U.S. Senate advocates of Iran sanctions urged President Obama to re-instate punitive steps against Iran if it sells more oil than a November deal allows.
The November multilateral nuclear agreement — called the Joint Plan of Action or “JPA” — loosens threats against buyers of Iran’s oil if the Middle Eastern nation’s “average daily crude oil exports remained constant over a six-month period.
Recent reports, however, suggest that Iranian oil sales have remained above one million barrels per day for five straight months,” Senators Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) said in a letter to President Obama on Monday. The half-year pact is intended to facilitate the negotiation of a longer-term deal to limit Iran bomb-relevant nuclear activities.
Menendez and Kirk — who authored an Iran sanctions bill currently in limbo in the Senate — also noted allegations “that Iran and Russia are making progress toward a $20 billion barter arrangement that would breach the JPA and significantly undermine U.S. sanctions.”
“If Iran moves forward with this effort to evade U.S. sanctions and violate the terms of oil sanctions relief provided for in the [interim nuclear deal], the United States should respond by re-instating the crude oil sanctions, rigorously enforcing significant reductions in global purchases of Iranian crude oil, and sanctioning any violations to the fullest extent of the law,” the lawmakers wrote.
On Friday, though, a senior Obama administration official voiced confidence that Iran’s oil exports would ultimately fall within limits established under November’s interim atomic accord.
“We have had teams talk to each of the remaining importers of Iranian oil, and we feel comfortable that in fact, they will meet the target that we have, and there’s nothing to lead us to believe otherwise at this time,” the insider told journalists in a background briefing.
“We, of course, keep continuous eye on this and in continuous discussion with all of the importers,” the official added.
- 1 High Court Vacancy Spells Trouble for Congress
- 2 Why Four Justices Were Against the Supreme Court’s Huge Gay-Marriage Decision
- 3 The Winners and Losers From the South Carolina Republican Debate
- 4 Can Obama Unilaterally Raise the Minimum Wage?
- 5 FBI’s Facial-Recognition Technology Has Achieved ‘Full Operational Capability’
What We're Following See More »
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.