Corker-Menendez Bill Could Kill Iran Nuclear Deal

by Robert Creamer

Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist and author of the recent book: "Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win," available on amazon.com.
This week the Senate Foreign Relations Committee takes up a bill sponsored by Senators Corker and Menendez that would give the GOP-controlled Congress veto power over recently-concluded Framework Agreement that would prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
 
The bill sounds reasonable enough.  Its backers say it is only intended to give Congress the ability to sign off on the final agreement. 
 
In fact, it represents a last-ditch effort by the same Neo-Con crowd that brought us the disastrous Iraq War to delay and then kill the deal.
 
The reason is simple – and some Neo-Cons like former Bush U.N. Ambassador John Bolton don’t try to hide it.  They want the U.S. to take military action against Iran.  They want another war in the Middle East.
 
Experts in arms control throughout the World have hailed the deal – which was negotiated between the United States, the other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, Germany and Iran -- as a major breakthrough.
 
Most military experts familiar with the details of the framework – including the former head of the Israeli Intelligence Service Mossad -- believe that the agreement is the best alternative for preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
 
The agreement requires extensive and intrusive monitoring of Iran's nuclear program--including daily access by international inspectors--to make sure that Iran is living up to its commitments.
 
Experts say that without an agreement, Iran could produce enough highly-enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon within two or three months if they chose to do so. This agreement increases that time to at least twelve months. If Iran made any attempt to break the agreement, it would give the United States and its allies time to take action.
 
And it is clear as day that if the diplomatic process fails, the U.S. will be left with two terrible options: a nuclear Iran or another Middle East War.
 
Most military experts agree that simply bombing Iran's nuclear facilities would only set back Iran's nuclear program, not eliminate it.  So the military option would almost certainly require American involvement in another full-blown Middle Eastern war.
 
If the United States Congress manages to kill the nuclear deal, international support for the sanctions that have brought Iran to the negotiating table will collapse, and the hardliners in Iran who want a nuclear bomb will be strengthened politically and emboldened to race for a bomb.
 
The Framework Agreement announced in Switzerland turns out to be much more detailed – and much more iron-clad  -- than the Neo-Cons’ dire warnings  had predicted.  So now they have opted to take a more subtle approach. 
 
“Oh”, they say, “all we want to is to give Congress the right to have a say.”
 
Of course, this line of argument completely ignores the Constitution, which clearly gives the President the right and responsibility to negotiate international agreements and conduct foreign policy.  
 
The nuclear agreement with Iran is not, after all, a legally binding international treaty that must be approved by the Senate.   As many Republicans are quick to point out, it could be abrogated by a Republican President if the voters choose to elect one in 2016.
 
Why in the world would anyone want to give the completely dysfunctional GOP-led Congress the ability to veto this critical agreement?  
 
Why would any Democrat in his or her right mind want to hand that power to the likes of Senator Ted Cruz or to “bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” McCain, or to the Tea Party “nuclear experts” who dominate the House Republican caucus.   
 
Do we really want to give that power to people like Tom Cotton, who organized 47 of his GOP colleagues to send a letter to the Ayatollah in Iran explicitly trying to undercut the negotiating position of the United States and the West by telling him that our country would not keep its end of an international agreement.
 
That would be handing over power to the same reckless people that caused one of the most horrific foreign policy disasters in modern American history.  These are many of the same people who are directly responsible for wasting trillions of dollars on the War in Iraq – for the deaths of thousands of American soldiers, and over a hundred thousand Iraqis.  They are the foreign policy geniuses that turned Iraq over to a President who had spent years of exile in Iran – who was a client of Iranian leadership – and then were amazed that Iran’s power in the region increased.
 
These are the very same people who kicked over the sectarian hornets nest in Iraq and loosed the horrible sectarian energy that spawned ISIL.  They are the same people who presided over the debacles at Guantanamo and Abu Grebe – symbols that became terrorist recruiting posters for extremists world wide.
 
