|
|
|
Join UANI
Top Stories
CNN:
"One day after announcing his support for the Iran nuclear deal,
Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware said he wants the Senate to get
an opportunity to vote on the proposal. 'I think it would be really
regrettable if we didn't ultimately go to the floor and cast our votes
for or against this deal,' Coons said Wednesday on CNN's 'New Day.'
Coons' support put the Obama administration just one vote away from the
number needed to keep the Republican majority, which is opposed to the
deal, from snagging enough Democratic support to override President
Barack Obama's veto on a motion disapproving of the proposal. As Coons
and Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pennsylvania, announced Tuesday their support...
But while Coons said 'there should be' a vote on the deal, he rested the
fate of that vote squarely on the shoulders of Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell and the top Republican's ability to reach an agreement
with Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid to cut down debate time." http://t.uani.com/1LNUIip
AP:
"Iran's supreme leader said Thursday 'there will be no deal' if
world powers insist on suspending rather than lifting sanctions as part
of a landmark nuclear agreement, and said it is up to Iran's parliament,
and not him, to approve or reject it... Khamenei said some U.S. officials
have spoken of the 'suspension' of sanctions, which he said is
unacceptable. 'If the sanctions are going to be suspended, then we will
also fulfil our obligations on the ground at the level of suspension and
not in a fundamental way,' he said. Iran's supreme leader has
traditionally had the final say on all important matters, but on Thursday
Khamenei said lawmakers should decide on the deal. 'It is the
representatives of the people who should decide. I have no advice
regarding the method of review, approval or rejection,' he said.
President Hassan Rouhani is opposed to letting parliament vote on the
deal, which he insists is an understanding with world powers and not a
treaty. Last week he warned that if parliament votes on the deal its
provisions would be legally binding." http://t.uani.com/1JBfhLR
NYT:
"Just before the Senate left town for its August break, a dozen or
so undecided Democrats met in the Capitol with senior diplomats from
Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia who delivered a blunt, joint
message: Their nuclear agreement with Iran was the best they could
expect. The five world powers had no intention of returning to the
negotiating table. 'They basically said unanimously this is as good a
deal as you could get and we are moving ahead with it,' recalled Senator
Chris Coons, the Delaware Democrat who lent crucial support to the deal
this week despite some reservations. 'They were clear and strong that we
will not join you in re-imposing sanctions.' For many if not most
Democrats, it was that message that ultimately solidified their
decisions, leading to President Obama on Wednesday securing enough votes
to put the agreement in place over fierce and united Republican
opposition. One after another, lawmakers pointed to the warnings from
foreign leaders that their own sanctions against Iran would be lifted
regardless of what the United States did. But the president's potentially
legacy-defining victory - a highly partisan one in the end - was also the
result of an aggressive, cooperative strategy between the White House and
congressional Democrats to forcefully push back against Republican
critics, whose allies had begun a determined, $20 million-plus campaign
to kill the deal... Under the direction of Representative Nancy Pelosi of
California, the Democratic leader, and a team of lieutenants, House
Democrats orchestrated a daily roll-out of endorsements of the Iran deal
from a Capitol war room, tucked into Ms. Pelosi's office just off the
House chamber... 'There was a plan, and there continues to be a plan,'
Ms. Pelosi said in an interview... The administration, too, went all-out.
At the White House, administration staff members set up their own West
Wing war room and even created a separate Twitter account, @TheIranDeal,
to make their case... Opponents of the agreement said they could not
remember another recent policy battle where the White House and Ms.
Pelosi were so driven. In tandem, they made the Iran vote a strong test
of party loyalty." http://t.uani.com/1EDrO4S
Nuclear Program
& Agreement
NYT:
"Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ordered
Parliament to vote on an agreement to curb the country's nuclear program,
the state news media reported on Thursday, announcing his decision a day
after President Obama secured enough votes to ensure approval of the deal
in the United States. Although Parliament is expected to approve the
agreement, the announcement nonetheless represents a blow for President
Hassan Rouhani and his team of nuclear negotiators. They had long insisted
that such a vote was not constitutionally required because the agreement
between Iran and the world powers was not an international treaty. Mr.
