles, the prime minister has been [10:37] getting it from his allies and his rivals, all of them saying that the prime minister has looked [10:43] weak, that he dragged the country into a war that yielded no results, and that he really didn't stand [10:49] up to the president when it came to fighting in Lebanon, which there are many, many people here and [10:54] the security establishment here in Israel who want to see the prime minister finish the job [10:58] against Hezbollah. They've made this very clear. And even the head of the military, the chief of [11:04] staff, has announced, along with Netanyahu, that Israel is not going to be withdrawing its troops [11:09] from Lebanon. This fight looks like it's set to continue. So the problem that President Trump has [11:14] here is that prime minister Netanyahu is one of the biggest stakeholders, the biggest stakeholder [11:19] in this war, to have had no interaction even at all, no contribution to the negotiating process that [11:27] led to this memorandum of understanding and will presumably lead to a more permanent ceasefire. [11:32] But he is the person who has the biggest chance to scuttle all of the progress that's been made. [11:37] If the prime minister goes back to fiercely fighting against Hezbollah in Lebanon and, for example, [11:43] fires weapons, fires missiles into the outskirts of Beirut, that would anger Iran and could set off [11:49] another crossfire over the entire Middle East and could really sabotage this deal. [11:57] Well, it's a really good point, Matt. And you take me to my following question, [12:01] which is what about the fact that the president says Iran will be allowed to keep some missiles? [12:04] How is Israel responding to that? Yeah, I mean, that's something that a lot of folks have already [12:11] been hitting on. And again, we didn't hear in response from the president's most recent comment [12:16] about two hours ago at the G7. But I can tell you it's been part of just a group of different [12:22] complaints that everybody has been firing together all at once at the prime minister. [12:27] There are some major things that the prime minister had assured the Israeli public he was going to [12:31] achieve with this war and with its conclusion that are now left gaping open. The resolution to [12:37] Iran's nuclear future, the missiles, the ballistic missiles and Iran's funding for proxy groups across [12:44] the region. All of these have not been answered in this MOU. All right, Matt Bradley traveling in [12:50] Tel Aviv. Thank you, Matt. Please stay safe. We really appreciate it. Sahil, let me turn to you [12:55] on Capitol Hill. You're getting reaction from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. And the chief complaint [13:01] seems to be there's a lack of details in this memorandum of understanding the language that's been [13:07] released so far. What are you hearing? Well, Kristen, I think we can safely call the reaction [13:12] a mixed bag. I will say in the last few hours since some of the details of this MOU have come out, [13:17] I've heard more criticism than praise. And let's start with Republicans. I think the most interesting [13:22] thought line here breaks down between those who are essentially free agents, no longer have to worry [13:27] about the politics or crossing President Trump, and those who are conscious of the politics and want [13:32] to align with President Trump. To that end, take a listen to what Senator Bill Cassidy said. He's a free agent, [13:37] no longer running for reelection, retiring. Take a look. [13:39] It's going to be a long stormer before we are out, and it may commit to U.S. taxpayer [13:45] not. Now Iran recognizes that they can do the leverage of the straight-form use to extract [13:55] from the other countries of the world whatever they want. This is JCPOA plus. And I opposed [14:05] then, I opposed now. That JCPOA line was Bill Cassidy comparing it to President Obama's Iran deal 11 [14:12] years ago that Republicans vehemently opposed. Now there's Senator Lindsey Graham, a close Trump [14:17] ally who is running for reelection with Trump's endorsement this fall. He had a different take. [14:21] Quote, it's my opinion that signing the MOU will be beneficial to the United States [14:25] inasmuch as the straight-form moves will begin to open and the hostilities with Iran will stop. [14:30] Graham goes on to say whether or not the United States can reach an acceptable, verifiable deal [14:34] with Iran regarding its nuclear program and other issues is yet to be determined. [14:39] But I see little downside to trying. End quote. Notice how Graham qualifies his praise there, [14:44] saying it's all contingent on getting a final deal. Now, the Democrats, the prevailing feeling [14:50] there is that this deal is going to be worse than the JCPOA, that at this point Iran is negotiating [14:55] from a position of greater strength than they were 11 years ago because they've executed the closure [15:00] of the Strait of Hormuz and imposed economic pain on the United States and the world and [15:05] in the views of Democrats. It's working. Senator Richard Blumenthal called this a disgraceful [15:09] deal, an unconditional surrender by the United States, took issue with the $300 billion windfall, [15:14] the unenforceable promises, and Senator Chris Murphy went a little further, calling it a total [15:19] humiliation for the United States, even a necessary humiliation, in Chris Murphy's words, [15:24] because he thinks any deal has to be taken to end this war, given that, in his view, [15:28] Iran is only going to get stronger. Well, incredibly strong reaction in these opening [15:33] hours of us seeing that memorandum of understanding. Sahil, thank you for your [15:37] reporting from Capitol Hill. Dan and Elise, you're both with me on set. Dan, give us the reality check. [15:42] 60 days to get a deal done with Iran. It took the Obama administration two years. Is it possible? [15:47] I would say I would not put my money on it. And the MOU does say that if both parties are still [15:53] ready to keep talking, they can extend it another six days, you know, forever and on, right? But [15:59] these are incredibly