Just last week Senator Tom Cotton sounded like he was doing a Dick Cheney imitation when he said that it would only take a few days of bombing to deal with the Iranian nuclear program.  Right, Tom – just like the War in Iraq only lasted a few months, we were greeted as “liberators,” and the war actually “paid for itself” out of oil revenues. 
 
These are the same people who warned us that “the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud” generated by Sadam Hussein’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
 
It isn’t just that these people have a different point of view – or a different set of policy priorities.   They have proven time and again that they don’t know what they are talking about.  They have proven that their reckless, shoot-first-ask-questions-later foreign policy is an absolute catastrophy.
 
Tom Cotton was quoted last week saying: “The President is trying to make you think that (military action in Iran would be like what) we saw in Iraq and that’s simply not the case.  It would be several days of air and naval bombing.”
 
Marine Corp General Anthony Zinni, former Commander-in-Chief of the Central Command says on the other hand: “ After you’ve dropped those bombs, what happens next? Eventually…. I’m putting boots on the ground somewhere. And like I tell my friends, if you like Iraq and Afghanistan, you’ll love Iran.”
 
Who do you believe?
 
The people who are beating the war drums with Iran have a proven record of being wrong.  And it would be very wrong for Democrats to turn over the power to stop this agreement to those very same people once again.
 
To stop this last-ditch effort to kill this critical agreement, all Democrats need to do is to prevent the bill from obtaining a veto-proof majority of 67 votes in the Senate or 290 votes in the House. 
 
This requires that Democrats refuse to be stampeded into taking a vote that could easily result in another Mid-East war, the way some of them were stampeded into voting to authorize the invasion of Iraq.
 
Many people forget that 60 percent of the Democratic Caucus in the House voted against authorizing the Iraq War.  Most of those who voted “yes” regret it to this day.
 
The Congress does have a role to play here.  It should carefully monitor the final negotiation of the details of the deal – and oversee the agreement’s implementation.  If Iran reneges on its obligations, it should stand ready to impose tough new sanctions.  And if that were to happen, there is little question that the rest of the international community would be ready to join us once again, because Iran would be the bad guy – not the United States.
 
Luckily, some Democrats in the Senate who have previously indicated they would support the Corker-Menendez bill have begun to have second thoughts. 
 
If you agree that Senate Democrats should stand with President Obama and not Neo-Con Republicans – if you agree it's a bad idea to empower Iranian hard-liners by stopping this agreement – if you oppose another War in the Middle East – call your Senators right now at 202-224-3121 and tell them to vote NO on Corker-Menendez.
 
Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the book:  Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com. He is a partner in Democracy Partners and a Senior Strategist for Americans United for Change. Follow him on Twitter @rbcreamer.
 
 
     

Browse articles by author

More Current Affairs

Added 20.06.2018
Sessions quoted a line written by the apostle Paul to a small community of Christians living in Rome around 55AD to defend the Department of Justice’s approach. He said: "I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order." Sessions used the Bible because one of the most vocal opponents of the crackdown on asylum cases has been the Catholic Church. It’s no surprise that Sessions appealed to Romans chapter 13 verse 1 in response: not only did he hope to undermine Catholic authority by using the Bible against them, he cited a statement so broad that one might use it to defend anything a government does, good or bad. Picture below St Paul writing his epistles, by Valentin de Boulogne, via Wikimedia Commons.
Added 19.06.2018
 

I find it exceptionally irritating when I hear liberals worry about whether Israel will be able to remain a "Jewish and Democratic State" if it retains control of occupied Palestinian lands.