Rouhani and the negotiating team have argued that Iran's Supreme National
Security Council should review the agreement, which would lift sanctions
against Iran in exchange for a series of restrictions on the country's
nuclear program. Ayatollah Khamenei told an audience of Shiite Muslim
clerics that Parliament 'should not be bypassed' in the review of the
nuclear deal. He was careful not to show any support or opposition to the
agreement, saying it was up to the 'representatives of the nation' to
decide. He is widely seen as the architect behind the nuclear agreement,
and analysts expect that lawmakers will support the deal, which has the
public backing of Ali Larijani, the influential head of Parliament. A
small but vocal faction is expected to put up a fight, but ultimately,
the members of Parliament are expected to look to Ayatollah Khamenei for
guidance." http://t.uani.com/1N5lggw
NYT:
"In a sign of just how much the world has changed in recent years,
King Salman of Saudi Arabia will visit President Obama at the White House
on Friday, and the kingdom's oil production will barely get a mention...
Instead, the first order of business for King Salman is likely to be the
Iran nuclear deal, analysts said. The White House meeting, which will
come just days after Mr. Obama secured enough support in Congress to
ensure that the accord will go into effect, represents the first major
effort by the administration to reassure important Persian Gulf allies as
the deal enters a new phase. 'This is a meeting about the days after the
deal,' said Prem G. Kumar, who recently left the National Security
Council as a senior director with Middle East responsibilities... The
king, who was crowned in January, will make his first visit to the United
States five months after skipping a summit meeting of Gulf nations at
Camp David. He is widely seen as more vocal than his predecessor in his unhappiness
with the United States and, in particular, its approach on Iran." http://t.uani.com/1OcmDZD
Reuters:
"President Barack Obama will assure Saudi King Salman of the U.S.
commitment to help counter any Iranian security threat, White House
officials said on Wednesday, despite concern among Gulf allies that a new
nuclear deal could empower Tehran in the region. Obama, hosting Salman on
Friday on the king's first U.S. visit since ascending to the throne in
January, will seek to allay the fears of Washington's most important Arab
partner that the lifting of sanctions on Iran would allow it to act in
destabilizing ways... We understand that Saudi Arabia has concerns about
what Iran could do as their economy improves from sanctions relief,' Ben
Rhodes, Obama's deputy national security adviser, told reporters in
previewing the visit... Rhodes acknowledged there was a risk that Tehran
could spend those funds on 'nefarious activities'. But he said Obama
would make clear the United States would do 'everything that we can' to
counter any Iranian threats to its neighbors." http://t.uani.com/1KLOvoC
Al-Monitor:
"Former chief nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili and current nuclear
negotiator Abbas Araghchi have had a busy two days, testifying before a
special parliamentary committee and the Assembly of Experts about the
nuclear negotiations and Iran's nuclear program. Araghchi took the place
of chief nuclear negotiator Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who is
traveling to regional countries, and spoke to the Assembly of Experts on
Sept. 2. He said, 'Our demands in the nuclear negotiations was respect
for our nuclear rights and accepting our country's rights to move toward
research and development, progress and the realization of industrial
enrichment and the use of new-generation [centrifuge] machines IR6 and
IR8 in order to reach our industrial goals.' Araghchi said they achieved
these goals in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Araghchi
said that among the biggest achievements of the nuclear talks were the
recognition of the UN Security Council of Iran's right to enrich and the
removal of economic and financial sanctions. He added vaguely that arms
sanctions on Iran were to be addressed or perhaps removed 'in a
reasonable time.' Araghchi said that Iran's Supreme National Security
Council and parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee
were given detailed reports about the JCPOA. He added that the
limitations on Iran's nuclear program 'were not forever' but rather in a
'clear time frame.'" http://t.uani.com/1ikbRX7
Tehran Times:
"Iran's entire nuclear industry, including uranium enrichment, is
recognized under the nuclear deal, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi
has said, noting that nuclear research and development will be pursued in
full. Addressing members of the Assembly of Experts on Wednesday, Araqchi
also vowed that Iran will not halt the enrichment of uranium even for a
single day. He also added that Iran is going to use generation 6 and 8
centrifuges to reach 190,000 SWUs for enrichment in 15 years. 'The
lifting of sanctions, as required by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, was also among the achievements of the nuclear negotiation
team,' he said." http://t.uani.com/1ECb6CS
Fars (Iran):
"Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan warned on
Wednesday that Tehran would not allow the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) to visit every site and facility that it wishes. 'Iran does
not plan to issue permission for the IAEA to inspect every site,' Dehqan
said in an interview with al-Mayadeen news network on Wednesday. Granting
such permissions are even in violation of the IAEA and the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) rules, he added. Dehqan had also earlier
underlined that Tehran would not allow any foreigner to discover Iran's
defensive and missile capabilities by inspecting the country's military
sites... He pointed to the recent statements of the US officials on Iran,
and said, 'The US officials make boastful remarks and imagine that they
can impose anything on the Iranian nation because they lack a proper
knowledge of the Iranian nation.' The Iranian Defense Minister reiterated
that the time had come for the Americans to realize that they were not
the world's super power and no one recognizes them as such any
longer." http://t.uani.com/1LNUbNq
Congressional Vote
NYT:
"With President Obama securing the votes Wednesday needed to assure
the Iran nuclear accord will survive congressional challenge, Republicans
are considering legislative options to counter the deal, including the
possible reimposition of sanctions the agreement is supposed to lift.
