A senior U.S. lawmaker wants the Obama administration to explain how it would respond if Iran and Russia finalize a “sanctions-busting” oil deal.
U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) said the potential “oil-for-goods” plan would circumvent international efforts to squeeze concessions from Iran on its bomb-usable nuclear activities. In a Monday letter, he asked Secretary of State John Kerry to identify what “designation and enforcement steps” the administration would pursue if the potential $20 billion arrangement takes effect.
Negotiators for Russia, the United States and four other countries are offering Iran relief from economic pressure if the Middle Eastern nation significantly dials back its contested atomic efforts. Tehran denies it is seeking a nuclear-bomb capacity, and so far has not offered curbs sufficient to satisfy Washington and its allies.
Royce said the proposal for Iran to trade oil for nonmonetary goods from Russia “would present a clear violation of Iran’s obligations and would undermine the rationale behind the current negotiations.” Treasury Secretary Jack Lew in April said Washington could penalize groups or individuals that engage in trade under the possible pact, but he did not specify what legal authorities would permit such action.
The lawmaker also asked for a rundown of steps by Washington or its partners “to deter a potential deal.”
The United States contends that a six-month interim accord obligates Iran to cap its average daily oil exports to six key oil-importing nations at about a million barrels. Royce said the list does not include Russia, potentially enabling a barter deal to boost Tehran’s daily oil sales by up to half a million additional barrels.
Royce also aired concern over indications that Moscow may supply Iran with arms or nuclear systems under the proposed arrangement.
What We're Following See More »
It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”
It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.
Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.
UPDATED: Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) will not be playing the role of Ralph Nader in this year’s election. Speaking in Dallas today, Webb said, “We looked at the possibility of an independent candidacy. Theoretically, it could be done, but it is enormously costly and time sensitive, and I don’t see the fundraising trajectory where we could make a realistic run.”