A future Iran nuclear accord could automatically reinstate international sanctions if Tehran violates its provisions, says a senior White House official.
“We will not construct a deal or accept a deal in which we cannot verify exactly what [the Iranians] are doing,” Reuters quoted U.S. national security adviser Susan Rice as saying on the CBS news program “60 Minutes.”
Washington and its allies hope a six-month nuclear agreement reached last month will lay the groundwork to negotiate more enduring restrictions on Iran’s arms-relevant nuclear activities. Fears of Iranian backpedaling, though, have contributed to a congressional push for new sanctions that the White House sees as a threat to diplomacy.
Rice said that if international authorities catch the Iranians violating a future deal, “we will ensure that the pressure is reimposed on them.”
Washington and its partners still have not developed language that would automatically renew sanctions under such conditions, “but this is something that’s quite doable,” she said in an interview aired on Sunday.
Rice said it remains uncertain if existing economic pressure is sufficient for Iran to accept a “verifiable” means of ensuring that it could never build a nuclear weapon so quickly that it couldn’t be stopped.
Her remarks echoed comments made by President Obama during a Friday press briefing.
“There is no need for new sanctions legislation — not yet,” Agence France-Presse quoted Obama as saying. “If Iran comes back and says, we can’t give you assurances that we’re not going to weaponize “¦ it’s not going to be hard for us to turn the dials back [and] strengthen sanctions even further.”
On Sunday, Iran and the five permanent U.N. Security Council member nations and Germany paused their talks for the Christmas holiday, with a European Union spokesperson saying discussions would likely resume before the New Year, according to a separate Reuters report. The international envoys are engaging on how to implement last month’s deal. The interim accord grants Iran limited relief from punitive economic measures, but Tehran wants the “P-5+1” nations to offer additional sanctions curbs under a future agreement.
The Persian Gulf power insists that its atomic activities are peaceful, but that assertion faces strong international skepticism.
What We're Following See More »
The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.
"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."
No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."