Added 18.06.2018
Daniel Wagner: "My prediction Korean War will be formally ended, the peninsula will be denuclearised, and a lasting peace will be the result."
Added 14.06.2018
Extract: PiS [ the ruling Law and Justice party] has established the most significant addition to the Polish social safety net since 1989: the Family 500+ program. Launched in 2016, Family 500+ embodies the nationalism, traditional family values, and social consciousness that the PiS seeks to promote. The program pays families 500 złoty ($144) per month to provide care for a second or subsequent child...........The program has been enormously popular. Some 2.4 million families took advantage of it in the first two years. The benefit, equivalent to 40% of the minimum wage, has almost wiped out extreme poverty for children in Poland, reducing it by an estimated 70-80%........... Liberal pro-European politicians and policymakers are not convinced. They complain that such a generous family benefit will weaken work incentives and blow up the government budget. But initial evidence suggests that Family 500+ has actually increased economic activity. It has also reversed the post-communist decline in fertility, increased wages (particularly for women), and enabled families to buy school materials, take vacations, buy more clothes for their kids, and rely less on high-priced credit for basic household needs. And, thanks to rapid economic growth, the government deficit has steadily fallen, not grown.
Added 12.06.2018
The depths of hypocrisy of the Republican Party in supporting Trump’s meeting with the North Korean dictator in Singapore are hard to plumb. This is a party whose leading members adopted the Ostrich Foreign Policy Principle for decades. If you don’t like a country’s government or political and economic system, pretend it does not exist.
Added 12.06.2018
US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has spoken out against China’s strategy of “intimidation and coercion” in the South China Sea, including the deployment of anti-ship missiles, surface-to-air missiles, and electronic jammers, and, more recently, the landing of nuclear-capable bomber aircraft at Woody Island. There are, Mattis warned, “consequences to China ignoring the international community.” But what consequences?
Added 12.06.2018
With a general election approaching in September, Swedish voters are being warned that now it’s their turn to be targeted by Russian interference in the democratic process. According to Sweden’s Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB), which is leading the country’s efforts to counter foreign-influence operations, such interference is very likely, and citizens should be on the lookout for disinformation and fake news.
Added 11.06.2018
Extract: "While the presidency has grown stronger over the years, during the Trump administration Congress has been timid and subordinate. That is because the leaders of the Republican Party – which controls both the House of Representatives and the Senate – are frightened of Trump’s base. They cannot afford to alienate the roughly 30-35% of Americans who passionately back him, ignore his personal transgressions, tolerate his degradation of the country’s civil discourse, favor his brutal treatment of immigrant families, and don’t mind that he is leaving the US almost friendless in the world."
Added 08.06.2018
Has North Korea’s ruler, Kim Jong-un, made a strategic decision to trade away his nuclear program, or is he just engaged in another round of deceptive diplomacy, pretending that he will denuclearize in exchange for material benefits for his impoverished country? This is, perhaps, the key question in the run-up to the summit between Kim and US President Donald Trump in Singapore on June 12. Until then, no one will know the answer, perhaps not even Kim himself.
Added 07.06.2018
Some analysts even project that, before long, Facebook will hold more data on its users than any government. Meanwhile, it makes a lot of money from this data. Its advertising revenues came up to around US$40 billion in 2017 (up 50% from 2016). With Google, it holds an 84% market share in online advertising.
Added 05.06.2018
Roseanne Barr is an American comedian whose fictional TV character of the same name is a working-class Trump supporter. For those who remember the show “All in the Family,” she might be usefully compared to Archie Bunker, the crude proletarian patriarch from Queens, New York. Barr’s show was swiftly canceled late last month by the television network ABC, not for anything her “character” said in her show, but for a tweet in which she described Valerie Jarrett, an African-American former adviser to Barack Obama, as the offspring of the Muslim Brotherhood and “Planet of the Apes.”
Added 04.06.2018
 

When Donald Trump was elected, I, like many others feared what his presidency might do to the country. A year and a half into his term in office, our concerns have been justified. 