'While the president may be able to sustain a veto with the tepid,
restricted and partisan support of one-third of one house of Congress
over Americans' bipartisan opposition,' said Senator Mitch McConnell,
Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, 'it will require a
bipartisan Congress to strengthen our defenses in the Persian Gulf and to
stand up to the inevitable Iranian violations of the agreement that will
need to be addressed after he has left office.' Republicans have been
thinking through alternatives for months, knowing that Mr. Obama would
probably be able to fend off efforts to override his veto of a resolution
scuttling the accord... Senators Mark S. Kirk, Republican of Illinois,
and Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, both opponents of the
current Iran accord, introduced legislation this year that would extend
the Iran Sanctions Act, which expires at the end of 2016, for another
decade. While most lawmakers understand the need to have legal authority
to 'snap back' any sanctions that are lifted, Republicans would most
likely move to enforce those sanctions, putting Democrats in a bind in an
election year by pushing for a vote on legislation to punish Iran for
killing Americans and Israelis, and for supporting Hezbollah, leaving the
president little choice but to veto because if he signed it, the Iranians
would say they are no longer bound by broader agreement." http://t.uani.com/1JQek1D
IranTruth:
"Today, 56 preeminent experts on nuclear weapons programs, arms
control, nonproliferation and intelligence sent a letter to President
Obama with an extensive analytical attachment urging him to reconsider
his intention to veto any Congressional resolution of disapproval of the
Iranian nuclear deal, known also as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of
Action (JCPOA). President Obama has said: 'No deal is better than a bad
deal.' The letter highlights fatal flaws in the JCPOA that render
it a very bad deal. The JCPOA, the letter notes, permits Iran to
retain key equipment, facilities and materials for its nuclear program;
and, puts in place a completely ineffective verification regime that,
according to Associated Press reports, will be permitted to inspect its own
facility at Parchin and itself provide samples from Parchin to the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)." http://t.uani.com/1fX8qUq
WashPost:
"Even as his colleague from Maryland on Wednesday provided the final
vote needed for President Obama's Iran deal to survive, Sen. Benjamin L.
Cardin (D-Md.) continues to wrestle with whether to support the deal - a
decision that has pitted him against his rabbi, riled his constituents
and consumed him for much of the past month. 'When Senator Cardin goes to
synagogue, he hears about this. When he goes out to dinner, he hears
about it. When he sees his grandchildren, he hears about it,' said Ronald
Halber, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of
Greater Washington. 'It's not that he gets a chance to escape.' Both
supporters and opponents who have lobbied Cardin say they have no idea
where the senator stands. 'Cardin is in a tough situation,' one
Democratic staffer on Capitol Hill said. 'I think he sort of feels like
the responsible thing to do as the ranking member on Foreign Relations
and a member of the U.S. Senate is to support the deal, but as a strong
supporter of Israel and a leader in a Jewish community, the right thing
to do is to vote against it.'" http://t.uani.com/1fXcTXs
Sanctions
Relief
Reuters:
"France's PSA Peugeot Citroen , the biggest-selling European
carmaker in pre-sanctions Iran, has hit a setback in its bid to reclaim
that throne: domestic rival Renault. Peugeot has been struggling to
negotiate a bigger manufacturing deal with partner Iran Khodro, the
country's largest automaker, amid lingering anger over its abrupt 2011
withdrawal. Now Renault plans to use $560 million of its cash that had
been trapped in Iran to seize the advantage, after July's international
deal to lift sanctions in exchange for nuclear curbs on Tehran, people
familiar with the matter said. 'Our strategy is to be the biggest
carmaker in the country,' said a Renault source with knowledge of the
discussions. 'PSA has made a lot of statements (about Iran),' the Renault
source said. 'Chickens shouldn't be counted before they are hatched.' ...