technical issues. As you say, that agreement under the Obama administration [16:04] was so technical, so complicated, and every concession had to be extracted, you know, with [16:10] brutal kind of painful negotiations. So I don't think 60 days will produce a historic deal. [16:17] It can't. I mean, that deal, look, the framework deal took about six to eight months. And then that [16:23] larger deal took two years. And it was, you know, hundreds of pages. But Dan and I have the text in [16:30] our hot little hands. And it has all these Easter eggs that, like, are, you know, really incredible. [16:37] What stands out to you, Lisa? What are you focused on? Having seen this, having listened to the president, [16:42] where does this go from here? Listen, this is a deal to open the strait, okay? And it's a framework. [16:49] The strait was open before the war began, by the way. It was. So it's a, what they say in [16:53] Diplomatees that Dan and I talk about is back to the status quo ante, right? It's back to February 27th, [17:00] right? And this is a framework deal and a pinky swear to negotiate the nuclear program. Now, look, [17:09] if it ends the war and you go back to, you know, the economy settles, the strait opens, [17:15] there's no more conflict in the region, the economy improves for Americans. That's a good thing. And [17:21] Iran's program was severely, you know, damaged. The missile program, the weapon silos, the industrial [17:30] base was damaged. So yes, this is not as strong as the JCPOA. And it's very unlikely that they're going [17:38] to get that kind of deal. Because as we've been talking about, this is the best deal that the [17:46] president could get. The JCPOA was the best deal that the U.S. could get at the time. And the costs [17:53] have gone up because of, you know, now the strait of Hormuz is the new nuclear weapon. But [17:58] Iran is maybe in a politically stronger position. And, you know, the old Ayatollah didn't want to [18:07] use the strait. But it's also, you know, weapons-wise and, you know, I would say militarily [18:12] wise, it's in a weaker position. So, Dan, how are the United States golf partners reacting in this [18:19] moment? At least lays out the fact that Iran actually may be more emboldened than it was [18:25] during the negotiations over the JCPOA. They are relieved, I think, for the most part. They could [18:29] not absorb yet more warfare, more bombing, more damage to their oil and natural gas infrastructure [18:37] to their economies. They have all these elaborate plans to diversify their economies. This has [18:41] thrown a wrench in that. So they were slightly desperate for the war to end. However, they're [18:46] full of anxiety. They don't know if this will last. There isn't a serious treaty or agreement here. This [18:52] is just a memorandum. Will Israel continue to bomb Lebanon? And will that then trigger all of this to [18:57] unravel? So I think there's a lot of concern in the Gulf. Elise, one of the focuses of the [19:03] president's Republican allies, quite frankly, was this idea of unfreezing Iranian assets. Now we're [19:11] hearing about a $300 billion reconstruction fund. Is the idea that that will be gifted over time once [19:20] the administration sees progress? And how can the United States assure that that's what's actually [19:26] happening? Well, Dan and I were talking about this earlier. So initially, you know, on day one, [19:30] when the deal is signed, the blockade is opened. Iran gets some waivers to sell oil. Off the bat. [19:37] Off the bat. And, you know, for a little while, the strait will open without some tolls. What happens [19:44] going forward? We really don't know. Iran gets the major benefits, whether it's lifting sanctions, [19:52] unfrozen assets, this reconstruction fund, the more they engage in negotiations. And then there's [20:00] a final deal. But, you know, J.D. Vance, Vice President Vance, said something very interesting [20:07] yesterday to Megyn Kelly on her show. And he said, listen, you know, if that if this is all we could [20:14] get, you know, Iran doesn't get any more benefits. And we open the strait and the war is over and [20:22] everyone goes on with their lives. So I think that the U.S. is already bracing for the fact that these [20:29] negotiations could go on indefinitely. They could stall. And let's be honest, if you look at what [20:35] happened in Ukraine, if you look at what happened in Gaza, this is kind of par for the course with [20:39] this administration is, look, they do try to negotiate, you know, an end to the conflict. But [20:45] the president, you know, gets impatient. He moves on. He's talking about Cuba. I mean, I don't see [20:51] these negotiations really going anywhere anytime fast. Dan, very quickly, what are you going to be [20:55] watching for in these next 60 days? I would like to hear more about what has been promised to Iran [21:03] about unfreezing assets. And where's that money? It's 300 billion coming from to rebuild Iran. [21:08] I would just make one last point here, which is this administration has embraced the concept of [21:15] negotiation that they criticized President Obama for embracing, which is you, Iran, will, you know, [21:22] limit your nuclear work. And in return, we will ease sanctions. And they've really embraced that idea. [21:28] And they and they can do pretty much. It says, I mean, that they could do whatever they want with [21:32] the money. So, you know, back to the missiles and the proxies, it's it says like, you know, the central [21:38] bank would determine, you know, where the money goes. And I thought it was notable. You heard [21:42] President Trump effectively say none of this is binding. They'll do it because I'll start [21:47] bombing them if they don't. Not if he takes the troops out and, you know, the midterms are coming [21:52] and the troops are home. It'll be difficult to do that again. All right. Elise and Dan, [21:57] thank you so much for your great insights and reporting. We really appreciate it. [22:01] We thank you for watching and remember, stay updated on breaking news and top stories on the [22:05] NBC News app or watch live on our YouTube channel.