Added 01.06.2018
Extract from the article: "While the West’s relative decline is almost inevitable, its economic dysfunction is not. Yet pessimism can be self-fulfilling. Why undertake difficult reforms if a dark future seems preordained? As a result, accepting and anxious pessimists tend to elect governments that duck difficult decisions (witness Germany’s grand coalition), while angry pessimists make matters worse (by voting for Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda or for Brexit, for example). It doesn’t have to be this way. As French President Emmanuel Macron has demonstrated, bold leaders can succeed with a message of hope, openness, and inclusion, and by promoting a vision of progress based on credible reforms."
Added 30.05.2018
It has been nearly two years since the United Kingdom narrowly voted in favor of leaving the European Union. As the march toward Brexit – formally set for the end of next March – proceeds, fundamental questions about the nature of the future UK-EU relationship remain unanswered. Instead, every time a tough decision must be made in the negotiations in Brussels, British ministers kick the can down the road, or even into the long grass. This is somewhat surprising. Apparently, none of the politicians and newspaper editors who plotted for years to get the UK out of the EU thought much about what would happen if their machinations succeeded.
Added 30.05.2018
Discussions are now underway to establish a system of joint deposit insurance for eurozone banks. Proponents of the scheme, with the European Commission and the European Central Bank (ECB) taking the lead, point out that deposit insurance would avert the danger of a run on banks in times of crisis. While this argument is true, critics emphasize the disparity in risks, owing to the high share of bad loans on the balance sheets of banks in some countries. To address this risk disparity and move ahead with the plan, balance sheets will need to be cleaned up before considering the next step. While the share of bad loans for banks in the stable eurozone countries is just 2%, the most recently published International Monetary Fund statistics, from last April, show a share of 11% for Ireland, 16% for Italy, 40% for Cyprus, and 46% for Greece.
Added 29.05.2018
Trump’s decision cannot be justified by any breach of the agreement on Iran’s part. It is, rather, a return to the old, largely unsuccessful US policy of confrontation with Iran. The only difference this time is that the Trump administration seems determined to go to the brink of war – or even beyond – to get its way. If the administration has any plans for keeping Iran’s nuclear program in check in the absence of the nuclear deal, then it is keeping them a secret. Judging by some of the administration’s rhetoric, it would appear that airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities are on the table. But bombing would only delay Iran’s nuclear program, not stop it. Would Trump then consider a massive ground war to occupy the country and topple the regime? We know all too well how that strategy worked the last time it was tried.
Added 28.05.2018
US President Donald Trump’s abrupt decision to cancel his planned June 12 summit with Kim Jong-un represents a diplomatic coup for the North Korean leader, and an even bigger victory for China. In the space of just a few months, Kim’s image has gone from that of international pariah to that of thwarted peacemaker.
Added 23.05.2018
The good news is that the United States and China appear to have backed away from the precipice of a trade war. While vague in detail, a May 19 agreement defuses tension and commits to further negotiation. The bad news is that the framework of negotiations is flawed: A deal with any one country will do little to resolve America’s fundamental economic imbalances that have arisen in an interconnected world.
Added 21.05.2018
The cryptocurrency revolution, which started with bitcoin in 2009, claims to be inventing new kinds of money. There are now nearly 2,000 cryptocurrencies, and millions of people worldwide are excited by them. What accounts for this enthusiasm, which so far remains undampened by warnings that the revolution is a sham? One must bear in mind that attempts to reinvent money have a long history. As the sociologist Viviana Zelizer points out in her book The Social Meaning of Money: “Despite the commonsense idea that ‘a dollar is a dollar is a dollar,’ everywhere we look people are constantly creating different kinds of money.” Many of these innovations generate real excitement, at least for a while. As the medium of exchange throughout the world, money, in its various embodiments, is rich in mystique. We tend to measure people’s value by it. It sums things up like nothing else. And yet it may consist of nothing more than pieces of paper that just go round and round in circles of spending. So its value depends on belief and trust in those pieces of paper. One might call it faith.
Added 19.05.2018
The protests that rippled across Russia ahead of Vladimir Putin’s fourth inauguration as president followed a familiar script. Police declared the gatherings illegal, and the media downplayed their size. Alexey Navalny, the main organizer and Russia’s de facto opposition leader, was arrested in dramatic fashion, dragged out of a rally in Moscow by police. On May 15, he was sentenced to 30 days in prison. More than 1,600 protesters across the country were beaten and detained.