For Renault and Nissan, its 43.4 percent-owned alliance partner, Iranian
production would bolster an already strong presence in emerging
markets... 'Unlike PSA we have always remained in Iran,' a Renault source
said. 'Loyalty should pay.'" http://t.uani.com/1Upb7RF
Press TV (Iran):
"Finland's engineering group Outotec has been awarded a contract for
the delivery of technology to set up a new iron ore beneficiation plant
in northeast Iran, the company says. The plant owned by Khorasan Steel
Complex Co will have a capacity to produce 2.5 million metric tons of
pellet feed grade iron ore concentrate per year, expected to be
commissioned in 2017. Under an order worth 45 million euros by Iran
International Engineering Company (IRITEC), Outotec will provide process
technology for 'a complete beneficiation plant and an entire value chain
from raw material testing, process development to concentration and
dewatering'. The company will be also responsible for basic engineering,
and supply of key process equipment, as well as advisory services for
detail engineering, construction and commissioning, Outotec said. 'This
order is another significant milestone for Outotec in the quickly
developing Iranian iron and steel industry,' Kalle Härkki, head of
Outotec's Minerals Processing business area, said. The order is similar
to one awarded by Bafgh Mineral Complex Iron and Steel Industry Company
to Outotec in June to establish an iron ore pelletizing plant in Iran's
central Yazd province." http://t.uani.com/1N5rWLI
Sanctions
Enforcement
Al-Monitor:
"US critics of the nuclear agreement with Iran are turning to the 50
states as it becomes increasingly obvious that Congress won't be able to
kill the deal... The Republican attorneys general of Oklahoma and
Michigan, Scott Pruitt and Bill Schuette, wrote a letter to their
counterparts Sept. 1 urging them to do just that. 'The states certainly
have numerous moral and reputational reasons to prohibit investment of
public assets into companies doing business with Iran and other countries
that sponsor terrorism,' they wrote. 'Even if it is true that Iran has
relinquished its ambitions for a nuclear weapon and that its deal with
President [Barack] Obama will prevent such an acquisition - both of which
are highly questionable - Iran engages in a range of other reprehensible
activities.' The letter was accompanied by proposed draft legislation
that the states that haven't yet passed such sanctions are invited to use
as a template. States have two main avenues for sanctioning Iran:
restricting investments by state retirement plans, and barring state
agencies from buying goods and services from blacklisted individuals and
entities. According to United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), a lobby group
opposed to the deal, 30 states have already passed pension fund
divestment measures. Eleven of them - California, Florida, New York,
Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Michigan, Rhode Island, Connecticut, South
Carolina and Pennsylvania - have also enacted UANI-inspired restrictions
on government contracting." http://t.uani.com/1hCZsgm
Syria Conflict
AP:
"President Bashar Assad has a 'pivotal' role to play in the war on
terrorism and in any political settlement to Syria's devastating civil
war, a senior Iranian official said Thursday. Deputy Foreign Minister
Hossein Amir Abdollahian said after meeting with Assad that any
'successful' attempt to find a solution should take into consideration
the right of the Syrian people to shape their future. Iran is a key
backer of Assad and has said it is working on a four-point initiative to
end the Syrian civil war. Abdollahian said Iran 'highly appreciates the
pivotal and central role of Syrian President Bashar Assad in preserving the
national unity of Syria and in combating terrorism.' Abdollahian met
earlier in the week with U.N. special envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura
while on a trip to neighboring Beirut." http://t.uani.com/1KtCOEg
Extremism
Tasnim (Iran):
"Lieutenant Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC)
Brigadier General Hossein Salami on Thursday said the recent conclusion
of nuclear talks would not end Washington's enmity towards Iran and
Islam. Addressing a large group of Basij volunteer forces in a massive
drill in Tehran, General Salami said, 'The United States is the number
one enemy of the Iranian Muslim nation and the Islamic world' whether or
not a nuclear deal whose text was finalized by Iran and world powers in
July will be signed. He further denounced the US war rhetoric against
Iran, saying that Americans know that all their interests are within the
range of Iran's fire. 'Our enemies are well aware of our capabilities and
defensive and offensive capacities, but still talk about the availability
of military option,' he added." http://t.uani.com/1LXniR7
WashPost:
"In Washington, President Obama has secured enough votes in the
Senate to survive any major congressional challenge to the Iran nuclear
deal, as Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) on Wednesday became the 34th
Democrat to announce her support for the accord. In Iran, however, the
United States remains Satan number one - at least for the hardliners.
