President Obama thinks his administration has won a key victory in striking a nuclear accord with Iran, and he’s asking his secretary of State to protect it. But when John Kerry comes to Congress on Tuesday in the hopes of persuading Congress to back the pact, he should count on anything but a warm welcome.
Members are already saying the interim deal between world powers and Iran does nothing to dull Tehran’s nuclear threat, and members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee are already sharpening their knives: “Despite what the administration has said, this agreement does not hold Iran’s nuclear program in its tracks,” Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif., told National Journal Daily.
For Kerry, it will be a familiar role: He’s fresh off a Middle East trip attempting to reassure allies about the Iran deal.
But the stakes are especially high as a new round of talks resumes this week in Vienna. The White House has said negotiations might unravel if members of Congress follow through on threats to levy more sanctions, even if they take effect down the road.
Members, however, are not acquiescing. They fear sanctions relief will give Iran a “lifeline” just as it’s beginning to cry uncle, Royce said, which could revive Iran’s economy and, eventually, allow it to gain the capability to build a nuclear weapon.
Nailing down sanctions now — even if they are to begin after the six-month deal between world powers and Iran expires or founders — would give the U.S. “some leverage at the table,” Royce argued. “Just because the president wants to play with a weaker hand doesn’t mean that Democrats and Republicans in Congress should oblige.”
In the Senate, new sanctions to target Iranian oil exports and revenue, foreign-exchange reserves held overseas, and additional sectors of the Iranian economy are under consideration. In the House, which passed similar sanctions in June, Majority Leader Eric Cantor is spearheading a bill to narrowly define the terms of an acceptable final nuclear deal.
Tuesday’s hearing may turn into a wonkfest over contentious points on the negotiations, which aim to unwind a decadelong standoff over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
Members of Congress — as well as many leaders in Israel — object to the agreement because it does not require Iran to suspend enrichment and reprocessing activities. Critics say it’s not enough that the Nov. 23 deal is meant to keep Iran’s uranium enrichment below 5 percent, far below weapons-grade levels, and neutralize its stockpile of 20 percent-enriched uranium in exchange for some $7 billion in sanctions relief.
“It’s a terrible deal,” said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., in a recent interview. “I do not believe it’s in the world’s interest to allow Iran to have the capability to enrich and process uranium.”
Iran is not exactly helping matters, either, given its continued construction of a plutonium reactor in Arak. Royce said lawmakers from both sides of the aisle raised that issue last week during a classified briefing with the State Department’s Wendy Sherman and Treasury’s David Cohen.
Amid the suspicion, there’s fresh gossip on Capitol Hill about a secret plan to constrict Obama’s flexibility on sanctions. Although the president has the legal option to waive the measures temporarily if it is in the U.S. national security interest, some aides on the Hill say Congress is seeking ways around him. “We have looked at how to restrict the president’s ability to endlessly waive sanctions,” a Senate aide said.
But all this may prove to be more bark than bite. Already there are fissures between those who say the deal is doomed to fail and those who want to give the White House a chance to negotiate. “None of us here take great stock of these numerous legislative proposals on Iran sanctions,” said one House Democratic aide.
The longer Congress waits and diplomatic talks continue, the “less appetite there is to pass legislation that could somehow undermine the progress or implementation of the interim agreement — especially when there’s absolutely no way the president is going to allow anything like this to become law,” the aide said. “It’s just tough talk.”
What We're Following See More »
Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.
Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”
Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."
In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-expected primary battle behind her, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) is no longer going on the air in upcoming primary states. “Team Clinton hasn’t spent a single cent in … California, Indiana, Kentucky, Oregon and West Virginia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “campaign has spent a little more than $1 million in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone backer in the Senate, said the candidate should end his presidential campaign if he’s losing to Hillary Clinton after the primary season concludes in June, breaking sharply with the candidate who is vowing to take his insurgent bid to the party convention in Philadelphia.”
The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."