Consider this: Those reports you heard about the 'Death to America 2015'
graffiti being erased from the walls of the former U.S. Embassy in
Tehran? Well, the graffiti apparently has appeared again on the embassy's
walls, according to a report by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. The
report quotes Iran's Fardanews.com, viewed as close to Tehran's mayor,
Mohammad Bagher Qailbaf, as saying that the slogan is back, only now it
does not mention any specific year." http://t.uani.com/1JDLa8Y
Human Rights
AFP:
"Iran's Basij militia, which played a key role in crushing
opposition protests in 2009, has put on a show of strength in the capital
in a two-day exercise culminating Thursday. Some 50,000 members of the
largely volunteer force were taking part in the drill, which was intended
to 'prove the security forces' ability to safeguard national security,'
Basij spokesman General Nasser Shabani told Iranian media. Shabani
recalled the role played by the militia in 2009, when defeated reformist
candidates led mass street protests against the controversial re-election
of hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. 'Considering our experience of
events in 2009 as well as our [other] past experiences, we planned this
drill to demonstrate the security' aimed for by Iran's supreme leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, he said... A senior commander, General Hossein
Salami, hailed the force as the 'eternal shield' protecting 'the sacred
system of the Islamic republic.'" http://t.uani.com/1hX7KR0
AFP:
"Women drivers in Iran's capital could have their cars impounded by
police if they are caught driving with a poorly fixed veil or without
their heads covered, a police chief said Wednesday. 'If a (female) driver
in a car is poorly veiled or has taken her veil off, the vehicle will be
seized in accordance with the law,' the head of Tehran's traffic police,
General Teymour Hosseini, was quoted as saying by the official ISNA news
agency. He added that any woman who had her car seized would need to
obtain a court order before getting it back. Since the Islamic Revolution
in 1979, wearing a veil in public has been mandatory for all women in Iran...
'Unfortunately, some streets of the capital have come to resemble fashion
salons,' Iran's judiciary chief Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani said this week,
questioning the 'tolerance' that has led to 'such a situation.'" http://t.uani.com/1XkDuQ3
Opinion &
Analysis
Ray Takeyh in WSJ:
"Overall, the landscape of Iran suggests few reasons for optimism:
The Islamic Republic has negotiated an advantageous arms-control
agreement, and the accord looks likely to survive opposition in the U.S.
Congress. Tehran's regime represses its citizens and has embarked on an
expansion of its influence from the Persian Gulf to the banks of the
Mediterranean. Look a little closer, though, and another picture is
visible. In some ways, Iran resembles the Soviet Union of the 1970s, a
bloated state that eschewed reforms and eventually brought about its own
collapse. The faded history of the Cold War tends to focus little on
Soviet premier Alexei Kosygin. In the mid-1960s, Kosygin pressed for
economic reforms that involved loosening state controls. This was the
China model before China embarked on it in the late 1970s. Kosygin's
enterprising efforts were ultimately obstructed by an aging Politburo led
by Leonid Brezhnev. The Soviet Union chose to rely on oil wealth, which
seemed a smart decision amid the price hikes that followed the Arab oil
embargo in the early 1970s. But once oil markets went from boom to bust,
the Kremlin had a problem it could neither mitigate nor resolve: Failure
to sustain the Kosygin reforms, which could have been cushioned by rising
state revenues, meant that Mikhail Gorbachev's belated efforts had no
chance of succeeding. Beyond unwise economic planning, the Soviet Union
also made some costly foreign-policy decisions in the 1970s. The Kremlin
began investing money and resources in areas peripheral to core Soviet
security concerns, such as Africa and Latin America. Imperialism was
tempting, but it also led to the invasion of Afghanistan, a disastrous
decision that further bled Russia. A combination of economic misjudgment
and imperial misadventures contributed much to the Soviet Union's demise.
Fast-forward to Iran today. President Hassan Rouhani is celebrated in the
West for his pragmatic approach to state planning and international
relations. But by another perspective, Mr. Rouhani is making a series of
mistakes that could imperil the state he seeks to revive. Two years into
his tenure, there is scant evidence that he intends to embark on
structural changes necessary to resolve Iran's mounting economic problems.
Inflation and unemployment plague Iran, while rampant corruption remains
unaddressed. Like Russia's former Communist leaders, Mr. Rouhani
appears to hope that sanctions relief, access to global financial
markets, and ramped-up oil sales will prove sufficient... Like the Soviet
Union of the 1970s, Iran has embarked on an imperial mission whose costs
are more obvious than its benefits. The billions that Iran spends to
sustain Bashar al-Assad in Syria and the lavish sums it invests in
terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah may offer regional sway, but
they further burden the Islamic Republic's depleted economy. No policy
has been more destructive to Iran's practical interests than its
unrelenting hostility toward Israel. The two states have neither territory
in dispute nor a long history of animosity, yet an ideologically driven
Islamic Republic has made assaulting the Jewish state one of its
principal obsessions. This has led Iran to partner with unsavory actors,
alienate much of the international community, and distress a public that
has no stake in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While many in the U.S.
are concerned about the direction Iran is taking and its potential rise
in the Middle East, there may be a reason to cheer on Iran's president.
Let us hope that the Islamic Republic goes the way of the Soviet
Union." http://t.uani.com/1OcpMss
Aaron David Miller
in WSJ: "Enough senators have indicated support for
the Iran nuclear deal that the agreement is likely to survive
congressional review. After that, it's likely that the International
Atomic Energy Agency will certify that Iran has come clean about possible
past military dimensions of its nuclear program and complied with
downsizing requirements, according to terms set in April. Serious
sanctions relief is likely to begin by early next year. But none of this
suggests that controversy over the agreement or Iran's nuclear program
will end or that Iran will become any less controversial in U.S. politics
or among some U.S. allies in the Middle East, or somehow more manageable
or moderate in a violent region. If we were talking about Japan or
Argentina, there wouldn't be concerns over nuclear activities or the
management of a transition to a contained (and defanged) nuclear
threshold state. But Iran isn't an island in Asia or a country in a
stable part of South America. It's in the middle of a volatile region
where it is eager to defend its interests and to spread its influence.
And Iran is run by a repressive, highly ideological and authoritarian
regime that serially abuses human rights. The nature of the Iranian
regime is not going to change anytime soon. some critics of the deal
think it won't change at all. The battle for the hearts and minds of
Iranian moderates and reformers is likely only a thought experiment right
now. The reported arrest of a prominent Iranian reformer suggests which
way the hard-liners want things to bend-and it's not toward President
Hassan Rouhani's moderate sensibilities. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei didn't acquiesce to this nuclear deal to give up power to the
reformers; he did it to maintain power for his ilk. The Iran debate would
be deeply polarizing in the U.S. even if this weren't campaign season.
But the 2016 presidential contest virtually ensures that the nuclear deal
will be prominent in any foreign policy debate. If the agreement goes
through Congress without any Republican support (as appears likely), even
more bitterness is possible. Republicans will push for additional
sanctions and continue to hammer Democrats over the deal. As long as
Republicans control the House, there is no chance that this Congress
would agree to lift sanctions permanently. And should a Republican win
the White House next year, a new administration might choose to reassess
some or all of the accord, particularly if Iran is behaving badly in its
region. Democrats, meanwhile, will feel exposed should Tehran's
anti-American and anti-Israeli policies and anti-Semitic rhetoric
continue. An arms-control accord this complex has never been tested before.
Many of the mechanisms-snap-back sanctions, a 24-day inspection period,
the committee to arbitrate disputes-are only as effective as the
commitment of both parties to abide by the agreement. And even if Iran
finds the deal's terms too compelling to cheat (and for Tehran, this is a
very good deal) there are myriad ways it might test the monitoring and
verification protocols. Will the IAEA have capacity and resources to
conduct comprehensive monitoring? Will Washington-which hasn't shown
itself to do well with day-after follow-up-be prepared to call Iran out
over small issues and adopt a no-tolerance approach to violations? Over
time, will all involved be inclined to feel that we can't let the
agreement fail-and thus not enforce every small Iranian violation?
'Cheating' in an agreement this complex might be accomplished in a
thousand small ways, not necessarily in large and obvious moves.
Experienced intelligence analysts know that even when your motto is
mistrust and verify, it's a lot harder for the U.S. to detect and expose
what Iran may be trying to hide. And while U.S. domestic
politics,implementation uncertainties, the regime's repressive nature and
regional ambitions, and Saudi and Israeli suspicions all keep the issue
simmering, there is another factor that might raise temperatures to a
boil: In its remaining time in office, the Obama administration cannot
afford to be Iran's lawyer-defending the regime or making excuses for its
behavior." http://t.uani.com/1ik7Im2
WSJ Editorial:
"Maryland's Barbara Mikulski on Wednesday became the 34th Senate
Democrat to announce her support for President Obama's nuclear deal with
Iran, enough to sustain a veto on a resolution of disapproval. So the
deal will proceed, and Democrats had better hope it succeeds because they
are taking responsibility for Iran's compliance and imperial ambitions.
Politically speaking, they now own the Ayatollahs. The Democratic
co-owners include Vice President Joe Biden, presidential front-runner
Hillary Clinton and nearly every member of the Congressional leadership.
While New York Senator Chuck Schumer came out early against the deal, he
has done nothing publicly to rally opponents. His silence suggests he has
long known Mr. Obama would have enough votes to prevail. Democrats will
reinforce their ownership if they now use a Senate filibuster to block a
vote on the motion of disapproval. More than 50 Senators are expected to
oppose the deal, and a large bipartisan majority will oppose it in the
House. Yet the White House is pushing for 41 Senate Democrats to enforce
a filibuster, so that a bipartisan motion of disapproval dies in the
Senate and Mr. Obama wouldn't have to veto. But what a spectacle that
would be-the President's party using a procedural dodge to avoid voting
on the merits of so consequential a deal. Previous arms-control pacts of
this magnitude were submitted as treaties requiring two-thirds approval
by the Senate. Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats maneuvered the Iran deal as
an 'executive agreement,' so he is able to commit America to trusting the
Ayatollahs with the support of a mere partisan minority. At least
ObamaCare had a partisan majority. As with ObamaCare, the polls now show
more than half of the public is opposed to the Iran deal-despite Mr.
Obama's vigorous promotion and a cheerleading media. Also like ObamaCare,
the President is assuring Democrats that public support will improve once
the pact goes into effect. But this makes Democrats hostage to Iran's
behavior. This means hostage to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,
who recently said that 'even after this deal our policy toward the
arrogant U.S. will not change.' It means hostage to Mohammad Yazdi, head
of Iran's powerful Assembly of Experts, who declared this week that 'we
should not change our foreign policy of opposition to America, our number
one enemy, whose crimes are uncountable.' Ayatollah Yazdi will play a
large role in selecting Ayatollah Khamenei's successor. And it means
hostage to Qasem Soleimani, head of the Quds Force of Iran's
Revolutionary Guard Corps, which will receive billions of dollars in cash
once sanctions are lifted. Mr. Soleimani is likely to deploy that cash to
fund terrorism and proxies fighting in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and
Gaza. Democrats will have essentially voted to finance Iran's combination
of Persian imperialism and Shiite messianism... The Iran deal is one of
those watershed foreign-policy moments when history will remember where
politicians stood. Mr. Obama has said as much by conceding that if Iran
gets a nuclear weapon, 'it's my name on this.' By forming a partisan
phalanx to let Mr. Obama overcome bipartisan opposition, Democrats have
also put their names on it." http://t.uani.com/1KM0FxB
|
|
Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against
Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear
Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive
media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with
discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please
email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com
United Against Nuclear
Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a
commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a
regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons. UANI is an
issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own
interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of
nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment